I think i may be coming across overly anti-Mormon when that is not at all my intention, i hope you know that i respect the LDS Church and am not anti-Mormon.
My point is, if i can explain myself in a coherant manner (you know i'm not the best when it comes to putting my thoughts into words), my beliefs are not based on a shred of physical evidence, heck Christian Gnosticism doesn't even really on Jesus Christ actually having lived! Personally i believe that he did myself, but if he didn't then the result to my faith would be negligable.
LDS Christianity on the other hand is totally the opposite, the BoM which is at the heart of your Church makes bold claims about the history of the Americas that, if proven true, would make it immediately obvious that Joseph Smith was indeed a very special man and a Prophet of God.
Its the claims made in the BoM about what would be real-world history and their central role in your faith that for non-Mormons are the greatest hinderance to the Church's believability. However if those claims were proven true, and i mean obviously true, not speculatively true, they would be its greatest asset.
Do you see what i mean? Gnosticism makes no real world claims about anything, there is nothing to back up a person's belief in Gnostic thought other than their own personal experience.
Having conclusive evidence that the BoM is true and that Joseph Smith could only have received its information from a higher power would set Mormonism apart from every other religion on the planet, the evidence would be staring us in the face, people would be daft not to convert.