Rama's Bridge: Where Modern Science & Ancient Myths Collide

[satansrini]

Hello folks,

Found this on the Ancient Origins site - the one Plutronus has posted about an 1800 year ancient letter.

One excerpt:

"Researchers who have analyzed the Ramayana state that it is an overambitious work of fiction. Is that true? Or is it possible that Adam's Bridge is actually the structure described in this Indian classic? "

Read the whole thing here. It is an interesting read:

www.ancient-origins.net/human-origins-opinion-guest-authors/ramas-bridge-where-modern-science-and-ancient-myths-collide

Regards,
Srinivas

[skywalker]

Ok. I'll check it out later when I have more time.

[satansrini]

May 11, 2014 22:23:20 GMT -6 skywalker said:

Ok. I'll check it out later when I have more time.

Sure..it is just a 1 page read.

[skywalker]

If that "underwater" bridge really is manmade...which it appears that it might be...then it very well could account for the mythological story about Rama's Bridge. I do have some problems with the dates though. They are saying the myth could be as old as 2 million years ( )...that's an awful long time to be telling a story. And who was it who was originally telling it? If the ape-men were our prehistoric ancestors then humans couldn't have been telling the story because why would we call ourselves ape-men? I wouldn't really consider a homo erectus to be an ape man anyway because they were almost exactly like modern day humans. There wasn't that much of a difference.

I think that most myths and legends do have their origins in something that actually happened. They just get exaggerated and modified over time, so somewhere there probably really was a bridge that inspired the story. This one could very easily be it. Maybe someday they will find out for sure.

[Deleted]

Hi Srini

I like the story. And if people bother to compare many stories of old, they tend to bring some truth to each other, regardless of what continent.

I also believe that the "timeline" of the Egyptian culture could be revised. Why this isn't done in a scientific matter, I don't know.

I'm also a fan of Graham Hancock. Unfortunately I think that some people presume he "makes" his discoveries fit his earlier hypothesis.


On casual observation, Erik V daniken kind of muddied those waters, and "people" let him do so. Doesn't mean he's completely wrong. Just not the "expert" that should have been paying attention.

As for 'ape men', I entertain the idea that possibly, at one time, we were able to communicate better with other specie. Sometimes, we had a common goal, and would work together. However, seeing how us humans are still racists, it just couldn't last. Just as we complain about being "slaves", or I'd go so far as saying "underappreciated", other specie feel the same towards us. As bad as this world is now, if any part of these "myths" involving "monsters" are true, we humans didn't stand a chance. Somewhere down the line, "someone" must have decided to give us a chance .