Tuesday, June 6, 2017

Back to Malay One Last Time – Part III

Continuing from the previous post, regarding the fallacy of the Malay Theory as to where Lehi landed. As we have shown in the previous two posts on this, the Reader’s own submitted animated drawing shows that the monsoon winds blow out of the southwest toward the northeast during what is called the “Southwest Monsoon,” the ”Ascending Monsoon,” and the “Summer Monsoon,” which covers six months of the year from around April to September (the Winter Monsoon, Retreating Monsoon, or Northeast Monsoon, which runs from October to March, covers the other six months of the year).
Dhows vary in shapes and sizes. Some with one or more triangular sail(s), made from different kinds of hard wood like rosewood or teak. For centuries dhows have been used for fishing and trade and symbolize livelihood and sustenance. They put in at night and sail along the coast, rarely moving out of sight of land and were used almost entirely as trade and fishing vessel

This Reader insists that because early trading and fishing dhows of the Arabian Sea sailed toward the east and back that the winds blew from the east to west. However, this Reader has ignored time and again when it is stated, that he cannot compare the lateen sail (triangular rigged sails) were used on weaker built (meaning not deep ocean sailing ships) coastal vessels for thousands of years in the Indonesian area, from Arabia to China with deep ocean ships. No one is questioning these vessels sailing east and west, since their sails were maneuverable as well as their ships having oars long past the time of Lehi.
The point has always been in deep ocean sailing ships which were “driven forth before the wind” which is how Nephi describes his ship—you don’t sail those along the coast, they would not broach the winds in the Indonesian area, Bay of Bengal or anywhere else along the northern Indian Ocean (Sea of Arabia) coastal area. You keep comparing oranges with apples instead of like for like. Coastal vessels are not—I repeat, coastal vessels are not—deep ocean, fixed sail ships which Nephi built by his own admission and brought Lehi across the great deep. The minute you inject coastal sailing, you eliminate all that is in the Book of Mormon. Perhaps you haven’t ever been to sea in a sailing vessel with a fixed sail and one with a lateen (maneuverable or tacking sail) which can go most anywhere along almost any coast and made up the trader’s sailing boats of the ancient world. Though flimsy, they were not called upon to withstand constant deep ocean pounding of currents and waves.
    Consequently, all your comments and arguments on this are moot.
6. We've discussed this before so I'm not sure why its come up again. Perhaps because you ignore any opinion but your own, not combining apples and apples but insisting on throwing in an orange from time to time that is not relevant. We never discussed this—you wrote your opinion, and I answered it using professional mainstream sources and you ignored those sources and any ideas on this other than your own and just kept restating your own opinion. It was Eistein who said that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different outcome. We might say stating the same thing over and over again and expecting a different reaction is much the same.
7. Right now, at this very moment, the winds are blowing from the Arabian Peninsula directly towards the Malay Peninsula. No, they are not, unless you are talking about surface, coastal winds that do not hold up off the coast in deep water.
Again, using your submitted map, and adding colorful arrows shaped as the original lines, you can see that these currents and winds (white arrows) are moving in a curve and any possible movement from west to east is blocked by a huge subcontinent called India, the others (blue arrows) and the lower winds and currents (yellow arrows) blow toward Sumatra

Also, as indicated earlier, for current and past 180 hour showing, see NOAA (National Weather Service) Wavewatch III, NWW3 Product Viewer showing 20170530 Indian Ocean (Global) (Latest run) 2017/05/30 06z Significant Wave Height and Peak Direction forecast for 180 hour hindcast, all arrows reading waves and winds move to the northeast (actually north by northeast) across the entire Indian ocean from between Madagascar and Australia clear into India and Malaysia and Thailand.
The real time map from the internet indicated above showing 180 hour forecast showing [with increased bubble enlargement] the direction to the northeast or north by northeast. Note the direction of the red arrows

Once again, if Lehi sailed the route you keep hammering on, there would have been no need to build a special ship “unlike that of man” since any coastal dhow could have sailed along the coast to Malay. However, going into deep ocean (“blue water”) is another matter in a ship “driven forth before the wind.”
    In addition, the winds and currents along the northern mouth of the Malacca Strait are quite interesting

