NASA SPENDS BILLIONS,and ...

[Guest guest]

Hello Everybody,

NASA spends billions on a project,takes aerial pictures from state of the art

cameras,hires scientists from round the globe to analyse what they have

clicked,and our own busy Gynaecologist,from APNA MGIMS,Kishoreda,in less than

24hrs,brings out all the facts about such bridge formation,and pooh poohs,all

that is said.

Well done,Kishoreda,don't know how u managed to get all the data so soon,but all

I can say is KISHORE-DA,Jawaab hain.

Shyam(84).

Hanuman's bridge

There are two ways of looking at a problem. Either you make the facts fit a

theory, or you make a theory which fits the facts. You can also tailor make

the facts, so that only the relevant facts are high lighted and your theory

is proved.

Ashok's postulate that Hanuman made a bridge between India and Lanka can be

viewed from this angle.

It is a fact that in the Palk strait there is a line of small outcroppings

in the ocean almost in a straight line joining Rameshwaram and Lanka. It is

also a fact that the adjoining sea is shallow only at that point. An ariel

view would make the almost straight line of outcroppings look as if man

made.

If only these facts are high lighted, anyone will obviously conclude that

some man (or monkey) made this 'bridge' to Lanka. However, there is a

fallacy in this argument.

There are some facts which have been deliberately ignored.

1. The so called bridge is not an isolated formation, but is an extension of

similar outcroppings extending up to and beyond Vallinokam and Vembar, which

are far away from Lanka.

2. Anywhere in the world, adjoining islands and land masses have a shallow

area in between and outcroppings are a common phenomenon.

3. India, Pakistan (and Lanka) broke away from the Australian sub continent

billions of years ago and banged head on into the Asian land mass creating

the Himalayas. The Lankan land mass is part of the Indian mass which broke

off and lagged behind and left a remnant between in the form of a bridge.

However, there are other parts of this remnant. (See point 1)

4. Extensive geological studies have already been conducted on the rock

samples of this 'bridge'. The whole mass is that of fused volcanic rock.

There is absolutely no evidence that any part of it is man made.

Now it is up to you. You can either create a theory which can explain all

these facts, or you can bend these facts to support your theory and live in

a romantic cocoon of fantasy.

Please note that this mail is not meant to prove or disprove the Ramayana.

It only attempts to clarify the highlighted facts. It seeks to point out

that just by looking out of an aircraft and seeing natural formations which

'seem' man made is not enough. In this age of evidence based medicine, we

need evidence based theories too.

Kishore Shah 1974

------------------------------

Website: www.mgims.org

------------------------------

[Guest guest]

do i smell sarcasm here shyam ??

ashok '84

shyamkamath wrote:

Hello Everybody,

NASA spends billions on a project,takes aerial pictures from state of the art

cameras,hires scientists from round the globe to analyse what they have

clicked,and our own busy Gynaecologist,from APNA MGIMS,Kishoreda,in less than

24hrs,brings out all the facts about such bridge formation,and pooh poohs,all

that is said.

Well done,Kishoreda,don't know how u managed to get all the data so soon,but all

I can say is KISHORE-DA,Jawaab hain.

Shyam(84).

Hanuman's bridge

There are two ways of looking at a problem. Either you make the facts fit a

theory, or you make a theory which fits the facts. You can also tailor make

the facts, so that only the relevant facts are high lighted and your theory

is proved.

Ashok's postulate that Hanuman made a bridge between India and Lanka can be

viewed from this angle.

It is a fact that in the Palk strait there is a line of small outcroppings

in the ocean almost in a straight line joining Rameshwaram and Lanka. It is

also a fact that the adjoining sea is shallow only at that point. An ariel

view would make the almost straight line of outcroppings look as if man

made.

If only these facts are high lighted, anyone will obviously conclude that

some man (or monkey) made this 'bridge' to Lanka. However, there is a

fallacy in this argument.

There are some facts which have been deliberately ignored.

