Here are some more information for Ram Thin:

Ram Sethu: Proof of Great Science of Ancient Past

1.      Indian Historians: Notorious or Ignorant

More than a hundred years ago, when History of India was written under British influence, there was no room for Ramayan and Mahabharat as historical events. They were epics and of no importance for students. It is surprising that India is one country whose history has been written by its enemies and the whole nation yet follows it. No doubt the history was a strategic attack on Indian civilization and culture that paved way for western culture into the nation. With time, truth is evolving back. Science of India that was denied is now accepted through western influence. The myths are suddenly appearing to be history. And one such history is Ram Sethu. Since, it is a history of Hindus, politics and literates are not ready to accept it as truth.

If they are so intelligent, let them go through this article. I challenge them through few questions mentioned in bold in this article.

Let us have a background of what politicians and historians (British written history literates) say about Ram Sethu.

Historian B.D. Chattopadhyay of Jawaharlal Nehru University says the archaeological record says nothing of the sort. There is no evidence of a human presence in the subcontinent, he says, before roughly 250,000 to 300,000 years ago. It is generally believed man's hominid ancestors did not leave their African home until about two million years ago.

Very important point here is that Mr. Chattopadhyay has forgot to note that what is said of hominid ancestors is also a belief – a belief generated by Western people and followed by Mr. Chattopadhyay – not Truth, not Science. Surely Ramayan, if a belief is a belief of eastern people – Indian People. Mr. Chattopadhyay is trying to introduce a belief clash.

Why Mr. Chattopadhyay wants to defy a true instance with a false belief? Does Mr. Chattopadhyay want to say that Lord Rama is deep in the heart of billions of Indians to this date without any truth? Can false beliefs find so deep root in society and for so long time?

I read a similar comment from N Ramanujam. Head, Post Graduate Department of Geology and Research Centre, V.O. Chidambaram College, Tuticorin.

He said that Adam's Bridge is only a chain of shoals between the Palk Strait and the Gulf of Mannar, created by sedimentation owing to long shore currents.

Explaining the bridge's geological history, he said both the Palk Strait and the GoM were once part of the Cauvery basin, which was formed during the separation of India and Antarctica about 70 million years ago during the `Gondwana period.'

They were combined till a ridge was formed in the region owing to thinning of earth's crust. The development of this ridge augmented the coral growth in the region.

"The coral cover acted as a `sand trapper' leading to the formation of Rameswaram Island," Dr. Ramanujam said.

The long shore currents on the southern side of island created a discontinuous shoreline eastward from Dhanuskodi to Talaimannar, which's the Adam's Bridge.

Let us see what Mr. Ramanujam has said:

How many such Chain of Shoals bridging two nations is known to Dr. Ramanujam? Is there any other Geographical construct anywhere in the world – deposits of shoals along the coast doesn’t say that it bridges two land pieces?

Again Mr. Ramanujam is taking support of another belief to beat the truth. He is talking of Gondwana theory, a theory that has no concrete proof – an imaginary thesis with some scientific logic behind it. Hundreds of such theory can be generated based on Geographical principles, but that do not defy a concrete reason of existence.

Why did Gondwana theory leave a trace of only One Bridge on the Globe?

Very important – Ramanujam is unable to change the names of two places as Dhanuskodi and Talaimannar which are not English names as they already exist, and hence successfully accepts a controversial English name of Adam’s Bridge instead of Ram Setu. Mr. Ramanujam could very easily put his theory with the name of the Bridge still as Ram Setu. But he ends up in saying that is Adam’s Bridge – WHY?

Why did Mr. Ramanujam accept Adam’s theory to be correct? Does Mr. Ramanujam want to support that Adam and Eve existed and Lord Rama didn’t exist?

If yes, then Adam and Eve existed in India alone as the bridge is in India – Again controversy – as Manu Shatrupa would be more known names in this region and analogy to Adam and Eve. Moreover, acceptance of Adam’s Bridge is acceptance that it was build by Adam. Actually, the logic fits opposite to them – how can the first man on earth build a bridge of that volume? He would be immature at first place, he is alone at second place and why will he ever endeavor to bridge the sea? Though the only evidence is with India, no logic fits to the name as ‘Adam’s Bridge’. This clearly reflects the Christian mentality trying to impose and kill Hindu greatness. And poor Historians of India, brought up in the education system of English, unable to break the boundary of false arrogance of being high literary, seems to be helplessly saying that Ram Setu Bandh is not historical. They cannot even hold a petty vision that humans have build wall of length of Great wall of China that is visible from even Satellite; what would stop humans to build Ram Setu Bandh and what is surprising or opposing to the fact that it was built as a part of Ramayan as a history.

