Submitted to theSubmitted to theCommittee of Eminent Persons onCommittee of Eminent Persons on

Sethusamudram Shipping Channel ProjectSethusamudram Shipping Channel Project

“ “Objections/ suggestions in respect of the Objections/ suggestions in respect of the Sethusamudram Shipping Channel ProjectSethusamudram Shipping Channel Project

( 54 + ii) pages( 54 + ii) pages

Dr.B.V.SubrahmanyamDr.B.V.Subrahmanyam

Some Observations about the Committee Some Observations about the Committee (Appendix –II )(Appendix –II )

•Terms of ReferenceTerms of Reference, Purpose of CEP, Purpose of CEP,,• guidelines for submission,guidelines for submission,• the powers and duties of the committee andthe powers and duties of the committee and• how the committee intends to use the submissionshow the committee intends to use the submissions are not clearare not clearis it to explore the need for further detailed investigations of is it to explore the need for further detailed investigations of SSCP* ; SSCP* ; is it meant to be submitted to the Supreme Court ?is it meant to be submitted to the Supreme Court ?Is it only to be of an Opinion Survey nature, or poll ?Is it only to be of an Opinion Survey nature, or poll ?Is it with the idea of making Expert recommendations , etc.”Is it with the idea of making Expert recommendations , etc.”

* Time for submissions is inadequate* Time for submissions is inadequate

A. Composition of the CEPA. Composition of the CEP does not cover does not cover important areas of expertiseimportant areas of expertise* Archeology / Marine Archeology * Archeology / Marine Archeology * Oceanographic expert * Oceanographic expert * Tsunami and natural hazards expert* Tsunami and natural hazards expert* marine expert * marine expert * National and naval security expert * National and naval security expert * Legal expert (international law of sea )* Legal expert (international law of sea )* expert in Traditional knowledge, Sanskrit * expert in Traditional knowledge, Sanskrit and Valmiki Ramayanamand Valmiki Ramayanam* Expert in Evaluation of Project Viability, Project,* Expert in Evaluation of Project Viability, Project, Economics & Project Finance Economics & Project Finance * Social scientists ; * Seismologist,* Social scientists ; * Seismologist,* Atomic minerals/ energy expert (Thorium* Atomic minerals/ energy expert (Thorium deposits), etcdeposits), etc

B Every professional has a right to hold & state one’s own B Every professional has a right to hold & state one’s own objective, scientific, and unprejudiced opinion, on a objective, scientific, and unprejudiced opinion, on a technical matter. technical matter.

C.C. By convention, By convention, Doctors do not operate on own kith . Doctors do not operate on own kith . Judges do not sit in the judging position, if relations are Judges do not sit in the judging position, if relations are

involved. involved.

Professionals who have their own strong views and Professionals who have their own strong views and those who have publicly made their stand earlier those who have publicly made their stand earlier will find it difficult to be objectivewill find it difficult to be objective..

Known Adages : Known Adages : “ “ Justice should not only be done, it should appear to be Justice should not only be done, it should appear to be

done”done”““One cannot hunt with the hound and run with the hare”One cannot hunt with the hound and run with the hare”

•

III. Objections to the Sethu Samudram Canal III. Objections to the Sethu Samudram Canal Project in its present route and form (SSCP*)Project in its present route and form (SSCP*)

The Sethu Samudram Canal Project in its present route and The Sethu Samudram Canal Project in its present route and form (hereafter referred as form (hereafter referred as SSCP*SSCP*) does not appear to be well-) does not appear to be well-conceived. My objections to it are on the following counts.conceived. My objections to it are on the following counts.

• 1) Benefits of the Project are not 1) Benefits of the Project are not quantified and appear to be doubtfulquantified and appear to be doubtful

• No white paper (or data) available to the Indian No white paper (or data) available to the Indian public on the benefits of this 2500 Crore Rs. public on the benefits of this 2500 Crore Rs. project.project.

• (News reports - cost of this project is escalating to (News reports - cost of this project is escalating to 4000 - 5000 Cr. ( + large annual maintenance 4000 - 5000 Cr. ( + large annual maintenance costs). costs).

• Only Experts with experience in Evaluation of Only Experts with experience in Evaluation of Project Viability, Project Economics and Project Project Viability, Project Economics and Project Finance can evaluate the real benefitsFinance can evaluate the real benefits

• However, the following observations can be made However, the following observations can be made based on the Project rationalebased on the Project rationale

• (see Appendices –III & IV -for the details)(see Appendices –III & IV -for the details)

Appendix IV-_ PROJECT RATIONALE (SSCL website. Ref. 16 )

a. Vessels save distance and timeb. Savings to Indian Economy – free ship movement from West to Eastc. Revenue to India from tariffd. Beneficial to Indian defence f. Economical development of Tamilnadu coastal regions g.Development of infrastructure and new growth centers of the regionh. Quality Enhancement in life of people in the region

**All benefits listed qualitatively, & not quantified. **Project benefit summary is general **Many benefits repetitive

It is necessary to evaluate benefits (large Tax-payers’ amount (2500 to 4000 cr.))

*Defence benefits ?? Project not Defence- generated.*Currently, no hindrance to Free movement *Multi-modal Transport of Goods with Road Transport being a powerful sector.

* The benefit of Economical development of the coastal districts of Tamilnadu * the benefit of Development of infrastructure and new growth centers of the region , and * the benefit of Enhancement in the quality of life of the region”. All these 3 benefits are same & independent of Channel project

They will accrue by •planning and implementing sufficient investment in •infrastructure, industry, minor fishing ports, roads and other activities in the region.

•Savings to the Indian Economy and•Revenue to India” appear to be the same.

Economic benefits to be impartially evaluated

News Media indicates Rs. 21 to 90 Crore annual benefit.Prima facie, return rate= 0.4 to 0.8 %, is very low

It appears necessary to evaluate the real benefits, as Tax-payers’ money of the order of 2500 to 5000 crores is involved.

•Sri Rama and Sri Rama Sethu are Historic Sri Rama and Sri Rama Sethu are Historic

((see Appendix V,VI-for details )see Appendix V,VI-for details )

Faith and belief are universal and vital to humans (see Appendix V).

