Sunday, June 4, 2017

Back to Malay One Last Time – Part I

This is a theory that simply won't go away despite all the reasons why it is a bad idea and totally inconsistent with the scriptural record. Because it won't go away, those who espouse it continually leave a door open for those who don't know or want to believe something other than Mesoamerica. Like theories in general, some people are persistent in their ideas, and we have one who keeps hammering away with his Malay theory. Despite every known General Authority and Prophet who has spoken on the subject claims Lehi landed in the Western Hemisphere, this person continues to promote his Malay ideas. So let us take a look at his last comments. 
   Comment: "Evidently, Del, you are unaware of the winds and currents that move about the Malay Peninsula, or you are listening to Olsen or others who promote Malay as a model for the Land of Promise. We've discussed this before so I'm not sure why its come up again. The monsoon winds blow west half the year and east the other half of the year. Right now, at this very moment, the winds are blowing from the Arabian Peninsula directly towards the Malay Peninsula…There is no going against the wind or currents half of the year…All the arrows you have drawn on the map are accurate for half of the year. The winds reverse for the other half. Boats have been blown to the Malay Peninsula for at least two millennia. There is substantial evidence that it is not only possible, but that it happened quite frequently. You've mentioned Tim Severin before on your blog. He did it. So we know it is possible. I am not aware of any evidence that boats were blown from the Arabian Peninsula to Chile. Ever, in all of history. Can you provide one example?” Unknown.

Animated Earth image of internet monsoon winds in the Indian Ocean, submitted by the Reader from (,11.38,316). Left Top: Yellow Square is the area of our discussion, the Indian Ocean, Sea of Arabia and Bay of Bengal; Top Right: Circle highlight and  blow up of Bay of Bengal. Bottom Left: Enlarged area of interest; Bottom Right: Enlarged area of Bay of Bengal. Note the lines on the animated image submitted—they move from northeast to north by northeast as we have been saying!
Response: You can say whatever you want. However, even your own submitted “internet monsoon winds” animation image show the winds blowing out of the southwest and heading to the northeast as we have been saying—your own drawing does not show any east to west flow in the area we are discussing!

Englaregement of the yellow square in the above image. Note that the green arrow is the path the winds take past the Arabian Peninsula, which is a southwest wind (blow out of the southwest toward the northeast). The white arrow is the best a ship might do in trying to turn eastward when being “driven forth before the wind” as was Nephi’s ship. The dotted blue arrow would have been a possible route for a tacking vessel using a lateen sail that was maneuverable, such as the Arab coastal vessels of the time,  but not for Lehi's vessel
In addition, these monsoon winds are called the “northeast” and “southwest” winds because they blow from those directions. We have put up drawings of numerous experts in this field to show that, including NASA whose study of the winds is essential for liftoff and reentry and they have expanded that to all over the world, including the Indian Ocean, Indonesia, etc. It is also those northeast winds that blow across India that cause so much damage, flooding and cost as well as deaths almost every year. Personally, I've said all I'm going to say on this subject since winds and ocean currents are more studied in this area than anywhere else in the world and more is written and more is diagrammed. If you want to debate this, then debate it with the experts, not some journal issue out of a small mag that has little credibility in the field. I personally have spent the past 15 years studying these winds and currents and other than a few isolated articles have found nothing in the mainstream of sea and wind that is different except with the possible El Nino periods.
     In addition, screen captures of clouds on a single day do not make a point in this field, but studies over many years of statistics plotted. See all of NASA’s work on this, or the NOAA, etc., whose significant mainstream work we have shown time and again here. Check out the “Mean significant wave height and 1000mb winds for July in Indian Ocean using Navy Advanced Measuring equipment of wave height, wave period and wave spectra data 20 to 40 year spans. See NODC Ocean Archive System data. NOAA Mean Wave Direction, and NOAA's National Data Buoy Center, which has buoy and C-MAN stations that record real-time and historical wave data. Etc., etc., etc. And if you want current data of a single period, 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.
As mentioned above, all the arrows are moving basically northeast from this southwest monsoon, currently blowing at the writing of this article on May 30th. Note: They do not blow east and west! Also note: the White arrow points to the internal blowup of the area blowing into the Malay Peninsula area and the direction of the arrows—northeast!