1. The so called bridge is not an isolated formation, but is an extension of

similar outcroppings extending up to and beyond Vallinokam and Vembar, which

are far away from Lanka.

2. Anywhere in the world, adjoining islands and land masses have a shallow

area in between and outcroppings are a common phenomenon.

3. India, Pakistan (and Lanka) broke away from the Australian sub continent

billions of years ago and banged head on into the Asian land mass creating

the Himalayas. The Lankan land mass is part of the Indian mass which broke

off and lagged behind and left a remnant between in the form of a bridge.

However, there are other parts of this remnant. (See point 1)

4. Extensive geological studies have already been conducted on the rock

samples of this 'bridge'. The whole mass is that of fused volcanic rock.

There is absolutely no evidence that any part of it is man made.

Now it is up to you. You can either create a theory which can explain all

these facts, or you can bend these facts to support your theory and live in

a romantic cocoon of fantasy.

Please note that this mail is not meant to prove or disprove the Ramayana.

It only attempts to clarify the highlighted facts. It seeks to point out

that just by looking out of an aircraft and seeing natural formations which

'seem' man made is not enough. In this age of evidence based medicine, we

need evidence based theories too.

Kishore Shah 1974

------------------------------

Website: www.mgims.org

------------------------------

[Guest guest]

do i smell sarcasm here shyam ??

ashok '84

shyamkamath wrote:

Hello Everybody,

NASA spends billions on a project,takes aerial pictures from state of the art

cameras,hires scientists from round the globe to analyse what they have

clicked,and our own busy Gynaecologist,from APNA MGIMS,Kishoreda,in less than

24hrs,brings out all the facts about such bridge formation,and pooh poohs,all

that is said.

Well done,Kishoreda,don't know how u managed to get all the data so soon,but all

I can say is KISHORE-DA,Jawaab hain.

Shyam(84).

Hanuman's bridge

There are two ways of looking at a problem. Either you make the facts fit a

theory, or you make a theory which fits the facts. You can also tailor make

the facts, so that only the relevant facts are high lighted and your theory

is proved.

Ashok's postulate that Hanuman made a bridge between India and Lanka can be

viewed from this angle.

It is a fact that in the Palk strait there is a line of small outcroppings

in the ocean almost in a straight line joining Rameshwaram and Lanka. It is

also a fact that the adjoining sea is shallow only at that point. An ariel

view would make the almost straight line of outcroppings look as if man

made.

If only these facts are high lighted, anyone will obviously conclude that

some man (or monkey) made this 'bridge' to Lanka. However, there is a

fallacy in this argument.

There are some facts which have been deliberately ignored.

1. The so called bridge is not an isolated formation, but is an extension of

similar outcroppings extending up to and beyond Vallinokam and Vembar, which

are far away from Lanka.

2. Anywhere in the world, adjoining islands and land masses have a shallow

area in between and outcroppings are a common phenomenon.

3. India, Pakistan (and Lanka) broke away from the Australian sub continent

billions of years ago and banged head on into the Asian land mass creating

the Himalayas. The Lankan land mass is part of the Indian mass which broke

off and lagged behind and left a remnant between in the form of a bridge.

However, there are other parts of this remnant. (See point 1)

4. Extensive geological studies have already been conducted on the rock

samples of this 'bridge'. The whole mass is that of fused volcanic rock.

There is absolutely no evidence that any part of it is man made.

Now it is up to you. You can either create a theory which can explain all

these facts, or you can bend these facts to support your theory and live in

a romantic cocoon of fantasy.

Please note that this mail is not meant to prove or disprove the Ramayana.

It only attempts to clarify the highlighted facts. It seeks to point out

that just by looking out of an aircraft and seeing natural formations which

'seem' man made is not enough. In this age of evidence based medicine, we

need evidence based theories too.