It is a Matter of Faith of the Hindus, forming the majority of this country, that Sri Rama Sethu was built & used by Sri Rama. It is an important religious relic for them. (There are not many relics remaining of Sri Rama’s times, in view of the very large time period involved. The Sri Rama sethu is one of them).

V.1 Faith and belief are universal. Faith and belief are thus universal and vital One cannot live a

life devoid of belief or faith.

It is Indian culture, faith and belief in certain values that is holding this Nation together.

A Nation without Rightful Pride and Self Respect in its Ancient History and Culture is as good as a kite without string or a rudderless boat.

It is most dangerous,, to attempt to demolish the underlying faith, culture and national pride of the nation.

It is a matter of faith of these 80 crore Hindus of this country that Sri Rama was responsible for the construction of the Sri Rama Sethu and that he did the installation of the idol at the Rameswaram temple.

Rameswaram is one of the 12 Jyothir Lingas --prayed to daily. Note the words “at Sethu Bandha Ramesam” referring to Lord Rameswara at Sethu construction

Since time immemorial, for the Hindus, the pilgrimage to Kasi and Rameswaram is a once in life time must ( like Haj to Mecca for Muslims).

National flag is not a piece of dyed cloth –It is Symbol of respect to 100 Crore Indians.Respect or Disrespect to Sri Rama Sethu is indeed to the majority of this country who believe that the Sethu was built by Sri Rama.

V.2 What the SSCP* purports to do to the Sri Rama Sethu ?

*there are several alternative routes and possibilities

•SSCP*purports to demolish

some 300 meters width and 12 m depth , initially increasing width & depth to 25 m (due to progressive demand/need for passage of larger ships, and also for the simultaneous passage of ships from opposite directions (vide the Hon’ble Minister’s statement in Parliament)

the present alignment would commences initial damage to the Sri Rama Sethu, leading to further and future increased damage.

This causes me and other Hindus deep hurt and anguish that an attempt is being made to demolish a famous religious relic. (There are not many relics of Sri Rama’s times, the Sri Rama sethu being one of them).

• SRI RAMA IS HISTORIC , SO IS, SRI RAMA SETHU• (See also the Dictionary meaning of History –Appendix VI-2).(See also the Dictionary meaning of History –Appendix VI-2).

• Dictionaries History is “past events ; methodical record of these ; study of past events “ ; “a continuous, systematic narrative of past events as relating to a particular people, country, person, etc usually written as a chronological account “;

• Itihasam means History : Valmiki Ramayanam (and Mahabharatam) called Itihasam. etymology: “itiha asam” means “it happened thus”. means “History” ,or “True Account”.

Valmiki Ramayanam - chronological record of Sri Rama’s life and events -- written during the times of Sri Rama.

First, original and true record of History of Sri Rama.

• Subsequent Ramayanams, Dasaratha Jathaka Katha by Buddhists (400 BC), Jaina Ramayanam (400 BC), by Kamban ( 12 th Century AD); Kalidasa , Ramacharitha Manas by Tulsi Das (1532-1623 AD) (See Fig. 1) They could suffer due to lack of direct knowledge and of inaccuracies in details. ].

The Ancient Indian Time Reckoning based on Astronomical positions of stars and planets.( These are unique and not repeatable)

Valmiki Ramayanam records astronomical positions during some 45 instances of Sri Rama’s life

using these the period of Sri Rama is (7090-9299 BP) Thus Valmiki has recorded chronologically the events in the life of Sri Rama.

3) “Belief that Sri Rama is Historic” is itself Historic

A. Sri Rama’s life quoted in Mahabharatham B. substantiated in many other puranamsC. substantiated by the writers of other religions such as

Buddhism and Jainism, albeit with some difference in details & Asoka

The belief in Sri Rama is historical.

Gurumurthy “Ramayana Temples” (Ref. 8) extensive research ofSthala puranas (local lore) in different parts of the country andarrived at the Route taken by Sri Rama (See Fig.2- Map).

many places mentioned in Valmiki Ramayanam exist even todaywith nearly the same name. (Ayodhya, Mithila, LucknowLakshmanapuri, Panchavati, Lanka, Rivers Ganga, Godavari,Mahanadi, Krishna, Tamraparni, etc).

4) What do we understand by the word “Sethu”meaning is of utmost importance

people mistake it to be some kind of a “Structure” (modern day Fly overs, Napier’s bridge in Chennai, or Hoogly bridge in Calcutta, or Golden gate bridge in San Francisco with a substructure or foundation, some pier or column elements and a deck structure).

mistaken understanding is evident from the press statements by some officials & some scientists that they did not come across any structure and that the area is one made of sand and stones

“NASA scientists have said that there are only sand tamboulines and not any man made structure” ; “  There was no man made bridge… “ ; “There is no man-made structure as far as our dredging is concerned”Some Geologists and marine specialists mentioned the area appears to be one with sand shoals.

Sanskrit proverb “Gatha jala sethu bandhanam” refers to “the folly of building a bund after the floods have receded”.

the word Sethu -in Sanskrit- means a Bund, pavement or in Civil Engineering parlance ‘a Causeway Bridge’.

(Ref 9 Bridge Engineering by Dr.S.Ponnuswamy ) “When high flood is occasional and normal flow is very little or the bed is dry most of the time, Causeways are adopted. It is but a paved road taken sufficiently deep to withstand scour action and is supported on natural ground only”.

Valmiki Ramayanam (Yuddha Kanda/sarga22 –Verses 22 to 87clearly describes the Construction of Sri Rama Sethu in detail.

Thus, it is not an elevated “structure”- such as the Napier’s bridge

Sri Rama Sethu is a simpler version, namely a Bund of Stones, boulders, Soil or a Causeway or a paved road.

5) Sri Rama Sethu is historic

sethu construction an important part in the life history of Sri Rama & it is historical.6) Is it Sri Rama Sethu or Nala Sethu or Adam’s Bridge?

*credit given to one responsible for the direction. ex. The Napier bridge not physically built by Napier. no connection between Adam who is stated to have lived in Mesopotamia (Ref. 10 - Wikipaedia ) and the Sethu near Rameswaram. (No Islamic texts mention the Sethu)

Are we not reverting to old names Ex. Chennai from Madras, Mumbai from Bombay;

Thereby with a national spirit, is better to call it Sri Rama sethu henceforth, instead of the alternative names of Nala sethu or Adam’s bridge.