Does Mr. Ramanujam want to say that if Adam built it, it is history, but if Lord Rama built it it is a Myth and a natural construct?

Professor Dupey says that as per Archeological survey, remains from Ayodhya controversial site has found temple remains whose age do not go beyond 600 B.C.

Mr. Dubey: Do you want to say that if I build a temple today, you will conclude that Lord Rama existed since today and not before?

Temples are build and rebuild and their age can only say about the age of the temple and the age of the personality whose worship is done in the temple.

We need to understand certain points here, modern Archeology and Science is far different than what used to exist in ancient India. For instance, old temples of India, yet existing, were built on a different technology than what we find in modern civil engineering. This doesn’t mean that ancient archeology was not having mathematics maturity – in fact, if we look at Temples of India, Jagannath Puri temple for instance, we do not find any iron or pillars used to build the temple – yet it stands from hundreds of years to a height of around 200 ft.

Assume that Puri temple would have been razed some 10000 years ago, what technology or archeological proofs would be derived to conclude that the temple was 200 ft high?

Similarly, the Ram Setu bandh has seen ages, and that too not on land, but in sea – a turbulent sea. The major of the mass is already washed off – a question to be pondered is that what remains is just a trace of the actual bridge – not the whole bridge as it was.

Ramayan mentions that the bridge was built over the sea water, with support of Sea – this implies that there was no supporting archeology involved in constructing the bridge – this is easily supported by the failure of Archeology ground to trace such constructs under ground. Yet the presence of shoals below the bridge and their type indicate that they cannot be found in sea in the manner it exists at Ram Sethu.

Now, Mr. Dubey accepts that the age of Shoals found at Ram Sethu goes around 1 million years. He misguides people, as he is a literate of History written by British, that Ramayan was first written around 10000 years ago and not 1 million years ago. Mr. Dubey, here is a simple calculation for you to further investigate:

The age of the bridge as per scientific dating comes to around 1 million years. As per Hindu scriptures, Ramayan took place in ‘Treta Yug’. Calculating by Hindu scriptures (Treta Yug with a tenure of 12,96,000 years, Dwapar Yug with a tenure of 8, 64,000 years, Kali Yug has just seen 5,000 years): We know that Treta Yug was before Dwapar Yug. So, one thing is quite evident. The Bridge was constructed at least 8,64,000 years ago, i.e., 0.86 million years ago, which is pretty close to 1 million years. Treta Yuga itself is 1.3 million years of age.

How is that scientific age of the shoals and the Hindu calendar age of Lord Rama matches exactly? Will Mr. Dubey and other historians dare to come out of the falsehood of our enemy teachings and try to explore some mathematics of Hindus before they say make such stupid comparison of scientific ages?

2.      Analysis of Valmiki Ramayan over RAM SETHU

Now, let us go into the Valmiki Ramayan and dig out more history out of it. Let us be sure that if we want to dig history, we have to touch Valmiki Ramayan alone and not any other Ramayan, because all other Ramayan are written with purpose of promoting Ramayan and recording the event.

Here are certain points from Valmiki Ramayan to be considered:

1.        There is no other book than Ramayan that has put into scriptures describing such geographical constructs.

2.        Ramayan says that it was build under the supervision of an Architect Nala – son of the greatest Architect of all times ‘Vishwakarma’ (Note: ‘Vishwakarma’ is a designation given to the greatest archeologist and builder of the era in ancient Hindu society, a similar practice as we have in modern world of ‘Nobel Prize’). Thus, the book makes sure that such a bridge can be constructed by only architect of highest skill.

Why do the politicians mislead the nation by saying that Lord Rama was a Superman who build the bridge, when Ramayan clearly says that it is not Lord Rama but the Architect Nala and Neela who build the bridge?

3.        The bridge was (Ramayan mentions the bridge constructed in 5 days: 14 + 20 + 21 + 22 + 23 = 100 yojans) 100 Yojans long and 10 Yojans wide. Data to be considered here:

4.        The data starts from 14 yojans as first day, which is less than other day’s data, confirming a logic that first day as a beginning had taken time to gear up all Vanars. Second day it took momentum and rest of the days the distance of the bridge constructed is found to be nearly same. A logical conclusion of this sort is made only when the event have occurred in reality.

Why did Valmiki thrust his imagination to get the bridge completed only in 5 days? He could have well increased the number of days to help people of today understand it more logically. Or he could have even reduced the number of days to highlight the power of Lord Rama.

