Clarification on the Rosenvall's Baja video

The Stick of Joseph podcast is one of my favorites. I recommend it all the time. The Paul brothers are outstanding interviewers and have interesting guests and topics. They usually present multiple working hypotheses on lots of topics to help readers make informed decisions. 

But sometimes they overlook important points that audiences should be aware of, such as in these videos about the theories of the Rosenvalls that the Book of Mormon took place in Baja California.

In the ongoing pursuit of clarity, charity and understanding, we need to correct an error. In a recent post, about the Baja theory video from the Stick of Joseph podcast, I analyzed the Rosenvall's website that discussed Cumorah.

https://www.lettervii.com/2026/05/cumorah-and-baja.html

I thought the video did not discuss Cumorah. I was wrong.

In a subtle way, they did discuss Cumorah, just not by name.

_____

Before getting to what they said in the video, as I keep repeating, I'm fine with people believing whatever they want. I encourage multiple working hypotheses, pending additional information. And I completely agree with the Rosenvalls that we should all "keep on the fact side."

The "fact side" is the first element in my FAITH model of analysis. We start with Facts, then articulate the various Assumptions, Inferences, and Theories that lead to our respective Hypotheses. This model of analysis allows everyone to clearly distinguish between facts and the other elements that are often presented as facts.

The "fact side" requires clarity and transparency.

Instead, the Rosenvalls (who are great people, faithful Latter-day Saints, sincere, educated, etc.), both in this video and on their website, ignore the facts relating to Cumorah.

_____

At 30:13, Rosenvall alludes to Cumorah without using the term. That's why I missed it before.

"Unfortunately, there's a lot of things that are fiction, things that have been made up, kind of recreated, kind of gotcha kind of stuff. They too can be tested and they become fiction. Here's where our problem is. It's in the middle. It's this in legal terms, it's called conjecture. In other words, you're presenting something that can't be tested or proved. So, for example, a quote from an apostle in 1835 is very interesting, but my problem is how do I go to him and say, "Hey, was this revelation or were you just kind of thinking about it?"

Most viewers have no idea what he is referring to because most viewers have never read Letter VII (Oliver Cowdery's 1835 explanation of Cumorah) and Rosenvall is hardly going to tell them about it. 

Nor did the Paul brothers question him about it. They just let it go as if they agreed.

Instead, Rosenvall put up this chart and relegated President Cowdery's statement of fact to "Conjecture."

Then, at 31:00, Rosenvall says

I'll be the first to tell you we do use conjecture, but it's important that we let you know that this is an assumption and I hope you'll hear me say that often and so forth. So be careful when we do geography because there's a lot of this when we're trying to extrapolate, we're trying to figure it out and so forth. So we'll try to keep you on the fact side.

Let's set aside for now the strange characterization of their speculative interpretation of the text as "fact." At the same moment he's admitting he uses conjecture, he doesn't list his theories under Conjecture on his chart. Instead, he's telling viewers he's going to "keep you on the fact side" when he just ignored the facts about Letter VII.

As we saw in my previous post, they don't even tell readers of their website about Letter VII. Instead, they use all kinds of conjecture and obfuscation to confuse their readers, completely avoiding the "fact side."

This is how M2Cers and similar geography theorists avoid their Cumorah problem. 

In 1917, when L.E. Hills published the first map of Book of Mormon geography that showed Cumorah in southern Mexico, he dismissed Oliver Cowdery's declaration without quoting or citing it, just as Rosenvalls do in this video. 

We can all see why Rosenvalls decline to "keep us on the fact side" regarding Cumorah. For their theory to work, they have to put Cumorah in Baja California.

To "keep us on the fact side" they would need to inform viewers of the following historical accounts anyone can easily find. The existence of these accounts is a fact everyone agrees upon. 

Once educated, people can separately decide what to believe. But no one can make an informed decision without knowing the relevant facts. 

(If the Rosenvalls don't "have time" to explain these facts in video interviews, they can refer people to their website after they change it to keep it on the "fact side.")

(i) Oliver and Joseph visited the repository of Nephite records in the hill Cumorah in New York multiple times. When he spoke about this in a conference just two months before he died, President Brigham Young said he did so because he feared the knowledge would otherwise be lost. See https://www.lettervii.com/2025/03/brigham-youngs-prophecy-about-cumorah.html

(ii) Oliver and Joseph, along with David Whitmer, met the messenger who, having received the abridged plates from Joseph in Harmony, said he was "going to Cumorah" before he brought the plates of Nephi to Fayette. Joseph identified him as one of the three Nephites.

(iii) Lucy Mack Smith reported that the first time he appeared to Joseph Smith, Moroni identified the hill as Cumorah. Thereafter, Joseph referred to the hill as Cumorah and the entire family knew to what he referred, even before he took possession of the plates. 

(iv) In 1834, the anti-Mormon book Mormonism Unvailed made a series of accusations against the Church, including that the Book of Mormon was fiction. In response, as Assistant President of the Church, and with the assistance of Joseph Smith, Oliver wrote and published the first formal history of the Church, including Letter VII. 

(v) At the outset of the history he published, Oliver explained that "To do Justice to​ this subject will require time and space: we therefore ask the forbearance of our readears, assuring them that it shall be founded upon facts." Throughout the essays, Oliver clearly distinguished between facts and speculation, such as when he explained he did not know how deep Moroni buried the stone box to account for erosion and when he explained that when he asked Joseph how long he prayed before Moroni came, "hours passed unnumbered—how many or how few I know not, neither is he able to inform me; but supposes it must have been eleven or twelve, and perhaps later,"

(vi) President Cowdery explicitly declared it is a fact that the hill in New York where Joseph obtained the plates was the same hill called Cumorah/Ramah in the Book of Mormon and that this is the location of the final battles.

(vii) After they published Letter VII in the Messenger and Advocate, Joseph had it copied into his own journal as part of his life story where everyone can read it here:

http://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/history-1834-1836/90

(viii) Joseph had it republished in the Times and Seasons and Gospel Reflector, and it was republished in the Millennial Star, The Prophet, and later in the Improvement Era.

(ix) While many Church leaders have reaffirmed the New York Cumorah (such as President Romney in General Conference in 1975), no Church leader has ever repudiated what President Cowdery wrote in Letter VII.

Consistent with these historical facts, there are multiple hypotheses about the setting of the Book of Mormon that (i) show Cumorah in western New York and (ii) explain all the geographical information in the text.

The Rosenvalls are among many awesome, faithful Latter-day Saints who reject the facts stated above and who have instead explained all the geographical information in the text based on their own interpretations. That's all fine. People can believe whatever they want.

But we all know that when people hide, censor, or ignore relevant facts, it's because those facts don't support or corroborate the theories they are promoting.

_____

Their chart is misleading at best, as even they admit without apparently recognizing it. 

Look at it again.

What they frame as "fact" in the chart is actually nothing but their own conjecture about how the text should be interpreted. 

Everyone who has proposed a theory of geography relies on the identical text, convinced their own interpretation is "correct," or in this case, "on the fact side."

Yet the ensuing confusion shows us that the text is vague enough to support multiple working hypotheses.

That's why the prophetic guidance about Cumorah is essential.

And because the prophetic guidance contradicts their theory, the Rosenvalls relegate it to "conjecture."