Some historians have questioned the location of Lanka and tend to associate it with some lake in Vindhya mountain range or elsewhere. (approach seems casual without serious research)

Valmiki Ramayanam, through the words of Sugriva, describes the geography of the world as known during his times. It extends beyond the Geographic boundaries of today’s India and extends to Java and farther on the eastern side.

Valmiki clearly mentions that Dakshina Samudram (southern sea) with waves and as extending a long distance of 100 yojanams at the Sethu. Waves cannot occur in lakes. How can anyone suggest that Valmiki who was aware of the mighty rivers of Ganges, Sindhu, Mahanadi, Godavari, Krishna, Kaveri, etc., mistook a mere lake in the Vindhya mountains to be the ocean.

Thus there can be absolutely no doubt about the location or the historicity of the Sri Rama Sethu.

APPENDIX – VIII THE PERIOD OF SRI RAMA OR SRI RAMA SETHU

A. Yuga based approach:Based on the Puranas (by Veda Vyasa – Sri Krishna’s Period)

i. Sathya or Kritha yuga ; duration =1728,000 yearsii. Tretha yuga ( when Sri Rama lived) 1296,000 yearsiii.Dwapara Yuga (when Sri Krishna lived) 864,000 years, and iv. Kali yuga (present age) 432,000 years.

the period of Sri Rama (Tretha yuga) said to be 17,50,000 years BP

another school the durations of the 4 yugas are respectively 4800, 3600, 2400, 1200 years only; which would place Sri Ramachandra at some 7000 BP only.

B. Astronomy based approach:

Astronomy (Jyotisham, planetary positions) is a well studied science since ancient times in India. At all important events the Astronomical positions were stated.

Valmiki Ramayana clearly mentions planetary positions at certain important events (45) in lifetime of Sri Rama.

The computations are quite involved and complex.

thanks to computers and Planetarium software available now, it is possible to make such involved computations.

1)Dr.P.V.Vartak’s study (Ref. 4,5,6 ) : Sri Rama's Birth 4th December 7323 B.C. Construction of Rama Sethu 26-30th Oct. 7292 B.C. (7292 BC + 2007 AD) = 9299 BP

SNoEvent Details Ramayana

ReferenceDate

1 Rama’s Birth Chaitra Suddha 9 th Punarvasu

Bala Kanda 18-8,9

Tuesday, 4 th Dec. 7323 BC

2 Bharatha’s birth Chaitra Suddha 10 thPushyami

Bala Kanda 18-8,9

Wednesday, 5 th Dec. 7323 BC

3 Lakshmana & Shatrugna’s birth Chaitra Suddha 11 thAaslesha

Bala Kanda 18-8,9

Thursday, 6 thDec.7323 BC

4 Marriages of all 4 brothers Bhadrapada Suddha 3 Uttara Phalguni

Bal 74/14-16 Friday, 7 th April 7307 BC

5 Exile to forest Chaitra Sudda 9, Pushyami

Ayodhya 20/45 Thursday 29, Nov. 7306 BC

6 Dasaratha dies Chaitra Pournima Wednesday 5 th Dec. 7306 BC

7 Ravana’s death Phalguni Amavasya Yuddha 92,93,65,66

Sunday 15 th November 7292 BC

8 Rama’s return to Bharadwaja Ashramam

Chaitra Vadya 5 th 6-128-22 Saturday 5 th December,7292 BC

9 Rama’s return to Ayodhya Chaitra Vadya 6 th 6-127-1 Sunday 6 th December, 7292 BC

2)Study by Pushkar Bhatnagar (Ref. 7)

Using Planetarium software, Sri Rama’s birth 10 th Jan.,5114(7121 BP).

date of Sethu construction would be to 7090 BP.

Summary:

two dates viz, 9299 BP and 7090 BP from astronomical basis.

There is need to ratify these studies and dates. However, astonomical studies have brought Sri Rama to historical and recent times (7090-9299 BP) (See Fig. 1).

C. Impact of the Astronomy based date or age of Sri Rama on the

astronomy based date for Sri Rama sethu as 7090 to 9299 BP,

tallies with the limited scientific data available and seems to corroborate the existence of Sri Rama Sethu.

preliminary Geological studies (Project Rameswaram (during Dec. 2002 – Mar. 2003)), suggested that all the boreholes are within the Upper Quaternary period (5 to 7 lakh years from today).

The SSCP website mentions the period of the upper 12 to 18 m depth as about 6000 to 7000 years BP.

earlier negative conclusions of the Government officials and the Minister, were on basis of the belief that Sri Rama sethu was 17,50,000 BP.

The astronomical date of 7090 to 9299 BP fits well in the time period range of the above said geological studies.

APPENDIX XI - INVESTIGATIONS

XI.2 Field Studies too few in number and miniscule in size

The importance and sensitivity merit detailed& careful investigation.

the different investigations that have been performed hitherto, are extremely limited and miniscule. See Table below.

SNo Nature Detail/Conclusion

Remarks

A Archeological Investigation

None ---------- ---------

MA Marine Archeological Investigation

None ---------- ---------

SI Satellite imagery

Two

SI1

NASA Credit must be given for bringing the attention of Indians to this issue

Unsuitable to determine either the age, or the presence of Sri Rama sethu

SI2 ISRO/SAC/MRG Qualitatively concluded that Sri Rama sethu is not present

Unsuitable to determine either the age, or the presence of Sri Rama sethu

G-F Field Geological Investigations

Two

GF1 GSI’s Project Rameswaram

3 bore holes. Concluded that there is “no structure” and that the age of the area is less than Quaternary period

Very limited. This study does not contradict the Astronomical period of Sri Rama or the causeway nature of the Sethu.

GF2 NIOT field tests – evaluation byDr. Badari-narayan

10 boreholes. Detected the presence of a layer of ‘boulders, stones, coral’ under a marine sand layer and over marine sand layer which itself was overlaying the crustal , ridge formation. Evidence of human transportation and placement.

