Mytho VS Science - Plzz Read - Page 3

Created

Last reply

Replies

26

Views

2.8k

Users

10

Likes

16

Frequent Posters

Abhisheking thumbnail
12th Anniversary Thumbnail Rocker Thumbnail + 2
Posted: 12 years ago
#21

Originally posted by: -Shruti

I'd go with mythology...better say puranic history, which isn't a myth. 😊

Bheeshma: Jiyo,meri putri jeeyo!Mjhe prasannata hui ye jaankar ki tmhe bhi lgta h ki m purva janma m koi "Shampoo-jee" nhi tha...🤣🤣
582445 thumbnail
Posted: 12 years ago
#22

Originally posted by: Abhishek_King

oops...did I???


so really Gods born after chimp age?bt Brahma first invented those Asuras n humans na???😲😲 chimpanzee is not mentioned in epics na????


dear bro stick to one either science or religious stories .. u r mixing these 2

Mimi has described the time appropriately if you strictly follow science then gods has come to existence only after Human get rationalized or civilization started. Veda come into existence near about 3000BC .. n Puran came much later .. so Pouranik Gods came even almost 1000 years later.

n if you are following religious stories then do not drag Charles Darwin theory .. let Chimpanzees be in science n history 😆


WindsOfHeaven thumbnail
15th Anniversary Thumbnail Banner Contest Winner Thumbnail + 8
Posted: 12 years ago
#23

Originally posted by: Abhishek_King


Bheeshma: Jiyo,meri putri jeeyo!Mjhe prasannata hui ye jaankar ki tmhe bhi lgta h ki m purva janma m koi "Shampoo-jee" nhi tha...🤣🤣

😆😆😆
Rehanism thumbnail
15th Anniversary Thumbnail Dazzler Thumbnail + 2
Posted: 12 years ago
#24

Originally posted by: --MimiGupta--

20,000 yrs ago human were chimpanzees.. not 2000 years ago..

Aryans invaded India before almost 4000 years..
Indus Valley Civilization was a Bronze Age Civilization.. (3300-1300 BCE; mature period 2600-1900 BCE) Chimpanzees can not build such a developed civilization.

n Jesus Christ was born before 2000 years ago..men were homo sapiens sapiens before 2000 years..

I think u have missed a 0..


This is not true. Humans were NEVER chimpanzees. Chimpanzees and humans are all modern apes and evolutionary cousins descended from a common ancestor that lived around 4-6 million years ago. Gorillas, orangutan and other modern apes are our second, third or distant cousins with whom we shared a common ancestor sometimes back in time (>10 MYA). Humans have been pretty much in their present form since around 100,000 years, though obviously, they weren't civilized or social by present standards.

I guess what you are referring to is Neanderthal man. Neanderthals were almost-human like species who cohabited the earth (Europe esp) along side humans until about 30,000 years back. They were perhaps our closest evolutionary sibling before they died out.
Edited by Rehanism - 12 years ago
Mean.Girl thumbnail
14th Anniversary Thumbnail Rocker Thumbnail + 2
Posted: 12 years ago
#25

Originally posted by: Rehanism


This is not true. Humans were NEVER chimpanzees. Chimpanzees and humans are all modern apes and evolutionary cousins descended from a common ancestor that lived around 4-6 million years ago. Gorillas, orangutan and other modern apes are our second, third or distant cousins with whom we shared a common ancestor sometimes back in time (>10 MYA). Humans have been pretty much in their present form since around 100,000 years, though obviously, they weren't civilized or social by present standards.

I guess what you are referring to is Neanderthal man. Neanderthals were almost-human like species who cohabited the earth (Europe esp) along side humans until about 30,000 years back. They were perhaps our closest evolutionary sibling before they died out.


I never said human was chimpanzees .. it is what TM said .. .. I am not talking about stages of evolution of Human here .. please read my comment 1st .. there is No connection between mine n yours
Atiratha2.0 thumbnail
Posted: 12 years ago
#26
We're all primates.. But a chimpanze isn't necessary born from a gorilla.. Every species has its own ancestor..

But how about the vanaras in ramayan.. Even in mahabharat sahadev's conquest to the south he fought vanara kings dvivida & mainda- formerly Sugreev's soldiers in the battle of Lanka.
(Why did they always have 2 brothers as kings?)..
amritat thumbnail
14th Anniversary Thumbnail Sparkler Thumbnail Engager Level 1 Thumbnail
Posted: 12 years ago
#27

Originally posted by: Atiratha2.0

We're all primates.. But a chimpanze isn't necessary born from a gorilla.. Every species has its own ancestor..

But how about the vanaras in ramayan.. Even in mahabharat sahadev's conquest to the south he fought vanara kings dvivida & mainda- formerly Sugreev's soldiers in the battle of Lanka.
(Why did they always have 2 brothers as kings?)..

Well I am not a history student, so pls forgive me if I'm wrong.
But I watched a video on youtube where it was said that the term "vanara" in Ramayana doesn't necessarily mean "monkeys"...
They were just people who looked different from the Aryans. Now how different, I don't know...
It was mentioned in the video that they looked like Mongolians, somewhat. Now, Aryans being very good-looking people, thought these Non-Aryans to be somewhat different. So called them "vanara".
Someone made a post recently that Rakshashas were Non-Aryans. I think, it's the same with "vanara". Maybe, the "vanara" were another clan of Non-Aryans, who were different from the Rakshashas in appearanace as well as lineage...

Related Topics

Top

Stay Connected with IndiaForums!

Be the first to know about the latest news, updates, and exclusive content.

Add to Home Screen!

Install this web app on your iPhone for the best experience. It's easy, just tap and then "Add to Home Screen".