Having said all that, I’ll take the time to answer your comments:
    1. Evidently, you are unaware of the winds and currents that move about the Malay Peninsula. Really? With all the charts and diagrams that have appeared over the past eight years in this blog? Really? On the other hand, no matter what I do or do not know has never been the issue—I use maps and charts from mainstream measurement sources, such as NASA, NOAA, PODAAC, National Ocean Currents Service, etc., etc., etc.
Even if a ship could manage to round India, which is unlikely since the winds would drive it into the west coast of India, it would still be caught in the wave of winds blowing northeast (north by northeast) and be forced into the Bay of Bengal (dotted blue line) and be sent or propelled toward the Tailand mainland as shown, not in the direction of Malaysia Peninsula—however, most likely it would be caught in the current taking it directly into Sri Lanka. Remember, Nephi’s ship was “driven forth before the wind”

The thing is, we cannot just decide Nephi’s ship could go wherever you want it to. And if you are going to use a map showing where the current goes, you need to take Nephi’s ship in those exact directions since that is what was pushing Nephi’s ship forward.
According to the Reader's own map and wind directions, even if one could get past the subcontinent of India, which is not probable, they would be sent on the south into Sumatra, a little north of there into the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, or most likely, be driven northward into the Bay of Bengal and into the Nepal, Myanmar (Burma), or Thailand shores
    The chances of hitting the islands enroute rather than sail past them is far more likely for inexperienced seamen like Lehi’s family, than threading their way between them to a more distant island, if indeed they were able to get their ship on such a course, which is highly unlikely since it was “driven forth before the wind” and would have been sent into the India western shore (dotted arrow in second image above).
    In Nephi’s ship, which “was driven forth before the wind,” he would have had to travel 300 miles southward, across winds, to reach favorable winds moving in the direction eastward toward the Malay Peninsula. That is 300 miles with no wind behind his ship! What on earth would you say was moving his ship forward with no winds behind him to push it forward—with the first 100 miles mostly into the wind! Don’t talk about others, who did not have ships like Nephi’s, built for deep ocean travel designed by the Lord, but talk about Nephi’s ship traveling the course you claim against or cross-wise of the currents and winds on the map you submit as your proof of wind direction! His ship required the wind to be behind it at all times!
The problem lies in trying to get off the shore to the south or southeast when the southwest monsoon is blowing as shown here in the Reader's submitted map. The white arrows show the current flow (a very strong current) that would send any ship leaving anywhere along the Arabian Peninsula to the northeast and into the western shores of India

    Nephi would have had to cross 300 miles of counter-currents to reach currents moving in a favorable direction, i.e., east! Remember, this is your map that you submitted as support of your idea.
    So we ought to take a look at where those currents shown on your submitted map actually go, not where you want them to go.

Orange arrows: Currents coming up the African coast, across the Arabian Peninsula, and directly into India (not around it, but into it)—if you put to sea anywhere along the Arabian coast, you are going to end up on the west India coast if your vessel is “driven forth before the wind.” The other, thinner arrows show where you would need to begin to end up toward the Bay of Bengal, the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, or the northern tip of Sumatra island; if you begin where the green arrow is located, you your current would be turned back upon itself, ending up in the circular gyre shown 

Remember, once again, this map and its small, light arrows are those you submitted as evidence of the direction of the winds and currents in the north Indian Ocean. Nothing has been added or deleted from your submitted map except for the colored lines for directional emphasis.
(See the next post, “Back to Malay – Part II,” for more on this fallacious Malay Theory)


  1. I appreciate your detailed comments, and I will commit to researching this matter further. But there is always the undeniable fact that someone from the Arabian Sea arrived right in the middle of the Malay Peninsula to establish a civilization between the 6th century and the 5th century BC.

    So no matter how many charts and graphs we quibble over, the evidence of civilization arising on the Malay Peninsula at precisely the time the Mulekites and Lehites set sail is undeniable. We can argue whether that civilization was Israelite, but it can't be argued that this journey was impossible. The evidence is overwhelming that a sea voyage from the Arabian Peninsula or West India to the Malay Peninsula was possible in the 6th to 5th centuries BC. - Jay

    1. Jay, the people that inhabit that peninsula are undoubtedly descend from the Chinese. They are Oriental in origin and the ancient genealogy tables show that they descend from Japheth. That is also an undeniable fact that you continue to ignore.