This study confirms the presence of Sri Rama sethu of the nature of a pavement/causeway and mathces the Astronomical period of Sri Rama

GH Hypothetical studies on the Geological formation

Four hypotheses on the geological formation of the area.

1.Though the authors believed that they are contradicting the presence of the Sethu, indeed they do not contradict the presence of the Sethu, if one remembers the possibility of the Astonomical period being the time of the Sethu.

GH1 Prof.Ramaswamy 2. The Sethu can be present on any geological formation below it.

GH2 Prof.Ram Mohan --do----

GH3 Prof.Ramachandran -- do ---

GH4 Prof.Ramanujam -- do ---

XI.4 Essential Factors

3 major factors are important , in investigating presence of the Sethu.

a.Important Factor 1: period of Sri Rama

Possibility (a1) –17,50,000 years BP or such a large orderPossibility (a2) - 7090 to 9299 BP (Astronomical Period) Possibility (a3) – Uncertain/ open ended time period

b.Important Factor 2- nature of the Sethu

Possibility (b1) – Bridge/ structure such as Stone Temples, or modern day Flyovers, etc. Possibility (b2) - a bund with Stone, Sand, trees,

[Valmiki mentions the second ]

c.Important Factor 3- Nature of Substrata/ Coastal Geology

Possiblity (c1) - Sri Rama sethu extends from ocean base to the top Possiblity (c2) - Sri Rama’s sethu was top layer over an already existing geological formation at that time

[ Valmiki mentions that a suitable location was advised. Such location could be a previously existing ridge (crustal portion of a geological feature) . It was said to be topped and ‘bridged’ by this causeway to enable the crossing].

Investigators should have kept an open mind with regard to the above possibilities. However, some seem have assumed f

(a1) Sri Rama’s period being 17,50,000 BP ; (b1) that the Sethu is a stone temple or flyover- like structure. (c1) the Sri Rama sethu extends– from ocean base upto top.

It is no wonder to arrive at mistaken conclusion of non-presence of the Sri Rama sethu.

However, if the self same data is evaluated considering the other possibilities listed above, all the test results

•corroborate the presence of the Sri Rama sethu, or •do not contradict the presence of the Sethu.

XI.5 Archeological investigationson this sensitive issue of National importance, there is hardly any Archeological investigation done

Hon’ble Minsiter of Shipping and Transport stated in Parliament

“As per the information available, no archaeological studies have revealed the existence of any structure of archaeological importance in the area. In the absence of any clinching evidence, none of the successive Governments including the NDA Government, have neither declared nor initiated any action to declare the project site or parts thereof as Monument of National Importance.

note the lack of clarity and specificity. what all archeological studies were made ? none of the successive Governments initiated any action. Thus there seem to be almost no Archeological investigation, in public knowledge, save the geological investigation by GSI (discussed later).

Specifically with regard to the Sri Rama sethu, the famous Rameswaram temple exists so close to the sethu and is connected with the episode of Sri Rama crossing the sethu.

How can one state then that there are no evidences near the sethu or its connectivity to the Sri Rama legend.

This country is dotted with several Sites of Ramayana importance (See Fig.2,Ref.8 ).

But the Archeological survey does not have much to show in terms of its own archeological investigations.

2) ASI, (under Ministry of Culture), counter affidavit in the Supreme Court.(since been retracted by the Government) Though the affidavit has been withdrawn, some historians/ archeologists (for example, K.N.Panickkar, Suraj Bhan, Romilla Thapar etc. –vide “Hindu” ; “Frontline Oct.5, 2007) are critical of the withdrawal of the ASI affidavit, not based on any evidence, but as a matter of professional protest.

The affidavit states Approach to history: “study of human history, which is the primary objective of ASI , like other sciences, and fields of study, must be carried out in a scientific manner, using available technological aids , and its findings must be based on tangible material evidence”.No sane person would disagree with this objective and laudable approach.

ASI further stated “mythological texts such as Ramayana “cannot be said to be historical record to incontrovertibly prove the existence of the characters, or the occurrence of the events depicted therein”

There is a strong and ages old belief in this country that Sri Rama ruled over parts of this country. Sri Rama has inspired the lives of the people of India since time immemorial.Sri Rama Rajya was the dream of Father of our Nation , Mahatma Gandhi. He died with the words “Hey Ram” on his lips. ASI (by itself) had not done any/ adequate study to come with incontrovertible proof or data that Sri Rama and Sri Rama sethu did not exist. Is there a white paper on the Archeological excavations and investigations regarding the Sri Rama sethu and the surrounding areas ? The answer seems to be “None”Was any Marine Archeological study done at Rama Sethu, as in the case of Dwaraka considering that the Sri Rama sethu is off-shore ? “None reported”

“Absence of Evidence is not necessarily Evidence of Absence”. At least, benefit of doubt should have been given by ASI, in the absence of own solid evidence. ASI was also not prudent in this sensitive, religion and faith related matter, in the absence of adequate data.Under the circumstances, it is peculiar that without any of its own Archeological investigations, the ASI tended to base its conclusions on other investigations, which themselves were extremely limited and inadequate.Despite these limited or absent investigations, ASI thought it fit to go on high pedestal claiming “study of human history, which is the primary objective of ASI , like other sciences, and fields of study, must be carried out in a scientific manner, using available technological aids , and its findings must be based on tangible material evidence”.ASI also dared to offend the sentiments of the majority of this country, without a basis. One wonders how any Indian , whether a Historian or Archeologist or others, with a clear conscience can accept that as correct.

XI.6 Remote sensing imagesA. NASA’s Satellite images 2002

Despite knowing technically well that it is not possible to estimate the time period of a place by satellite pictures, NASA publication never the less initially mentioned the period of 1750,000 years, presumably basing it on Puranic interpretation of the period of Sri Rama. NASA also made an initial statement about the special curvature of the feature being indicative of possible human construction.A subsequent statement by one Mark Hess of NASA stated the correct technical position that “ Remote sensing images or photographs from orbit cannot provide direct information about the origin or age of a chain of islands, certainly cannot determine whether humans were involved in producing any patterns seen”.

B. Studies by Marine and Water Resources Group of SAC/ISRO

in 2003 (Ref. 17), using satellite remote sensing imagery based on their experience with the Indian coral reefs and wellestablished methodology concluded that Adam’s bridge is notman-made.

