Well sure, anything is 'possible' (not plausible) if you're not willing to put a definite timeline to it, but the usefulness or relevance of the claim suffers as a result. Particularly as no group known as Jaredites has ever been substantiated as existing.
I think you are blinding yourself to the evidence which is there because you do not want to see it. I’ll go through it quickly again without adding in the evidence cause I already did that but then I'll add a few more.
1, The existence of the placement value of zero
North Americans Natives did not have it so why did Joseph assume the people of the Book of Mormon did.
2, The keeping of a calendar with list of kings.
North American Natives didn’t have calendars nor kings, why didn’t he use the word chief?
3, The use of cement in their buildings
North American Natives didn’t build like that at all and were more nomadic. So why did Joseph write about it?
4, The deforestation of a large area of land which happened.
Why would he even mention something like that
5, Population in the millions
Not something Joseph would have known
6 The maritime shipping of goods
North American Natives did not have a shipping industry but the Mayans did.
7, The Olemec and Mayan political system with city states are the same as in the Book of Mormon
8, The names of Kings as Tu and governors as Ku in the Olmec and Mayan and also found in the Book of Mormon
9, The use of gold, copper, iron and bronze something north American Natives would not have known.
The dating of the use of steel is very close to when archeologist believe steel was first produced and it is something they brought with them. Two of the mentions maybe a "literary topos," meaning a stylized literary description and not meant to take literally.
10, A time of a great society with wealth around 200 ad, exactly the same time as in the Book of Mormon. Pearls and fine clothing are mentioned, and a forming of an elite class of leaders.
These two are new
11&12 Massive warfare and human & child sacrifice.
I’m going to post here Mor 4 a description of their warfare which happened around 350 ad and then a description of Aztec warfare about a thousand years later, things didn’t change much.
Mor 4
11 And it is impossible for the tongue to describe, or for man to write a perfect description of the horrible scene of the blood and carnage which was among the people, both of the Nephites and of the Lamanites; and every heart was hardened, so that they delighted in the shedding of blood continually.
14 And they did also march forward against the city Teancum, and did drive the inhabitants forth out of her, and did take many prisoners both women and children, and did offer them up as sacrifices unto their idol gods.
15 And it came to pass that in the three hundred and sixty and seventh year, the Nephites being angry because the Lamanites had sacrificed their women and their children, that they did go against the Lamanites with exceedingly great anger,…. (they lose)
20 And they fled again from before them, and they came to the city Boaz; and there they did stand against the Lamanites with exceeding boldness, insomuch that the Lamanites did not beat them until they had come again the second time.
21 And when they had come the second time, the Nephites were driven and slaughtered with an exceedingly great slaughter; their women and their children were again sacrificed unto idols.
HERE BE CANNIBALS
CANNIBALISM IN MIDDLE AMERICA Marvin Harris, Cannibals and Kings: The Origin of Cultures, Glasgow, 1978, pp. 110-124
Now a description of Aztec warfare;
Since the Aztec armies were thousands of times bigger than those of the Huron or the Tupinamba, they could capture thousands of prisoners in a single battle. In addition to daily sacrifices of small numbers of prisoners and slaves at major and minor shrines, then, mass sacrifices involving hundreds and thousands of victims could be carried out to commemorate special events. The Spanish chroniclers were told, for example, that at the dedication in 1487 of the great pyramid of Tenochtitlán four lines of prisoners stretching for two miles each were sacrificed by a team of executioners who worked night and day for four days. Allotting two minutes per sacrifice, the demographer and historian Sherburne Cook estimated that the number of victims associated with that single event was 14,100. The scale of these rituals could be dismissed as exaggerations were it not for the encounters of Bernal Díaz and Andrés de Tápia with methodically racked and hence easily counted rows of human skulls in the plazas of the Aztec cities. Díaz writes that in the plaza of Xocotlan
there were piles of human skulls so regularly arranged that one could count them, and I estimated them at more than a hundred thousand.
I repeat again there were more than one hundred thousand of them.
Of his encounter with the great skull rack in the centre of Tenochtitlán, Tápia wrote:
The poles were separated from each other by a little less than a vara [approximately a yard’s length], and were crowded with cross sticks from top to bottom, and on each cross stick were five skulls impaled through the temples: and the writer and a certain Gonzalo de Umbría, counted the cross sticks and multiplying by five heads per cross stick from pole to pole, as I said, we found that there were 136 thousand heads.