      The people of Shem stayed in the Middle East. There is a difference between the Orientals which are called Asian and the Middle East Asians. The people of Malaysia are not descendant from Shem nor are they of the House of Israel. And no amount of linguistic studies can prove that. The model simple is wrong and does not fit in anyway way possible what the BOM describes. Give it up Jay - I doesn't work and has never worked. The scriptures simply do not support it. IRa

    2. Ira, I can appreciate your persistence on this matter but we honestly don't know where the people of Shem or Japheth went. As I've mentioned many times here, there are early accounts that suggest there was a group of Semites that left the Middle East around the time of the Jaredites, and there are also accounts of a group of Kenites (Rechabites) leaving the Middle East around the time of the Lehites.

      There are countless accounts of Israelites settling in southern India, and they claim that their colonies stretch as far as the Malay Peninsula and up into China. Some even went as far south as Zimbabwe, and they have the J1 and T1 DNA to back up their claims to Jewish ancestry. As Del has mentioned, the scriptures do support the presence of many of Lehi's brothers scattered throughout the isles of the sea.

      2 Nephi 10:21

      "But great are the promises of the Lord unto them who are upon the isles of the sea; wherefore as it says isles, there must needs be more than this, and they are inhabited also by our brethren."

    3. That's where you are wrong. We do know because of ancient genealogy tables that have been kept. I've seen a number of these ancient tables and the all say the same thing as to where the people's settled. By taking one Scripture​ of context and building an entire civilation out of thin air doesn't mean anything.

    4. This comment has been removed by the author.

    5. Did you ever see any of those tables that say that Semites settled in Chile? Or Peru?

      I think you have a double standard going on here, so its difficult to know how to proceed with this conversation.

  2. You write: "So no matter how many charts and graphs we quibble over, the evidence of civilization arising on the Malay Peninsula at precisely the time the Mulekites and Lehites set sail is undeniable. We can argue whether that civilization was Israelite, but it can't be argued that this journey was impossible" showing me that you simply do not read what we write, or do not understand what is so simply explain time and time again. Trade, therefore shipping, took place all over the area in question from earliest times--what you miss is the type of ship being used. One is a dhow type vessel still in use, using a lateen sail, which allows for coast movement, not dependent upon deep sea sailing or more specifically being "driven forth before the wind." No deep sea vessel with a fixed sail requiring the wind behind them could make that voyage. That is the point. Lehi sailed in a fixed sail, "driven forth before the wind" vessel that Nephi built under the Lord's direction. That type of vessel is for deep ocean (blue water) sailing back in the time when these coastal vessels could not have sailed into deep water.

    As to who landed on the Malay Peninsula in the centuries you mention, Chinese historians have always maintained it was people from China. The fact they might have landed in 600 B.C. does not seem significant under these circumstances.

  3. I assure you I am reading what you write, I just do not always agree. As you say the dhow was only one type of vessel. There were others used in Southeast Asia that were much larger called kolandiaphonta. These were crossing the Bay of Bengal and were likely capable of deep sea voyages. It is speculation, but it is possible that the Lehites may have based their design on one of these kolandiaphonta. In any case, we don't know what kind of boat the Lehites were in. But to say that boat could not have sailed the short and direct route to the Malay Peninsula but surely could have sailed the long, never-been-done-ever, voyage to Chile is a tough argument to support.

    Historians do not say it was people from China that reached the west coast of the Malay Peninsula in the 6th century BC. The latest research says that these colonizers were from Iran/Afghanistan region. The materials found in the ground come from the region of Iran and Afghanistan. I believe the Mulekites followed other exiled Jews to this region and departed from there.

  4. As to your June 4 9:25 post:
    1. What experts do not agree? Names, sources, dates, statements, etc.
    2. What proof it was the 6th century B.C.? Is this an estimate or is there specific information (like in the first year of Zedekiah, etc.)
    3. What material found in the ground? How was it dated? who determined the dates, etc.
    You make a lot of broad-ranging statements without anything to back them up. Please refrain from doing so without specific information that can be checked and verified, and I'm not talking about a copy of a book page no one can read.
    Also,what you believe is not the issue here, but what can be compared effectively to the scriptural record, which in the case of the Mulekites; "And they journeyed in the wilderness, and were brought by the hand of the Lord across the great waters, into the land where Mosiah discovered them; and they had dwelt there from that time forth" (Omni 1:16) which suggest nothing of the kind about Iran/Afghanistan.
    You do not have to agree with me. But it does seem that you should take the word of experts in the field that repeatedly and with great support say what I post. Your disagreement, after all, is with them, not with me--in this case, I'm just the "messenger." And we have posted on these pages in the past the names and sources of the Chinese writers who have made the claim of who first settled the Malay Peninsula.