5.        The data that more than a crore (10 million) Vanaras were involved in building it, seems to be logical to fit to support the volume of the bridge constructed. Now, the count may not be exact, but surely Valmiki wants to say that there was a huge task force working for the bridge.

Valmiki could have easily shown Lord Rama winning the battle with few hundred Vanars as his soldiers – why 10 million?

6.        The width vs. length ratio also looks scientific and supportive to help carry such a huge mass across the bridge. The bridge is wide enough so as to withstand the weight of crores of Vanaras and allow passage to all of them.

7.        The bridge is said to be built in 5 days, giving an idea that bridge had to be built in a very short period of time, failing which the Opponent King Ravana would have come to know about it and would have attacked never allowing the bridge to be constructed. Thus, the period fits the war logic.

8.        The bridge is said to be constructed by around a crore Vanaras, the count fits the possibility of getting the bridge constructed in such a small time – a huge task force doing it. Though, the methodology of construction is not elaborated and shortened by mentioning that various ‘Yantras’ or Machinery were used to build the bridge, but it gives an indication that machinery were applied to do the task. It should be a subject to study about our past. Valmiki Ramayan: Yuddha Kanda, 22.60:

‘Hastimatran Mahakayah Pashananshch Mahabalah

Parvatanshch Samutpatya Yantraiyah Parivahanti Cha’

What was the need to mention that certain Machineries were used for constructing the bridge? How did an ancient man imagine of machineries?

9.        Very interestingly, Rama is not said to have built the bridge and the point clarifies that building it was the skill of an architect – Nala and not Rama or Hanuman, the hero of the book. Had Ramayan been a fantasy of Maharishi Valmiki, he would easily fantasized and written something like Rama built a bridge of Arrows as Rama was the hero in fantasy. But it is not so, making one think that it is not fantasy writing.

Why didn’t he tell the world that it was Lord Rama who builds it and give the credit to someone else of this great happening? After all, Lord Rama was the hero of his imagination.

10.    Ramayan also depicts the materials used in making the bridge clarifying that it was a possibility, but not under imagination of human capacity under technology support of today.

11.    Seeing the time constraint, it looks logical to have Vanars who are brisk in their movement collecting materials and fitting it in place as directed.

12.    The places mentioned in Ramayan exactly matches to the current location of the bridge, thus confirming that the book is not a story.

13.    The length of the bridge matches to what is mentioned in Ramayan.

So, looking at Ramayan alone one can conclude that the Bridge is not a natural construct. Having proven on the point of Bridge alone that Ramayan is not a book of myth, but a book of History, it straight away brings the truth that Maharishi Valmiki was the first Historian known to man kind

3.      Current Findings on RAM SETHU and their analysis

However, we need to further analyze current findings as well.

1. The first thing to consider is that under the current scientific evaluation, the bridge is proved to have a chain of shoals is 30 to 35 km long in Palk Street, and its unique curvature confirms that it is man made, and is not a Geographical Construct at all.
2. Archeological findings have proven that first signs of human inhabitants in Sri Lanka date back to primitive age of about 1,750,000 years of the same era as Ramayan (‘Treta Yug’, which lies exactly mid way to above number).
3. Sri Lankan Government has done Archeological Survey and found some very interesting data:
   1. A mountain covered completely with herbal plants of same type that is found in Himalayas. There is no other mountain in whole Sri Lanka of that kind. This stands as an evidence that the mountain was brought by Lord Hanuman to Sri Lanka – How was this done is subject to study? To my knowledge, Sri Yantra of Hindu myth (or may be similar constructs) is actually a anti-gravitation theory which was know to our Rishis in those days and these things were possible only by such means. Someday, science will surely understand this.
   2. Ashok Vatika is traced with complete Greenery and while soil. With a gap of hardly 10-20 meters, soil suddenly turns to be black and burnt and it stretches to miles. This highly unnatural and it stands to prove that Lord Hanuman had burnt Lanka.

There are many other proofs that have come up, but I consider these two points as strong as the Bridge itself.

Can our Historians consult the British again and create more theory around these evidences, so that they can be included in History books against Ramayan?

1. From Ayodhya to Sri Lanka, most of the places still hold the names as it was around a million years ago. Even the devastating Muslim invasion could not eliminate the names. Ayodhya, Chitrakut, Panchvati, Rameswaram, Lanka – all the names are as mentioned in the book. Rameswaram is the place where Lord Rama worshipped Lord Shiva and established the idol ‘Shiv Lingam’, exist to date as a place of worship. Ramayan talks about Mahendragiri Mountain as the highest point and best point to watch across the sea. Geographically, it is proven that Mahendragiri is the highest mountain in that area and gives a visibility of around 60 km range.