The following are to be noted. 1) No on-ground studies were made.2) Conclusions were drawn based on satellite imagery. NASA statement “ Remote sensing images cannot provide direct information i) about the origin or age of a chain of islands,

ii) certainly cannot determine whether humans were involved in producing any patterns seen”

Is clearly contradicted by (SAC/ISRO)conclusion“ that the bridge is

not man-made” is questionable

Other conclusions about paleogeology does not vitiate the Astronomical period of Sri Rama sethu

.

XI. 7 GEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONSA) GSI’s “Project Rameswaram” 2002-2003

four boreholes drilled 4 km apart to collect subsurface samples to generate geological data to determine the geological history of Adam’s bridge/ sethu.

Evaluation of the study:size of sampling – this sample corresponds to a sample size of 1 in 634 million (sample size was extremely small)

No Strata details available

Conclusion of GSIPR :“no indications or evidence of man-made structures”

Writer’s comments :The investigation must have attempted to investigate the possible presence of multi-layered, rock-soil pavement with materials which are brought from a distant location, as stated in Valmiki Ramayanam . Instead the investigators attempted to locate erroneously “man-made structures”.

Conclusion of GSIPR :Rameswaram island evolved since 125,0000 years ago.

various natural coastal processes have led to the evolution of the coastal areas

the sea level in the region oscillated significantly over historical time scales exposing the sea bend between India and Sri Lanka periodically.

Around 6000- 7-000 years ago the sea level was 17 m. below the present level resulting the in partial exposure of the sea bed.

The domain between Rameswaram and Talaimannar may have thus been exposed some time between 18000 and 7000 years. Since then sea level has been rising gradually with minor periodic fluctuations.

The Hon’ble Minister quoted the GSIPR in the Parliament : “  Preliminary studies suggest that all the boreholes are within the Upper Quaternary period.”… “there was no Ram Bridge up to 205 metres.” …… There is no man-made structure”Writer’s comments:

GSIPR has tacitly taken period of Sri Rama as 17,50,000 BP. finding that the geological ages of the location is less than 125000 years, it concluded that Sri Rama sethu did not exist.

exact time of Sri Rama has not yet been ascertained as 17,50,000 BP

If Sri Rama’s period is takens as 7090 to 9299 BP, it does not contradict the data collected by the GSI.

The sea water levels indicated by GSIPR do not also contradict the Astronomical period of Sri Rama sethu.

Conclusion of GSIPR :Analysis of samples from drilling of boreholes between Dhanushokodi and the third island of Ram sethu suggests that there were 3 sedimentation cycles dominated by clay, lime stone and sandstone. The growth of the Dahanushkodi sand spit (narrow coastal formation )itself is a feature of coastal processes and shore line emergence and its orientation seems to be along the dissipation of wave energy patterns of the Palk bay and the gulf of Mannar.The Dhanushkodi sand spit and the five islands of Ram sethu (that lie within India’s EEZ) change their shape and size owing to monsoon activity. TL dating suggests that the sand dunes of Dhanushkodi to Ram sethu began to be deposited only about 500 to 600 years ago.Writer’s comments:None of the above conclusions contradict the Sri Rama sethu, if the astronomical period is taken and if the Sethu character is taken to be similar to the stone-soil pavement type. There is nothing contrary in the GSIPR’s data to this .

In summary, none of the data from the GSIPR contradicts the presence of Sri Rama sethu,

* if it were to be of the Astronomical period and * if it were to be a Pavement, causeway type, rock-soil conglomerate.

Geological Studies by Dr. Badrinarayanan (former Director, GSI) based on NIOT results 10 boreholes along this ridge up to the international boundary. six boreholes were in the sea.

Bore logs showed about 1.5m to 4m marine sand followed by 1.5 to 2.5m of boulders of calcareous sand stones and coral followed again by marine sand to various depths ending at continuous compact formation”.

“coral reefs can only form in clean and unpolluted water and these being marine organisms require firm and compact formation as foundation . presence of loose marine sand below these clearly indicates that these are not natural and are transported.Unless somebody has transported and dumped them these could not have come there. Some of the boulders are so light they could float on water. Apparently whoever has done it has identified it as light and strong boulders to make it easy for transportation.

Since the boulders are strong they can withstand lot of weight. There are corals that are present on land in Rameswaram, Pamban and Tuticorin areas. A study of them and dating them clearly show that the age of the coral is about 7300 years and the sea level at the time was 4m above the present day sea level.

Then there has been a lowering of sea level and between 4 to 5 thousand years BP the sea level was about 1.5m above present day sea level. The 1.5 to 2.5m thick zone of corals and rock presently occurring at shallow depths in the sea atop the crustal portion of the Adams Bridge appeared to be an ancient causeway. (see Fig. 3).

ancients appeared to have taken advantage of crustal portion of ridge to avoid dumping of lot of volume of rocks and boulders and also utilized less dense but compact rocks and boulders so that these could be carried easily to greater distances and at the same time strong enough to withstand pressure from above both by human as well as sea forces. “

Conclusions corroborate the Sri Rama Sethu thus:It matches well with the time-period of Sri Rama being 7090 –9299 BP, as per Astronomical evidence.

It meets description of the Sethu as a Bund of Boulders, Stones, sand, etc and matches with the field data of the presence of boulders, corals and sand.

It is a moot point for the Scientists to consider if any marine, coastal or geological process can transport rocks, corals and boulders and selectively place them on a softer bed, at particular levels. See Fig. 3. (This appears possible happen only by human transport and placement).