    1. Wanted to add this comment on the kolandiaphonta ships which were said to be massive, 50 meters in length and stand out of the water four to five meters, and carry six to seven hundred people.

      And unlike other trading ships these kolandiaphonta were not coastal vessels. They cut right across the bay, through deep water.

  5. I have always supplied sources for my arguments. I will continue to do so. But this will most likely be in the format of a page or a book that is in a language you might not be able to read. In these cases I always provide the best translation I can, but I cannot translate the entire page and include it in the comments here.

    1. What experts do not agree? Names, sources, dates, statements, etc.

    Pierre-Yves Manguin, A. Mani, Geoff Wade
    Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 2011 - History - 514 pages

    Charles Higham
    AC Black, Feb 28, 2556 BE - History - 144 pages

    The Chronometric Holocene Archaeological Record of the Souther Thai-Malay Peninsula - David Bulbeck - Australian National University, Australia

    Now, when they refer to "Indians" they are referring to the area around Taxila in Pakistan, which appears to have been a refuge for Jews fleeing the Babylonian captivity. So it is not just my belief, but it is the history as provided by the Pashtun people who claim to be descendants of Israelites who were carried away to Afghanistan by Nebuchadnezzar:

    History of the Afghans: Translated from the Persian of Neamet Ullah - Niʻmat Allāh - Oriental translation committee, and sold, 1836 - Afghanistan

    The Boundaries of Afghans’ Political Imagination: The Normative-Axiological Aspects of Afghan Tradition - Jolanta Sierakowska-Dyndo - Cambridge Scholars Publishing, Aug 11, 2557 BE - Social Science - 215 pages

  6. 2. What proof it was the 6th century B.C.? Is this an estimate or is there specific information (like in the first year of Zedekiah, etc.)

    The iron furnaces that were found in the area I propose as the Lehite landing site were dated back to 535 BC. This site is the oldest civilization on the Malay Peninsula, and it dates to within 50 years of when the Lehites would have reached the Promise Land.

    3. What material found in the ground? How was it dated? who determined the dates, etc.

    Carnelian beads, pottery and other artifacts that seem to be closely related to items found in the middle east and near east

    Pierre-Yves Manguin, A. Mani, Geoff Wade
    Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 2011 - History - 514 pages

  7. So what! Del has shown that we have all those things in South America and so we don't need to look at Malaysia because other factors tell us that it is in the wrong place such as D&C 54. So why bother with a bunch of iron furnaces in Malaysia when you have them in South America? People have been documented in South America from 2,000 bc - the time of the Jaredites. So D&C 54:8 fits perfectly. It doesn't fit Malaysia. So for that fact alone - I reject your idea.

    1. You have iron furnaces in South America dating back to 535 BC? I'd be interested to see where.

      People have been documented in South America from before 12,980 BC, but I know you reject anything that doesn't agree with your opinion. I wouldn't say that throwing out hard evidence makes your arguments "fit perfectly".

    2. Didn't you see the article written by Del a while back about metallurgy in the America's? Go read his stuff. Yes they had a high degree of metal workings in the America's. Del has already documented it for you if you would take the time to read his stuff.

      And yes I reject the 12,980 BC date completely. As I told you that is the reason you can't accept the South American model because you believe in an old earth and the idea that South America could not come up out of the ocean at the time of Christ. In that regard you do not believe in the scriptures when it tells you there was a world wide flood and th continent where the BOM people lived was changed. Even though that is what the record says you don't believe it because it goes against your uniformatarianism ideas. That is the source of the real problem here not anything else. I'm a geologist and went through the schools and was taught all their happy garbage. There are lots of problems with it that they can't resolve. It's a religion to these (secular) scientists. BYU is grouped in with them unfortunately. If they hadn't abandoned their belief in scripture they would know the truth of these things rather than running after the world.