But that was not all. Tápia also describes two tall towers made entirely out of skulls held together by lime in which there was an uncountable number of crania and jaws....
So intent were the Aztecs on bringing back prisoners to be sacrificed that they would frequently refrain from pressing a military advantage for fear that they would kill too many enemy troops before terms of surrender could be arranged. This tactic cost them dearly in their engagements with Cortés’s troops, who from the Aztec point of view seemed to be irrationally intent upon killing everyone in sight.…”
http://www.heretical.com/cannibal/mamerica.html
The Nephites may have felt they fought with boldness but the Lamanites were toying with them.
Going back to Mor 4
“ and did drive the inhabitants forth out of her, and did take many prisoners both women and children, and did offer them up as sacrifices unto their idol gods…
“Mayanists believe that, like the Aztecs, the Maya performed child sacrifice in specific circumstances, most commonly as foundation dedications for temples and other structures. Maya art from the Classic period also depicts the extraction of children’s hearts during the ascension to the throne of the new king, or at the beginnings of the Maya calendar.[18] In one of these cases, Stele 11 in Piedras Negras, Guatemala, a sacrificed boy can be seen. Other scenes of sacrificed boys are visible on jars.”
The natives Americans Joseph knew would not have done anything like this at all.
12, ritual cannibalism
There is no real evidence that North American Natives ever did this ritually, maybe when they were hungry.
http://www.native-languages.org/iaq13.htm
But for the Mayans and Aztec it was a way of life;
Moroni 9:8
8 And the husbands and fathers of those women and children they have slain; and they feed the women upon the flesh of their husbands, and the children upon the flesh of their fathers; and no water, save a little, do they give unto them.
From the same article.
Diego Durán gives us a similar description:
“Once the heart had been wrenched out it was offered to the sun and blood sprinkled toward the solar deity. Imitating the descent of the sun in the west the corpse was toppled down the steps of the pyramid. After the sacrifice the warriors celebrated a great feast with much dancing, ceremonial and cannibalism….
I have been pursuing the fate of the victim’s body in order to establish the point that Aztec cannibalism was not a perfunctory tasting of ceremonial titbits. All edible parts were used in a manner strictly comparable to the consumption of the flesh of domestic animals. The Aztec priests can legitimately be described as ritual slaughterers in a state-sponsored system geared to the production and redistribution of substantial amounts of animal protein in the form of human flesh.”
13, There are some actual hands on geography proofs which Joseph Smith simply could not have known.
Those who have studied the wording of the Book of Mormon carefully have decided that it describes perfectly the old spice trails which caravans would have traveled. He describes traveling down the side of the Red Sea and stopping at a places called Shazer which means a clump of trees where there would be water. Counting the days travel they have found several sites which could fit.
The next place which Lehi names is called Nahom or written in Hebrew as NHM. There is a place just like this on the old spice trail where alters have been found with NHM on them, they date from the exact time period, 600 bc, when Lehi would have been traveling through. Also at this same point there is a turn in the direction of the trail toward the east and in the Book of Mormon Nephi writes “and we did travel nearly eastward from that time forth” he’s spot on!
And another point; here in Nahom is where Ishmael dies and his daughters morn,
1 Nephi 17
34 And it came to pass that Ishmael died, and was buried in the place which was called Nahom.
35 And it came to pass that the daughters of Ishmael did mourn exceedingly, because of the loss of their father,
The root word for Nahom is Naham and means to mourn, see Strongs number 5098
The traditional way of mourning was for the women to wail and sing around the body, the men disappear for a while again something Joseph would not have known.
14, and now we know that other peoples came here by boat and not by foot at all.
The evidence is not built on one big thing, one big sign saying welcome to the land of Nephi. But, it is built on lots of small things which Joseph Smith simply could not have known.
Alma 36
6 Now ye may suppose that this is foolishness in me; but behold I say unto you, that by small and simple things are great things brought to pass; and small means in many instances doth confound the wise.
And the Higgs boson particle discovery was such big news because it was the first known fundamental particle of its kind to be discovered in nature. I'm not a physicist, so I don't actually know what that means, but I do know that it's something that was discovered in nature. As in, it actually exists. It wasn't declared discovered on the hopes that it would one day be there. So, yes, science still doesn't do eventual evidence.