The monsoons are represented by Orange Arrows (Northwest/Winter) and White Arrows (Southwest/Summer), neither of which would allow a ship “driven forth before the wind” into the Malacca Strait; plus Blue Arrows showing the normal year-around winds and currents moving northwest up the Strait, which would again be against a wind-driven ship trying to sail into and down (south) to Malay in the Strait. These blue currents effect the strong current coming off the islands, which are shown moving turning northward (white arrow) with the winter monsoon and westward (orange arrow) with the summer monsoon. All of this would have precluded Lehi from landing along the southwest shore of the Land Southward shown on this Malay theory map to the south of the blue arrows even if he could have sailed that far east
In further explanation of the map, Sea-Seek is part of Google Maps and Navigation and provides a complete break down on currents and winds of Oceans, Seas and Coasts, including the Malacca Strait, in which they write: “Along the North coast of Sumatera, the Southwest Monsoon prevails from about April to November and the Northeast Monsoon from about November to April. During the Southwest Monsoon the wind frequently holds both day and night near Ujung Raya. In the Strait of Malacca to the West of the islands North of the North Sumatera coast, there is a current setting in a West direction, often attaining a rate of 1.5 to 2 knots, and inclining North or Southwest by the action of the prevailing monsoon. Between these islands and the Nicobars, during the strength even of the Southwest Monsoon, there is frequently a current that sets directly into the monsoon at a rate of 2 knots. At the same period there is said to be a strong current between Pulau Weh as far as the meridian of Tanjung Jambuair. This current continues all the year around, but with less strength during the Northeast Monsoon.
    The point is, once again a person can say whatever they want, claiming this or that with such and such backup, but the proof is in the pictures and what they tell us. The winds and currents connected to the summer and winter monsoons of the Indian Ocean, coming off the India subcontinent or the Malay Peninsula flow in the directions we have been saying, to the southwest for six months and reversing, blowing to the northeast for six months and even the Reader’s own submitted images show this to be a fact!
    It seems to me that it is time to give this a rest and let it go. You have shown nothing to change anything we have listed and written about for the past eight years other than your own opinions, stemming from a collection of names which may or may not be accurately portrayed as Hebrew names. And even if they are, prove nothing in connection to Lehi and the Book of Mormon Land of Promise.


  1. I've said as much as should be said about the currents and winds of the Indian Ocean. If anyone wants to see for themselves just go here and click around and draw your own conclusions.


  2. "All of this would have precluded Lehi from landing along the southwest shore of the Land Southward shown on this Malay theory map to the south of the blue arrows even if he could have sailed that far east"

    Again, the Malay model I propose does not put anyone down the Strait of Malacca. The impassability of the Strait and the islands beyond is one thing we do agree on. There is no way the Lehites and Mulekites would have been able to navigate the ocean beyond the Strait.

    That said, I place the Lehite landing at the mouth of the Strait, at the foot of Mount Saraya on what was once an island. The oldest civilization in Southeast Asia is found there, and it dates back to the 6th century BC, within 50 years of the Lehite departure. One of the main founding heroes of this civilization was a warrior from the west named Maroni.

    Yes, it could be a coincidence, but if it is, it is a very odd one.

  3. Hmmmm got a problem then - The Jaredites predate 6th century BC when the Chinese arrived in Malaysia. THe Jaredites arrived not long after the Tower of Babel. Another nail in the coffin as if it needed any more.

    You haven't proven your case Jay. Even our little discussion about D&C 54 should tell you that your in the wrong hemisphere. I really don't see how any thinking person can even entertain such a ridiculous idea as yours.

    1. "Hmmmm got a problem then - The Jaredites predate 6th century BC when the Chinese arrived in Malaysia. The Jaredites arrived not long after the Tower of Babel. Another nail in the coffin as if it needed any more."

      Good point, I forgot to mention the first inhabitants that lived north of the peninsula. They arrived after a long migration across Asia and settled in mainland Southeast Asia, but just as in the Book of Mormon account, they never ventured beyond the narrow neck of the peninsula. So the two civilizations that appear in the 6th century BC were the first on the peninsula. The older civilization in the land north (called Moron) appeared between 3000 to 2000 BC. 10th century Arabic texts say these people were descendants of either Japheth of Shem (the accounts vary) who travelled in boats modeled after Noah's Ark around the time of the tower. We can compare this to the Jaredites and their boats modeled after Noah's Ark around the time of the tower.

      But we've been over this several times already.

    2. Yes we have and you are still wrong

    3. Oh and BTW - 3000 BC is impossible because Noah's flood occurred at 2348 BC. Not possible to have any archealogy before then. Not only that but the dispersion from the tower was later and therefore the earliest date would be around 2,000 BC. So here again you reveal your bias against the scriptures in favor of the world. That is why your model is so much garbage because you can't figure out the truth that is found in the scriptures. I certainly hope there are only one or two of you that actually believe this nonsense.

