Indeed the essay references over a dozen scientific articles (several more authored by Ugo Perego) to support its discussion on why ancient American DNA studies do not discredit the claims of the Book of Mormon. All of these references state directly or imply strongly that the DNA studies of ancient American migrations date to more than 10,000 years ago, pre-dating any events described in the Book of Mormon, or the bible and Pearl of Great Price, for that matter.
Emphasis on all created things remaining forever in the created state. If Adam and Eve had never fallen into mortality, then “they would have had no children” (v. 23) and no one but Adam and Eve would have existed. Furthermore because they fell, “the Messiah cometh in the fulness of time, that he may redeem the children of men from the fall” (v. 26). “For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive” (1 Cor 15:22).
Even if you believe in evolution, and you argue for extending the age of Adam to 100,000 years ago, or even 1 million years ago, you cannot easily dismiss the idea that before the fall, there was no death, and no birth (2 Ne 2:20-25). Where in evolution did (human) death and birth suddenly appear?
1) Adam and Eve are literal and tied to a young earth as the first humans -- science debunks this completely.
2) Adam and Eve are literal and tied to old earth age as first humans with spirits -- stay tuned below on how that works out...
3) Adam and Eve are figurative -- then the atonement is probably unnecessary since what was introduced by God through evolution can just be dismissed with a change in evolution without a mysterious sacrifice to atone for God's oops in evolution.
4) It's all bullshit.
Other implications of the concession of pre-adamites also dismantle the universal flood of Noah, otherwise, the humans who migrated across the Bering Strait would have drowned. LDS scriptures seem to be clear on a universal flood. The Book of Mormon Jaredites inherited the Americas after the land was empty when the flood "waters had receded from off the face of this land it became a choice land above all other lands " (Ether 13:2).
Basically, Perego’s argument is that he believes that pre-adamites are “pre-human hominids” that existed before Adam and Eve. Yes, “pre-human hominids” without spirits... Quoting him: “We became children of God in the moment God decided to put the spirit of man inside the physical bodies that have a different evolutionary path” -- than near-relatives in the animal world...
And this lecturer of possible racism, ladies and gentlemen, is the leading expert the LDS Church relies on for its scientific understanding of DNA problems related to the Book of Mormon account.
Yes, I know, some apologists will clamor thatI did a "ad-hominid" attack on Perego by implying he's racist, all the while not addressing the real issues raised by the essay, by Perego's statements and more.
You think they made a lot of problems for themselves when they disavowed their own prophets and scripture in "Race and the Priesthood" essay? They may have disavowed racism there, but they re-opened that can of worms again with the DNA essay. This is a whole new class of anthropological racism generated by a cross-breed of science and myth.
In "DNA Part 2: Defense Now Amorphous – two-fisted cherry picking" I will discuss more on the science of the Topic Essay.