Does DNA rule out Book of Mormon ancestry?

The ancestry evidence is strong. Does your argument rule out a large Israelite founding population, or any Israelite migration at all?

That grants the genetic result and makes the inference testable. The evidence weighs against a large founding population. Testing a small migration is a different question.

Populations mix, so we can’t learn anything from DNA.

Genetic data can tell us a lot about major population movements. The Church essay acknowledges the evidence for ancient Asian-related ancestry.

Those phrases mean basically the same thing.

They make different claims. The older wording encouraged a broad ancestry claim. The current wording allows for multiple other ancestral populations.

It does narrow a real claim readers learned from the old introduction. The introduction is editorial material, and we can still ask what the text itself requires.

You acknowledge the change and separate two questions: what the old introduction asserted and what demographic claims the scriptural narrative makes.

Yes, that shows why the DNA evidence confirms the Book of Mormon.

A possible explanation for why a signal is hard to detect supplies no positive genetic evidence for Lehi’s group.

That could make a genetic signal hard to identify. It leaves the possibility open, and we still need separate reasons to accept the book’s historical claims.

You separate compatibility from confirmation. The Church essay also calls faithful arguments based on DNA speculative.