Kishore Shah 1974

------------------------------

Website: www.mgims.org

------------------------------

[Guest guest]

do i smell sarcasm here shyam ??

ashok '84

shyamkamath wrote:

Hello Everybody,

NASA spends billions on a project,takes aerial pictures from state of the art

cameras,hires scientists from round the globe to analyse what they have

clicked,and our own busy Gynaecologist,from APNA MGIMS,Kishoreda,in less than

24hrs,brings out all the facts about such bridge formation,and pooh poohs,all

that is said.

Well done,Kishoreda,don't know how u managed to get all the data so soon,but all

I can say is KISHORE-DA,Jawaab hain.

Shyam(84).

Hanuman's bridge

There are two ways of looking at a problem. Either you make the facts fit a

theory, or you make a theory which fits the facts. You can also tailor make

the facts, so that only the relevant facts are high lighted and your theory

is proved.

Ashok's postulate that Hanuman made a bridge between India and Lanka can be

viewed from this angle.

It is a fact that in the Palk strait there is a line of small outcroppings

in the ocean almost in a straight line joining Rameshwaram and Lanka. It is

also a fact that the adjoining sea is shallow only at that point. An ariel

view would make the almost straight line of outcroppings look as if man

made.

If only these facts are high lighted, anyone will obviously conclude that

some man (or monkey) made this 'bridge' to Lanka. However, there is a

fallacy in this argument.

There are some facts which have been deliberately ignored.

1. The so called bridge is not an isolated formation, but is an extension of

similar outcroppings extending up to and beyond Vallinokam and Vembar, which

are far away from Lanka.

2. Anywhere in the world, adjoining islands and land masses have a shallow

area in between and outcroppings are a common phenomenon.

3. India, Pakistan (and Lanka) broke away from the Australian sub continent

billions of years ago and banged head on into the Asian land mass creating

the Himalayas. The Lankan land mass is part of the Indian mass which broke

off and lagged behind and left a remnant between in the form of a bridge.

However, there are other parts of this remnant. (See point 1)

4. Extensive geological studies have already been conducted on the rock

samples of this 'bridge'. The whole mass is that of fused volcanic rock.

There is absolutely no evidence that any part of it is man made.

Now it is up to you. You can either create a theory which can explain all

these facts, or you can bend these facts to support your theory and live in

a romantic cocoon of fantasy.

Please note that this mail is not meant to prove or disprove the Ramayana.

It only attempts to clarify the highlighted facts. It seeks to point out

that just by looking out of an aircraft and seeing natural formations which

'seem' man made is not enough. In this age of evidence based medicine, we

need evidence based theories too.

Kishore Shah 1974

------------------------------

Website: www.mgims.org

------------------------------

[Guest guest]

Dear Shyam,

Thank you for your back-handed compliment. I'd like to say the following:

NASA takes pictures of the earth and these are available on their web site

easily. They have not commissioned any analyses of this Hanuman bridge.

One person has taken some of these photographs and analysed them as per his

own reasoning. He is not connected to NASA in any way. Immediately, as is

the trend on the internet, 25 or more sites have spawned saying the same

thing and are clones of this original site.

I have just analysed the evidence and presented my view point. All the clone

web sites are saying the same thing, i.e. seen from above the bridge seems

to be in a straight line and hence is man made. I have just disputed this

and shown you different other sites which have a similar appearance and yet

are not man made.

My dispute is not with the pictures which have been taken spending billions

of dollars. I am not disputing the authenticity of these NASA photographs.

What I am challenging is the interpretation. That's all.

And you are wrong to say that it took me 24 hours to respond to the query.

In actual fact it was less than an hour of internet surfing to locate other

similar sites.

Kishore Shah 1974

NASA SPENDS BILLIONS,and ...

>

> Hello Everybody,

> NASA spends billions on a project,takes aerial pictures from state of the

art cameras,hires scientists from round the globe to analyse what they have

clicked,and our own busy Gynaecologist,from APNA MGIMS,Kishoreda,in less

than 24hrs,brings out all the facts about such bridge formation,and pooh

poohs,all that is said.

> Well done,Kishoreda,don't know how u managed to get all the data so

soon,but all I can say is KISHORE-DA,Jawaab hain.

> Shyam(84).

>