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,

error: Sorry, If you need something contact us.