    4. So on one hand you believe that the entire continent of South America was submerged under water until around 35 AD to form a pure island for the Lehites. On the other hand you don't understand how I can believe something so silly as a boat sailing 4000 miles from Oman to the Malay Archipelago. And you are calling me biased?

      On a personal note, there is only one of me so don't worry, the Malay Model is not going to threaten your existence.

    5. "So here again you reveal your bias against the scriptures in favor of the world."

      I personally don't worry too much about how old the Earth is. If you prefer the young earth timing then the Malay Model is matched for it. Remember that for the two millennia before America was discovered, nearly all those practicing faith in an Abrahamic tradition believed that the Garden was in the Far East. Even Columbus thought he had reached "Earthly Paradise" located "at the end of the Orient".

      The model I am proposing fits just as easily into a young earth timeline as any of the New World models. Your belief that there were no humans before 3000 BC doesn't magically fix the numerous chronological (and geological) problems that come along with Young Earth creationism.

    6. Sorry buddy but you are wrong about that. There were humans before 3000 bc but they were destroyed by the flood. As far as geologically is concerned it fits very well. For example. I take a magazine produced by ICR (Institute for creation research). The have rigorous scientific articles produced by PhD's in the sciences. They took a piece of lava from Hawaii and had it age date. The date of the lava was known to be 200 years old. Lo and behold the dating came back 16,000,000 years old. So how do you account for such a glaring discrepency. They have done this a number of times and the results are the same. The dating system is screwed up because secular scientists simply do not believe in God. In your case you simply don't believe in the power of God can bring up a continent in a 3 hour earthquake as testified by the prophets in the BOM. There is plenty of evidence this happened and you simply can't accept it.

    7. Lava is not something that is created ex nihilo. It is made of stuff that is often millions of years old. The scientists in the particular study were not dating the lava, they were dating the olivine stuck in the lava. The paper itself stated the correct date of the lava flows, but gave a date of millions of years for the olivine. There was no discrepancy until creationists totally misread the paper to support their opinions. I imagine you will now do the same with my comment.

    8. That's what I'm trying to tell you. ICR did a study called RATE. In that study they used the diffusion rate of heleum from zircon crystals the proved the earth is actually thousands not millions of years old. The earth us young and ICR has shown this to be the case.

      They did not misread the date of the olivine either. You have to understand that there is a battle between the secular atheists who make up all of the scientists and the scientists that make up those who believe in God. Which side do you want? It's obvious to me.

    9. So I take Jay that to you Noah's flood is a myth along with Adam and Eve and the many other stories in the Bible. I find it amazing that so-called Christians are incapable of understanding the difference between the work of God and the work of Lucifer. Science doesn't believe in Adam and Eve - do you? The Creationists and other scientists are now finding soft tissue in dinisour bones - blood vessels. This can't happen in 60 million year old bones yet there it is. How do you explain it? You either believe in the work of God or you don't believe.

    10. You're questions about my faith and suggestions that I am promoting the work of Lucifer has literally zero to do with the topic we are discussing.

    11. Jay, it has everything to do with the topic because of what the BOM says about the rising of the continent. It has everything to do with the dates you accept as to when the people inhabited Malaysia and South America. This is relevant to the discussion and quite telling that you can't accept the idea that God can rise a continent out of the ocean nor create exceedingly high mountains in a 3 hour earthquake. If you don't want to discuss it - that's fine. I understand where you are coming from however and it is contrary to the scriptures. That much is clear.

    12. Where does it say in the scriptures that the continent of South America was raised out of the ocean in a 3 hour earthquake? You seem to be doubting my faith in an event that I've only read about on this blog. Do you think Thomas Monson believes that South America was once a small island? Would you question his faith if he said he had never heard of that idea before?

  4. This comment has been removed by the author.

  5. Jay,

    I've enjoyed reading your breakdown and defense of the Malay model. Very interesting stuff. You defend your position quite well.

    Having said that, for me Del's model of Lehi having landed at the 30th parallel in South America makes perfect sense. Especially since according to George Q. Cannon that's precisely where Joseph Smith said Lehi landed.

    I think Del's wind and current model of how they sailed to the promised land makes perfect sense as well.

    Of course the Lord could have led them to Malay or anywhere else, regardless of wind or currents. The Lord is all powerful afterall and can control the elements at his command.

