History & Exopolitics

Researchers discover a 1.7 million year old man-made bridge

  • KP

    Not really though. I mean, nothing in this article says anything about how they’ve established that age- all they’ve worked out is that it could be man-made, which is perfectly possible. The two “scientists” and the author just linked that up to the Ramayana myth, and placed the whole thing 1.5 million years ago since ‘that’s when the story says it happened’. Armchair science at it’s best. If they had posited that the bridge was man-made and was made by some Indic civilization (1.5 million years ago or not) with hard proof, that’s perfectly fine. As it is, no one has “discovered” anything- just reasoned the way 5-year olds do. This isn’t science- claiming random things and providing no proof is solidly outside the realm of science.

    Mind you, not saying that that first claim of human origin is wrong. Just that you can’t mash up myths with science and call it proof. Stop spreading this nonsense around- this is the kind of thing that lets people like anti-vaxxers exist, calling people that have been proven to be wrong “victims” of some conspiracy and making everyone else stupider.

    Also, nice touch, claiming science has labeled incredible discoveries as impossible. Really adds to the victim narrative I mentioned earlier.

  • Tűnődő Blantos Sebestyén

    In the title you state that “Researchers discover a 1.7 million year old man-made bridge”.
    At the end of the article you ask: “Is it possible that Adam’s bridge is in fact a “man-made” construction…?” Come on.

    “It seems that researchers have confirmed …’
    So have they confirmed, or it just seemed like?
    Somebody saw some researchers nodding, and from a distance it seemed like they were confirming something? Come on.

    • SLBushway

      You’re taking yourself and this article too seriously. The questions at the end were clearly posted by the author to initiate a conversation. However, the author also makes clear that while some scientists believe it to be a man-made bridge that other scientists don’t agree. The article is both a research paper and an opinion piece – I suspect you have trouble differentiating between the two.

      • Tűnődő Blantos Sebestyén

        I know I shouldn’t take it seriously, because this article is not serious at all.
        It was just the clickbait (lying) title made me angry, my bad, the clicking is my bad too, never again.

  • Francis Fabian

    This is so, so wrong. It was 1.8 million years ago. Get your facts right. Also, where are the links that we can read from scientists/researchers? Bet that’d make interesting reading.

  • Lars Erlandsson

    That is not true!
    Homo erectus didn´t make buildings 1,7 million years ago!
    There was no Homo Sapiens at that time,

    • Redo Fledwick

      So you’ve been lead to believe, but there-again look at the facts. Once you’ve evaluated the entire conglomeration of information a reasonable person would conclude somebody that teachs the curriculum or directs the information in schools has simply followed the easy road, or someone higher up seems to not want to muddy the waters of our poor children’s minds with wild story’s of there real past, and this is how our past is forgotten and essentially stolen from us, but moreover we’ve embarked on a clarification of history and that starts with abolishing the mainstream ideas that we are a young race, and there are so many other indicators that i can no longer endorse the ideas which my present reality is founded, “oh the road to discovery is a road of many potholes and furrows, but in the end although bumpy and disheveled we reach our destination”, this is the road we as investigators of our past have chosen, because it is the only road to truth.

      • Bubbles

        You cannot pretend suppositions are facts.

  • Selvam R Nath

    Its true that we were having a great civilization in the past with all sophisticated measures to their life. Still archaeologists / researchers are behind these facts to get a clear picture of the past. Since most of the evidences are scattered below the sand as well as the parting of the continents due to tectonic activities, we are unable to get a concrete idea of the way of civilization in the past. But still with the evidences we correlate the matters with the present world. But it may be a period which will be more advanced than us too… Its man’s quest to knowledge of our past we are doing all excavations and findings….Each Era it has been carried out in its own ways and presented in papers / books / stones … Lets accept the facts and see what we can do with our present knowledge and facilities to present to our future generations….

  • woodrackets

    Didn’t think something could possible be worse than the History Channel. Well, this article is.

  • Catfish

    What a crock of shit.

  • Bubbles

    Denouncing science makes you sound like a fukking idiot….

  • Michael Roehrs

    science is the present state or error.