Science vs. Superstition: Claims for the timing of Mahabharata War – Part 1

Shri Koenraad Elst wrote…

“Since some people have deemed it necessary to counter lower dates for the Mahabharata war and insist on the “Arundhati period” of 4500+ BCE, here a reminder that I have already refuted this notion. Science advances whereas superstition goes around in circles.”

Shri Koenraad Elst had written the following, a while ago, when someone asked for his views on ‘AV observation’.

I had shown the fallacy and irrelevance of each and every argument, made in the above blog article of Shri Elst, through the following series of blog articles I wrote (some 2 years ago).

What caught my attention is a statement/quote by Shri Elst in his very first comment above (made recently in the context of growing comprehension of scientific impact of AV observation for the timing of Mahabharata war).  Of course, Shri Elst wrote to allude that ‘inference due to AV observation is rather a superstition’.

I will show, in this series, how the reality is exactly opposite and that every counter claim, put forward by Shri Elst, against AV observation, is in fact based on ‘superstition‘.

In next part, I will begin with definition of ‘science and scientific method’ and also of ‘superstition or superstitious logic’.

To be continued…


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s