Why don’t these politicians and historians say how are these mentioned in Ramayan? Did these places pre-existed and Valmiki traveled a lot to create this story? Or these places were named after people read Valmiki Ramayan?

The more logical answer is, these places pre-existed and the event took place which Valimiki wrote as poetic history.

1. Another important fictitious topic of Ramayan is ‘Pushpak Viman’ – a vehicle that could take aerial route to travel. No doubt the Pusphak Viman no more exists, but it cannot be fantasy as we have similar air planes telling about it. What challenges the concept of Viman is the understanding that technology has developed in current era and people were devoid of such high-tech products in ancient India. But then Ramayan gives a background of Pushpak Viman in terms of how it was acquired, thereby making one think that it was not a mere fantasy. It should not be expected from the book Ramayan to describe the details of Pushpak Viman creation. The question that should be asked is where the actual scientific data of Hindu researches about building the Pushpak Viman got lost – and true history of India and world will evolve.

Do our Historians want to say that if Pushpak Viman existed then Valmiki would have mentioned how it was built? How many history book of today contains the scientific methodology of building machinery – why don’t our historians first do this?

1. What seems to be mythical to the Historians and Science is the concept of Monkey building the Bridge. But they forget to expand the vision on this, purely because of their biased attitude to defeating Hindu faith. We all know now that there are many species that do not exist now and the largest known to human is Dinosaur. Why can’t different specie exist around 1 million years ago with the capacity of human intelligence and monkey like physical structure – something that was called as Vanars in those days? Science do not forget to mention that man evolved out of monkeys – but defeats Hindus to consider that Vanars were the in between form of the evolution the evidence present in those days. But no view would consider this, simply because then the religion of peace would win then. Yet, there is no doubt that evolution theory is again a controversial theory existing and taught to people, without any scientific evidence around it.
2. No historian can deny the fact that there is a coincidence and only one coincidence between a reality and its occurrence in a book called Ramayan. Instead, of now having set a direction to find out how such thing took place, these catholic followers are simply applying all forces and theories to falsify a fact.

Science is now saying that the age of earth is around 4 billion years – can science produce a history of 4 billion years with concrete proof – no one asks this question and believes science. No one knows how many generation of humanity evolved and got destroyed since the earth was formed. No one knows when the earth was exactly formed. Actual fictions and stories lie on this side as well – but our dear Historians do not have the courage to flatter about it.

I do not understand, if such an amazing construct is not within the reach of modern science, why can’t this bridge be put as one of the Wonders? Why can’t it be listed under World Heritages (yet maintain it as Hindu sacred place)? Instead, the anti-Hindu moves are motivating Congress to destroy the bridge.

If the destruction of a 500 year old Babri Masjid is not tolerable and it created havoc in the world, why is million year old constructs not protected? Thousands of Hindu temples have been destroyed and are being destroyed to date in Kashmir, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Malaysia, and so many other countries. Neither media nor politics talks about it. Why shouldn’t Hindus stand now to protect Ram Sethu, which is a direct proof of One million old history of India?

About the Author

This article is a part of my book: Ram Sethu: Myth or History. The book also deals with Sethu Samudram Project, Traces found in Ayodhya, Nuclear Deal as all of them are very closely associated with Ram Sethu.
I have also authored two more books:
1. Introducing Hinduism against Criticism
2. Before the world goes for a Religious war (10 Basic questions that every Religoius Leader must answer)
Do feel free to contact me and get clarified over Hinduism.

"Light-n-Thin" laptop: Dell XPS 1330 and SONY VAIO CR290--which to choose?

I want to get a thin-and-light laptop. REQUIRE: light weight, Centrino or equivalent (for longer battery hrs), at least 2G RAM (to run Vista efficiently), and a build-in web cam. After researching on line and limited by the budget, my two finalists are Dell XPS 1330 and SONY VAIO CR290. With the customized built, the hardware (i.e. processor, RAM, hard dive etc) can be the same. But I still don’t know what to choose.

I have an older Dell XPS laptop and love it. My boss has a VAIO and has had nothing but trouble with it.

I will say when you get either one, remove all the random crap they clog new computers with.

Apple MacBook Pro Spring 2010 (Core 2 Duo 2.4GHz, 4GB RAM, 250GB HDD, 13-inch)
The new 13-inch MacBook Pro uses a faster version of last year's processor, but a graphics chip upgrade and better battery life give it more value for the same price.

Thanks for visiting!