I havce heard critics of Ram Setu saying NASA has clarified that it is a NATURAL formation BUT than actual reports from national dailies like Times of India I only find following lines where NASA express its inability to determine how this bridge was formed?
> NASA has officially debunked this claim, saying the agency could not provide specific information about the origin or the age of the chain of islands, "and certainly cannot determine whether humans were involved in producing any of the patterns seen".
So, When will we stop playing with other words to forcefully establish our view??? It is heard that supporters of Ram Setu cannot provide concrete proof... well on the same lines SEVERAL theories floated about its Natural formation are also only HYPOTHESIS... and no single theory has been accepted as verified in the Scientific community.
Hence, geologically it cannot be determined whether its man-made OR NOT... so hold your horses.
The Adam bridge or Ram setu is center of debate. The article here refers Puranas and tried to establish link with Ramayana. Subsequent remarks are all provocative communal remarks without any scientific basis deserves to be discarded. The article however ignores report on carbon dating which establishes that bridge was a natural creation formed some 60 million years back which nullifies entire article scientifically.
Lord Rama is really great cauz if he want to get Goddes Sita he would have fired one teer and can damage Lanka & get goddess Sita. But to show the relation between humanity & animals he had taken the help of Lord Sugreev & his army and had built a bridge upon the Mahasagar and went to Lanka.
Never ending cheers for Lord Rama Goddess Sita, Lakshmanji & their army.