    The problem I see with the Malay model is that Malay is not on the American continent. Of course one could make the case that decendents of the Nephites and Lamanites could have came here later, but to me it doesn't work. For one thing how in the world was Moroni suppose to get to America from Malay? There is no indication that he would have sailed here after all the Nephites were slain.

    Based on the evidences you have laid out it sounds like it's quite possible that there could have been Israelites or at least true believers who either wandered or were led to Malay. In fact Christ may even have visited them as part of the other sheep he went to go see after he left the Nephites and Lamanites.

    At the end of the day I don't think it ultimately matters if we know exactly were the people of the Book of Mormon lived. If the Malay model makes the most sense to you and strengthens your testimony of the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon then I think that's all well and good.

    1. Hi MC, thank you for the thoughtful questions. I agree that Del's thoughts on the Lehites taking the southern route makes much more sense than a passage through the Strait. Most BOM scholars just ignore the complexity of that passage and just assume it would have been smooth sailing through the passage and the thousands of islands beyond. Del understands the problems with that assumption and has come up with an interesting explanation. However, I still feel that a journey half way around the world in 600 BC would have been too much for an inexperienced crew. This is the main reason I began to look for something closer, within range.

      Concerning Moroni. I feel the answer to your question is in the histories of the various tribes on the Malay Peninsula. As I mentioned, their main founding hero was given the name of Maroni, which in ancient Siam was a name/title given to warriors and chiefs. Among these tribes are accounts that they once had a golden book that contained the spiritual history of their people. According to the narrative, the father of the tribe was dying and called his seven sons for final blessings and to pass on the sacred books. The oldest son, with a darker skin, neglected the call. Because the oldest son was not responsible, the golden book was given to the youngest son who was of white complexion. The younger son then sailed away to the west in a boat with a promise that one day he would return with the golden book. So, I think the legends of these tribes explains the rest of the story. In addition, Arabic texts describe a great conflict in a land called Komoriyya around the 5th century AD. The people called the Kumr/Cumr sailed west to another land they also called Komoriyya. The Comoros Islands with the capital of Moroni are named after these people who sailed west around the 5th century AD.

      It appears to me that this answers the question of how a warrior chief named Maroni (an alternate spelling of Moroni in the BOM) went west with a golden book to a land called Cumorah.

    2. I forgot to mention that most scholars accept that the land of Komoriyya in Arabic texts is the Malay Peninsula. The land to the west also called Komoriyya has not been identified, but most scholars assume it must be Madagascar. But the Arabic texts say these people continued further west to a place with a mountain they also called KMR.

    3. I can see why based on those similarities one could think that the land of the Book of Mormon was in Malay.

      However the way I see it the land of promise is in America and no where else. If those evidences you point to existed in the Americas somewhere, even on an island off the coast somewhere, I would say you have something worth delving into.

      As far as your hang up with the Lehites sailing half way around the world with no seafaring experience, that is a non issue for me. The Lord led them to the promised land. A land he had kept secret and reserved as a place to raise up a righteous people. He controlled the winds and the sea. He also provided the Lehites with the Liahona which provided them with instructions of how to steer the ship.

      As I said before, to me the evidences you point to appear to point to the possibility that one of the lost tribes or another righteous remnant may have been there. To me the name similarities for example show that both the people in Malay and the Lehites were both Israelites. It appears they both used Hebrew names. Perhaps that golden record from the folklore you mentioned is a record of one of the lost ten tribes.

      This kind of stuff is fun to speculate about. We won't know the answer about the former inhabitants of Malay until the Lord reveals it. My guess is that it will be revealed when the records of the lost ten tribes is revealed. Guess we'll see.

    4. Thank you for your respectful comments. I agree that it is all speculation, and have maintained in my comments here on this blog for several months that taken individually, these Book of Mormon geography models are all weak. There isn't one single model that can resolve all the issues. But taken together, we get a wider view and start to see the possibilities. I try not to attack other models when presenting my own. I think they are all useful and have something to offer. - Jay

  6. You wrote: "these Book of Mormon geography models are all weak" -- if you are referring to our claim of South America, I would like to submit to you that we have 44 different scriptural references we show how they fit the Andean Peru area without question--you can disagree with all you want, but you show me another claim--any claim and any area--that has based their entire writing, model, theory, or whatever on strictly scriptural references that relate to their area, many only to their area, as we have. You comment is like saying "all religions are weak," but the LDS religion stands out many heads above any other claims that there is no comparison.