Today, we know that there is some bridge type structure exactly at the location, where Valmiki described in his Ramayana. This, itself proves the truth that the content of Ramayana about the brige formation is right.
To prove this, let us consider that bridge was the natural formation even before the time when Valmiki wrote Ramayana. Now there are two possibilities about this formation with respect to the sea level at the time Valmiki wrote Ramayana. 1. this formation was above sea level than Valmiki would not add about forming of the bridge by Ram%u2019s army in the Ramayana. 2. or this formation was below sea level than there are two possibilities. a. Valmiki identified this structure, which was unknown to the common public of that era and added about it in Ramayana. How can any one believe that Valmiki identified this (without the great resources of the present time available to him) just to put some text about this in Ramayana. If, this is considered true, than imagine how much research must had gone by Valmiki to write whole Ramayana. b. It is just by chance, that this structure is found exactly at the same location and in the same form, as mentioned by Valmiki. Chances of this would be one in billions of billions. So the only possible conclusion would be the very assumption that this is natural formation, is wrong.