C. Other Geological studiesFor the sake of completeness it is necessary to mention certain other geological studies. a. V.Ram Mohan :”hypothesizes that sea mounts …could be the result of various gelological processes and attempts to give an explanation for the evolution of Rameswaram and Adam’s bridge.“this formation may have been intitiated when the sea level was 125 m below the presentl level, around 18000 years ago and was building up when the sea level continued to rise”b. S.Ramachandran hypothesises “The continuous sand depostion and the natural process of sedimentation could have led to the formation of a chain of barrier island, which are very dynamic and this is not unique to Adam’s bridge notes. The formation of barrier islands, which are common in the Atlantic coast probably began around 25,000 years ago.

c.N.Ramanujam, attempted to reconstruct the geological evolution of the region and its significant features. According to him, block faulting, subsidence and formation of elongated depressions with ridge separation are the characteristic imprints of the early geological history that are recorded in the Palk Bay and the gulf of Mannar. These ridges became centres of coral reef growth, resulting in atoll like formations, which in turn acted as “sand trappers” attracting peculiar sandy deposits called salient formation in the region. What was originally a paleosea between Mandapam and Rameswaram thus because a sandy deposit (the salient) extending about 40 km in the east-west direction. This altered the shore line in the Mandapam-Rameswaram region and acted as an offshore obstruction wall for the littoral currents which transported sediments from the northeast and southwest directions and directed them towards the east and south east (see diagram).

The diversion of ocean currents contributed to the accretion of deposits from both the Dhanushkodi spit and the Talai mannar spit resulting in the formation of sandy barrier islands, which forms Adam’s bridge or Ram Sethu.

General observations on these studies are as follows.

* They are not field based studies, but are hypotheses. for the formation of the ridge by geological processes/ or for the coastal formation. * These may well explain geological formations /formation of the ridge. Sri Rama sethu being constructed subsequently on the top of such a formation, does not vitiate the geological formation. (See Fig. 3).* the presence of rocks and boulders at a specific intermediate sandwich between a top and a bottom softer marine sand layers. Is not explained. Why are boulders and corals not present in either the top or the lower layer ?

iv. How were these boulders and rocks “transported” or shifted to their final positions as far away from the main lands as 10 or 15 kms at a specific point of time.If corals cannot form over softer sand layers, their hypotheses does not explain the presence of coral over softer marine sand layers along with boulders. Their time periods mentioned do not vitiate the Astronomical period (7090 – 9299 BP) for Sri Rama sethu .

SSCP Website p66/68 state “The boreholes indicated multicyclic sediments comprisingclay, marl and calcareous sandstone, fossiferous limestone andloose sandstone, deposited in an episodic manner. Corals in Mundram Chatram occurred occasionally; sporadicbroken pieces suggestive of recycling from elsewhere. Preliminary dating of subsurface core samples below 60mdepth indicated a random age data varying from 20 Ka to 40Ka BP. Shallow level (15 – 18 m depth) cores indicated an app.age of about 6 Ka – 7 Ka BP.

A cursory examination of the core samples of the boreholes drilled by Sethusamudram Corporation suggest the deposition of mainly two types of clastic sediments i.e., the Top Zone (1-3 m app) comprises compact, moderately hard, thick Cavernous Calcareous siltstone with abundant megofossils comprising pelecepods, gastrpods etc. Corals are not to be seen. These cores also show ferruginous patches suggesting sub aerial exposure of the sediments.

These calcareous sediments are underlain by a thickly bedded, soft, brittle, illsotted, feebly calcareous, porous sandstone which are occasionally fossiliferous. This sandstone might have been deposited by shallow wave currents in the area between Palk Strait and Gulf of Manner. Present day forms and the recent sediments suggest an active episodic interaction of a fluvio-marine and marine agencies coupled with Neotectonism during upper Quaternary period.”

Interestingly, this data confirms what Dr. Badarinarayanan noticed, that is the location of an interspersing rock- boulder-coral layer in between sand layersthe possibility of corals being transported from somewhere else iii. a time period of 6000 to 7000 BP, which is near the Astronomical date of Sri Rama sethu of 7090 BP-9299 BP.

e.The following agencies conducted geology related investigationsNEERI as part of its EIA studiesSea Geo surveys through NSRDC for bathymetry and shallow seismic survey in the Adam’s Bridge area.Bathymetry and shallow seismic surveys along the entire alignmentGeotechnical investigation in water depths of 2- 5 m in Adam’s bridge area for soil parameters below the sea bed through NSRDCGeotechnical investigators carried out in Palk Bay /Palk strait and Radio Tracer studies (AEC) L& T- Ramboll Consulting engineers 2004-2005 conducted Bathymetric and Geophysical Surveys by NIOTGeotechnical investigations with vibro-coring operations and marine boreholes.However, the data available is not usable in this context ,for want of full details to public .

Inadequate and Faulty Investigations that Inadequate and Faulty Investigations that negated Sri Rama Sethu’s presencenegated Sri Rama Sethu’s presenceThe project/Government / ASI/ related agencies have The project/Government / ASI/ related agencies have attempted to repeatedly project the view that attempted to repeatedly project the view that

extensive scientific investigations have been made to extensive scientific investigations have been made to explore if Sri Rama sethu existed in the project area;explore if Sri Rama sethu existed in the project area;

that these investigations have resulted in the conclusion that these investigations have resulted in the conclusion

that there was no such Sri Rama Sethu in the area;that there was no such Sri Rama Sethu in the area; and and

that what exists are only islands of sand formed by that what exists are only islands of sand formed by geological eventsgeological events

Firstly, the number of field investigations which have been done Firstly, the number of field investigations which have been done are extremely few- (See Table in Appendix XI.2)-indeed only two are extremely few- (See Table in Appendix XI.2)-indeed only two – –

the conclusions of one was favourable to the presence of Sri the conclusions of one was favourable to the presence of Sri Rama sethu. Rama sethu.

The other gave unfavourable , on account of faulty assumptions The other gave unfavourable , on account of faulty assumptions made by the investigators. (See below). made by the investigators. (See below).

No Archeological or marine archeological investigation was ever No Archeological or marine archeological investigation was ever donedone

If the Astronomical Period of 7090 –9299 BP is taken If the Astronomical Period of 7090 –9299 BP is taken for Sri Rama sethu and if its nature is taken to be for Sri Rama sethu and if its nature is taken to be like a “Boulder-Coral-Soil Pavement” or “Causeway” like a “Boulder-Coral-Soil Pavement” or “Causeway” as mentioned by Valmiki, then test results from all as mentioned by Valmiki, then test results from all the available investigations (GSIPR/ Dr.Badari-the available investigations (GSIPR/ Dr.Badari-naryanan- NIOT/SSCP ) match. naryanan- NIOT/SSCP ) match. It can thereby be concluded ,prima facie, that Sri It can thereby be concluded ,prima facie, that Sri Rama sethu exists. Rama sethu exists. It can therefore be concluded that the SSCP* in the It can therefore be concluded that the SSCP* in the present route is bound to disturb the Sri Rama present route is bound to disturb the Sri Rama Sethu.Sethu.

