Please turn JavaScript on
DiscussMormonism.com icon

DiscussMormonism.com

Want to keep yourself up to date with the latest news from DiscussMormonism.com?

Subscribe using the "Follow" button below and we provide you with customized updates, via topic or tag, that get delivered to your email address, your smartphone or on your dedicated news page on follow.it.

You can unsubscribe at any time painlessly.

Title of DiscussMormonism.com: "DiscussMormonism.com - Index page"

Is this your feed? Claim it!

Publisher:  Unclaimed!
Message frequency:  27.75 / day

Message History

How did the Area leader know about the correspondence, and why did you share private correspondence without seeking Woodward’s approval to do?The Area leaders put me in touch with Scott Woodward. That's how they knew I was corresponding with him.
Our correspondence wasn't private. My brother-in-law was copied on all of my emails so he had copies of all of Scott's emails. Sc...

Read full story
It’s worth noting that Perego was writing for a layman, Mormon audience, not presenting a paper to a geneticist convention. Of course he will dumb it down. His main point that Lamanite DNA might have disappeared from today’s population on the basis that 100% of some ancestors DNA drops out of today’s populations DNA is accurate. It is also accurate, within that ...

Read full story
Simon calls Perego’s statement “It is increasingly likely around 6+ generations back that you have no DNA in your genome at all from many of your ancestors in that generation.” false. It isn’t false. The complete loss of all DNA from some ancestors does increase the further you look back from 7th generation ancestors onwards. One might quibble that Perego should have used “some”...

Read full story
It’s worth noting that Perego was writing for a layman, Mormon audience, not presenting a paper to a geneticist convention. Of course he will dumb it down. His main point that Lamanite DNA might have disappeared from today’s population on the basis that 100% of some ancestors DNA drops out of today’s populations DNA is accurate. It is also accurate, within that ...

Read full story
Simon calls Perego’s statement “It is increasingly likely around 6+ generations back that you have no DNA in your genome at all from many of your ancestors in that generation.” false. It isn’t false. The complete loss of all DNA from some ancestors does increase the further you look back from 7th generation ancestors onwards. One might quibble that Perego should have used “some”...

Read full story