Detailed, impartial, further investigations using borehole Detailed, impartial, further investigations using borehole sampling (of suitable size of sampling) and under water sampling (of suitable size of sampling) and under water diving studies, carbon-14 and other dating , are all diving studies, carbon-14 and other dating , are all necessary involving Marine Archeaologists, Geologists, necessary involving Marine Archeaologists, Geologists, Bridge engineers to further confirm the presence of Sri Bridge engineers to further confirm the presence of Sri Rama sethu at this level.Rama sethu at this level.

D. CONCLUSION

The investigators have also been looking at great depths of 100 m upto 205 m for the Sri Rama sethu. If Sri Rama sethu ( as per the astronomical date) is of the period 7090 to 9299 BP, the top level of the sethu would have been around present MSL+3.5 m. whereby the place to locate the causeway is within the top say 15 m thickness only and not at great depths. Apparently they have been looking at too great a depth than is necessary. In fact they need to have looked more carefully at tell tale signs in the upper crust of 0 to 15 m thickness in the Sethu area. This again corroborates independent analysis of geological study results made by Dr. Badarinarayanan, former Director Geological Survey of India, based on NIOT results. Some of the SSCP Website p66/68 test results also corroborate this.

5) Geological test results from GSI’s Project Rameswaram and NIOT only corroborate /they do not contradict --, the presence of Sri Rama sethu in the project location.The hypothetical studies by Prof. Ram Mohan, Prof. Ramachandran, Prof. Ramanuajm, etc., propose hypotheses for the geological formation of the area. These do not negate the Sri Rama sethu, if we consider the astronomical time period and other possibilities mentioned above. 7) If the Astronomical Period of 7090 –9299 BP is taken for Sri Rama sethu and if its nature is taken to be like a “Boulder-Coral-Soil Pavement” or “Causeway” as mentioned by Valmiki, then test results from all the available investigations (GSIPR/ Dr.Badari-naryanan- NIOT/SSCP ) match. 8) It can thereby be concluded ,prima facie, that Sri Rama sethu exists.9) It can therefore be concluded that the SSCP* in the present route is bound to disturb the Sri Rama Sethu.

10) Detailed, impartial, further investigations using borehole sampling (of suitable size of sampling) and under water diving studies, carbon-14 and other dating , are all necessary involving Marine Archeaologists, Geologists, Bridge engineers to further confirm the presence of Sri Rama sethu at this level. And what do we gain if such an investigation unequivocally establishes that Sri Rama Sethu indeed is located in the said area. (see Appendix XII). The gains to the National pride and esteem will be immeasurable.

APPENDIX XII- WHAT IF THERE WAS SRI RAMA SETHU1.If the existence of Sri Rama Sethu is proved, it would then be one of the first man-made constructions dating to prehistoric times. ( on 7-7-2007, we felt proud as a nation, that Taj Mahal (1653 AD) was again ratified and included in the 7 wonders of the world. If Sri Rama sethu (7090-9299 BP) indeed exists, it would be yet another wonders of the world and will be a matter of National pride. 2.(No man-made feature can be seen from the moon). But surely Sri Rama sethu would be among the few man made constructions that could be seen by a satellite. (NASA’s pictures of the sethu are fantastic).3. It would become a candidate to be the first ever pavement / causeway bridge. Hitherto , the Appian way in Rome (ca. 300 BC) is claimed to be one of the early pavement structures.

4. If the existence of the bridge were to be established, associated with it, the existence of Sri Rama would also be confirmed. This is of great importance to India. [The Father of our nation dreamt of Sri Rama Rajya, as an ideal. The behaviour and life of the people of this country are inspired by the life and behaviour of Sri Rama, since time immemorial that we say ‘Ramo vigrahavaan Dharmaha’ –“Sri Rama is the embodiment of Dharma”.

The other alternatives to SSCP* have not been The other alternatives to SSCP* have not been sufficiently exploredsufficiently exploredSome six alternative canal routes have been talked about. Some six alternative canal routes have been talked about. It appears that almost exclusively the factor of It appears that almost exclusively the factor of Environmental Impact seems to have been investigated by Environmental Impact seems to have been investigated by the NEERI and other agencies and this factor seems to have the NEERI and other agencies and this factor seems to have dominated the decisions so far.dominated the decisions so far.Has any agency or institution considered the damage that is Has any agency or institution considered the damage that is being done to the sentiments and psyche of the majority being done to the sentiments and psyche of the majority citizens of this country ?citizens of this country ?

The expert bodies which formulated the project The expert bodies which formulated the project showed consideration to Coral reefs, Marine algae, showed consideration to Coral reefs, Marine algae, Birds, Dugong-Dugong, etc., Birds, Dugong-Dugong, etc.,

•While there are several other alternative routes, The Sethu While there are several other alternative routes, The Sethu Samudram Canal Project is purporting to demolish some 300 Samudram Canal Project is purporting to demolish some 300 meters width and 12 m depth of this Sri Rama Sethu. meters width and 12 m depth of this Sri Rama Sethu.

•And this is only the beginning. In future, as there will be And this is only the beginning. In future, as there will be progressive demand/need for the passage of larger ships, and progressive demand/need for the passage of larger ships, and also for the simultaneous passage of ships from opposite also for the simultaneous passage of ships from opposite directions , there will arise a need for increasing the depth and directions , there will arise a need for increasing the depth and the width of the canal. the width of the canal.

•(Indeed the Hon’ble Minister –see Appendix XIII- has clearly (Indeed the Hon’ble Minister –see Appendix XIII- has clearly stated that future dredging of the Sri Rama sethu could go stated that future dredging of the Sri Rama sethu could go down upto 25 m)down upto 25 m)

But don’t the sentiments and faith of the But don’t the sentiments and faith of the citizens of this country do not merit any citizens of this country do not merit any consideration at all ?consideration at all ?

And it is not the sentiments and faith of today’s Indians but And it is not the sentiments and faith of today’s Indians but those of all the generations since times immemorial].those of all the generations since times immemorial].

Why is it that the Human Society not considered Why is it that the Human Society not considered at least a part of the ‘Environment’ and shown at least a part of the ‘Environment’ and shown some consideration?some consideration?

If there are different conflicting factors such as If there are different conflicting factors such as Public sentiment, Environmental impact and Public sentiment, Environmental impact and Economics, should the Highest rating be not given Economics, should the Highest rating be not given to Public sentiment; above importance to to Public sentiment; above importance to Environmental impact, and lower priority for the Environmental impact, and lower priority for the EconomicsEconomics..(Incidentally, if a project estimated at 2500 crores is (Incidentally, if a project estimated at 2500 crores is getting escalated to say 4000 crores, whatever is getting escalated to say 4000 crores, whatever is happening to the project Economics ?).happening to the project Economics ?).

Thus in effect, the present alignment and initial damage Thus in effect, the present alignment and initial damage would only lead to future increasing damage to the Sri Rama would only lead to future increasing damage to the Sri Rama sethu.sethu.

It is not impossible to investigate and arrive at an alternative It is not impossible to investigate and arrive at an alternative route for the canal without damaging the Sri Rama sethu.route for the canal without damaging the Sri Rama sethu.

This route can also be partially, on land if need be, like the This route can also be partially, on land if need be, like the Panama canal or the Suez canal.Panama canal or the Suez canal.Also, it is understood that only some 15 % progress has Also, it is understood that only some 15 % progress has been achieved on the project. It is very much in the initial been achieved on the project. It is very much in the initial stages and can be easily rerouted.stages and can be easily rerouted.It is not late at all for course correctionIt is not late at all for course correction. Also, the . Also, the sentiments and faith of the people are of lot more valuable sentiments and faith of the people are of lot more valuable than the money that might have been spent thus far. than the money that might have been spent thus far.

To summarise

1) “Absence of Evidence’ is not necessarily ‘Evidence of Absence”

NASA and ISRO (SAC-MWR’s) remote sensing/ satellite images cannot be used to decide (see NASA’s own statement)The time period of the islands , orif the islands are built by humans, or are natural formations

(only field, on ground study and dating can assist in this)3) Interestingly, on this sensitive issue of National importance, there is hardly any Archeological investigation done and almost no information has been collected and is available in the public domain. (This is not withstanding the several press statements made ).There are no Archeological or Marine Archeological investigations made in the Sri Rama Sethu area till date.

There are no Archeological or Marine Archeological investigations made in the Sri Rama Sethu area till date.Geological test results from GSI’s Project Rameswaram and NIOT -- only corroborate /they do not contradict --, the presence of Sri Rama sethu in the project location.The hypothetical studies by Prof. Ram Mohan, Prof. Ramachandran, Prof. Ramanuajm, etc., propose hypotheses for the geological formation of the area. These do not negate the Sri Rama sethu, if we consider the astronomical time period and other possibilities mentioned above. If the Astronomical Period of 7090 –9299 BP is taken for Sri Rama sethu and if its nature is taken to be like a “Boulder-Coral-Soil Pavement” or “Causeway” as mentioned by Valmiki, then test results from all the available investigations (GSIPR/ Dr.Badari-naryanan- NIOT/SSCP ) match. It can thereby be concluded ,prima facie, that Sri Rama sethu exists.

It can therefore be concluded that the SSCP* in the present route is bound to disturb the Sri Rama Sethu.Detailed, impartial, further investigations using borehole sampling (of suitable size of sampling) and under water diving studies, carbon-14 and other dating , are all necessary involving Marine Archeaologists, Geologists, Bridge engineers to further confirm the presence of Sri Rama sethu at this level.

I request the CEP to strongly recommend that I request the CEP to strongly recommend that

* the Project authorities explore alternative * the Project authorities explore alternative sea, land or combined routes for the sea, land or combined routes for the economical transport of goods and economical transport of goods and materials ,and materials ,and

•avoid disturbing the Sri Rama Sethu area.avoid disturbing the Sri Rama Sethu area.

•Sri Rama Sethu area and Rameswaram must Sri Rama Sethu area and Rameswaram must be declared as National Heritage and accorded be declared as National Heritage and accorded all the protection that such ancient relics all the protection that such ancient relics deserve.deserve.

APPENDIX XIV- REFERENCES1. Valmiki Ramayanam (written during the life time of Sri

Rama by Sage Valmiki)- http://www.valmikiramayan.net/ yuddha kanda /sarga22/–Verses 22 to 87.

2. The Oxford Mini-Dictionary [The Oxford Mini-Dictionary, Oxford University Press, 1981 pp.207 ]

3. The Webster’s Universal College Dictionary4. Dr. P.V.Vartak , “The Scientific Dating of The Ramayana and

The Vedas “, Ved Vidnyana Mandala, Pune, 1999.5. Dr. P.V.Vartak, “Vastav Ramayan, in Marathi, Vedvidnyana

Mandal, Pune ,1978 6. Dr. P.V.Vartak, “Vastav Ramayana”, Translation in Kannada

by Hemantha Raja Kulkarni, Sumantha Prakasana, Bangalore, 2002

7. Pushkar Bhatnagar, “Dating of the Era of Lord Ram”, Rupa & Co, 2004

8. Sitaram Gurumurthi, “Ramayana Temples”, Vikas Publishing House Pvt. Ltd., 2001

9. Dr.S.Ponnuswamy, “Bridge Engineering”pp.112-113,Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing Co.Ltd, 1986

10. Wikipaedia (website)11. Sri Sathya Sai Baba, “Ramakatha Rasa Vahini”, Vol. 2, Sri Sathya Sai Books & Publications Trust, Prasanthi Nilayam.12. “Scientific-Economic Aspects-Geological and Geophysical Perspective of the Ramsetu Bridge “ by Dr.S.Badrinarayanan, former Director Geological Survey of India, based on NIOT results.13. V.Ram Mohan, see Frontline e-book14. S.Ramachandran, Frontline e-book15. N.Ramanujam, Frontline e-book16. SSCP website 17. Frontline e-book (on the web)18. XIV Lok Sabha Proceedings (on the web)

THANK YOU FOR YOUR THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTIONATTENTION