I find Nilesh jis arguments and much much more logical than this , try debunking his geological and oceanographic data that coincides with the finding of Randal Carson

Mishra ji while I have some of your videos and have found them quite convincing and absorbing, this time I am quite surprised by your love for Roy and utter hate for Nilesh. I have seen some of his videos but don't know whether they are right or wrong. But some of your observations are quite interesting. You say he has no knowledge of Sanskrit. Ok. What about you? Are you trained in scientific aspects of discovery? How do you know that Roy is right?. You say that Oak is far extreme in dating Mahabharat. What about the submerged Dwarika in ocean? Is not it an evidence or atleast an indicator? Then you frequently talk about peer review. Don't you think that that these so called 'Peer reviewers' still believe in the Aryan invasion theory and also 'out of India theory of Aryans' . You mention that modern history has fixed the date for Mahabharat sometime before Christ because it's so convincing and so scientific and peer reviewed? So my suggestion to you is don't fall in these traps. If you think that you must speak don't take sides and just present the facts and remain neutral. And please don't talk about peer review because we know the facts about these peer review. Don't you know what happened to these 'peers' during Ram janmbhoomi case. The famous ancient Indian historians don't know Sanskrit and the famous Persian historians don't know Persian or Arabic. Then you talk about right and left leaning people. And it seems you are the most reasonable and rationalist and the so called right leaning people are dumbs and narrow minded so they believe in everything un- scientific and unreasonable. And lastly but not the least are you a trained scientific personnel who has the authority to label others as unscientific.

Problem is that All these IIT prof who drinks Tax payers money , Keep quiet when a western scholar comes up with some type of theory to demean vedas, Ramayan, Mahabharat or geeta. but not their fault just like all academics in India they like loyal Logo of HMV music company. IIT needs to actual show up their worth by creating technology solution for bharat instead of bragging about what is science and what is not science.

Nilesh Oak is a gem. I don't necessarily agree with him on some of the dates. But he is truly a gem.

If some theory is peer- reviewed that doesn't mean it is right.. look at Aryan Invasion theory which is proved totally mythical

1. Contradiction is fine but real question is "what is the alternative theory presented by one who is contradicting?" They should provide scientific evidences for their theory along with their contradictions Otherwise contradiction becomes just difference of opinion and all differences of opinion should be welcomed. 2. Nilesh Oakji's work is based on scientific methodology ... He has his theory on dating of Ramayana and Mahabharata and he proves his theories by astronomical and other large number of coroborative scientific evidences. Scientific research papers he uses are published by people absolutely not related to Hindu faith/mythologies or political related.. they are purely scientific. 3. This brings me to think how smart and futuristic our rishis were back then ... They new then that any king can just start his own calender which will make dating of historical events very difficult so they used astronomical observations which no one can manipulate so when time comes that our knowledge of astronomy is advance enough... We will be able to accurately date these historical events. 4. Lastly let me ask again "what is your theory" and let's prove it with scientific methods and evidence else let's support man who dedicatedly working on it.

First of all, Dr Roy & speaker need to debunk & harshly condemn distorted history of India & it’s culture presented during colonial as well as Congress era !

This is the same mindset which helped few Europeans to colonized Bharat for 200 years 😢😢

The time line given by Nilesh oak, is the most accurate the time line. Jai srhee ram for nilesh oak 🙏 🙏🙏

I believe that..Nilesh oak debunk any one any time...he is a gem💎

The very name Raja ram mohun Roy,raises my hackles- that Unitarian Christian allowed himself to become the flag bearer of colonial mindset and single-handedly nearly brought about the end of sanatana dharma in if not india at least in Bengal

There is hardly any convincing point in your video, except blaming Nilesh oak.

The best way to resolve such issues is through a one to one debate. It appears that one was set up and it did not happen because one of the protagonists had chickened out. As regards to peer reviews we know that it is a private club and the club won't deviate by guidance given by their funders. Also, Rajiv Malhotra has shown that there are a lot of so called "eminent" people have sold out and become anti-India agitators, both within and outside India. I believe that we should listen to everyone who has something to say but need to be mindful and think critically. I have read Nilesh books in which he help the readers to understand Astronomy as a lay person in order the understand his research and discoveries.

Anybody who stands up for Hindu rights, fights for Hindu rights, fights against Hinduphobia, or likes Nilesh Oak's date like Jeffrey Armstrong (translator of Bhagavadgita) of Canada and Pt. Satish K. Sharma (author of Caste, Conversion A Colonial Conspiracy: What Every Hindu and Christian must know about Caste) of UK, or Salvatore Babones (American in Australia, fighting intellectual class of "anti-India, anti-Hindu, and anti-Modi " forces) is NOT so-called member of right-wing BJP. There is no such party in the US, UK and Canada, but there are many terr0r1st organizations of Abrahamic Iconoclastic Desert Sects (AIDS) who attack and infect on a daily basis India, Modi, Hindus, and BJP with Dismantling of Global Hinduism (DGH) like Rana Ayyub, Audracious Tucchaki, Suita Vishwanath, Soros, etc!

Nilesh Oak is more logical. You are opposing him just to prove him wrong. He has given geological, oceanography, astronomical references.

We consider musa, Christ, Muhammad and Alexander historical. Ramayan and mahabharat as fictional Just because british had said that.

Nilesh oak had placed his point of view in full public domain through his numerous upload. He had put forward his theory based on " All the astronomical refferances are actual factual data of that time '

Although I don't had much respect for Mr. Nityānanda, but after watching this video the minimal amount of respect I had for him vanished instantly.

Will be interesting to see Nilesh oaks take on this. My belief is that Nilesh will come out sounding more plausible.

This Śastrārtha (शास्त्रार्थ) that is happening among various chronologists (such as Dr. Raja Ram Mohan Roy and Nilesh Oak) can be very healthy and fruitful in the cause of Sanātana Dharma. Hopefully, we will be able to zero-in on our actual hindu chronology, someday.

NO is popular because his analysis is detailed, and it makes sense. It's not a right-wing conspiracy.

I heard there is mention in ramayan about four-tusked elephant guarding Ravan's palace. That four tusked elephant is also called as Gomphotheres. And they went extinct atleast 12000 years ago. How can we explain this sir?

Not sure about the absolute veracity of Nilesh Oak’s proposed date, but the way these ‘ I scratch your back,you scratch mine’ intellectuals are mushrooming with their targeted rebuttals,the lack of recognition of their own condescension,the constant insistence that anyone who likes Oak’s books are right leaning,the constant demand for peer reviews( as if the random dates given by Christian orientalists based on the Bible were peer reviewed 🙄) and personal attacks actually gives more credence to his work. Honestly never seen so many people singularly go after one person with such vengeance.Why not just publish one’s own independent research?There are so many books one does not agree with.Does his popularity bother them?This video actually makes one want to go and read his books with more interest.Good job! please keep it up!

That's the basis of Nilesh Oak's scientific theory. What is terrestrial is celestial. And what is seen and described in the text is actual representation of the sky at that time.

Nilesh oak gives evidence from geological data as well which has not been reviewed by Roy. Also, Roy was talking in a very derogatory manner about evidence of Agastya Arundhati evidence without giving any evidence against it.

I love the fact that you encouraged people to read both books and decide for themselves. True sanaatani style!!

While healthy debate is an intrinsic way of Sanatana Dharma, one should be very careful of one's demeanor while presenting one's position on any topic. Use of words such as "debunking" should never be used as a matter of prudence and maturity. 'Alternative view' could perhaps be a respectful way.

Just blabbering about dates without explaining the science behind it doesn't lead you anywhere. Show the proofs and compare...show it us why it's not those dates. Just quoting different dates given by different people doesn't prove anything. Extremely unscientific. Just don't tag Nilesh sir in your videos to get more views.

For those of you coming here out of curiosity as to how he "debunks", do not waste your time. In the entire video he keeps a irritating giggle with a self appraising tone and keeps calling calling Nilesh Oak wrong for no apparent reason whatsoever (effectively translates to the reasoning that this Roy character is a PhD so he has to be right!). Only between the 10th and the 13th minutes, he picks up some of the slimily references that Mr. Oak has used and that's his entire "debunk" based upon. Mr. Oak has only used those as cross reference and the real dating is based on the Astronomical mentions of certain constellations and comets, which I'm sure can be established easily. I have not read the entire book of either Mr. Oak or this Roy character, my comment is only for this video with a click bait title and pure trash for the content. You can can rather see Mr. Oak's clarification here, which is pretty convincing to me: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/nJlxp7CAkrmthX0.html

Nilesh Oak is a Gem for us. I’ve cross checked his references and found them to be true to my senses

I think he is jealous of Nilesh Oakes' work

Although Sir, you are much respected and really well learned, using Right Leaning verbiage does not become you, we are Vedic Leaning and as we move forward to rediscovering, reclaiming and restoring out Glorious heritage, we remain Open to many possibilities of of our Itihasa.

Should have just given us Dr Roys proposed date whilst you were at it sir.

Writing a big book just to prove someone wrong is hardly something a smart person would do. Not supporting Nilesh, but can't support stupidity at the same time.

For Mahabharata dating, can any one challange 'the timing of Epoch of Arundhti' as proposed by Nilesh oak

Gone through many of your videos and appreciated them. But this time, sorry to say, you failed to convince that Nilesh Oak is wrong in predicting the year of Ramayan rather it appears to be more like a video made to criticize Nilesh Oak.

A very well spoken and pleasant video but fully devoted to counter the theory of Nilesh Oak. It reeks of bias and to some extent masked dislike for his popularity.

Sorry sir. I have great objection on "Peer Review". Peer can review anything which he/she already knows. And they have their own prejudices. If someone has discovered something new which peer doesn't know about, he (peer) will reject it. There are different opinions about dating of Ramayan and Mahabharat. No one is absolutely correct. But we have to see who is maximally correct. Language of Mr Ram Mohan Roy is very arrogant and heavily smells of personal jealousy. I am a scientist (a senior medical doctor) and I also criticize many other doctors but my language is never as harsh as Mr Roy. It would have been better if Dr Roy had presented his theory first and then humbly compared his findings with Mr Oak.

Earlier I thought this Misra was an authentic guy !

Raja Ram Mohan roy was a British implant like many others of the time. Nilesh oak is not doing anything wrong. Hindus laid the foundations of astronomy & had a model of 'interpreted astronomy' called as astrology which west used to mockery indian hindus. Astronomical positions of planets & galaxies in respect to earthern hamispheres is an intrinsic part of hinduism in dating & connecting it as causalilty of major events in history of mankind. So using astronomy to date really ancient events in modern context is not ridiculous but very scientific & obvious in hindu context. So, please be sensitive in your language. We appreciate your work also. But everyone is not a master of everything except Shiv & Vishnu. Dhanyawad 🙏

I am reading the complete life of Rama , hard copy by Author who simply calls herself Vanamali. She also goes by name Mataji Devi Vanamali. Now on page 122, she writes "Lakshmana had never seen him like this. He pleaded with him, JUST AS KRISHNA PLEADED WITH ARJUNA ON THE BATTLEFIELD OF KURUKSHETRA, begging him to shake off his unmanly and ignoble grief, but it was all in vain". I have highlighted this in the book. Out of shock. Because so far, i have heard it repeatedly that Ramayana is a history and not a mythological story for us, and Ram ji was a 7th avatar and this was in Satyug, and before Mahabharat times. This infact, with some variations on what is stated , is broadly repeated by believers and even scholars. I am now really puzzled and not sure if the author has made a mistake in her translation or deliberately (being a well paid leftist, to insert so many lies into wvery translation and muddy the waters). Well that will be something I shall investigate. However this podcaster, is 100% a leftist pretending to be a Indic isn't he. In other words he is trying to be another Devdutt Patnaik and Romila Thapar. He reminds me of the cunning Yogendra Yadav from AAP and now that sleazy floater is a free radical for hire. I suspect similarly about this Nithyanad Misra. He talks a lot....A LOT...in a pleasant droning manner. Obviously well trained by JNU to make the listener dose off. But there are those fools, who fall for appearances and will absorb opinions with a gaping mouth. His monologue even in the first 10 minutes is just about strawmanning. He cannot attack the logic presented by Nilesh Oak. All he is doing is attacking Nilesh Oak's 'credentials and credibility'. Typical leftist method. Dont prove facts. Just slander. So disappointed!

Well, I did not expect Jingle bell music on your doorbell for a staunch Sanatani like you!

Has Dr.Roy proposed his dates in this book? It looks like Dr. Roy has taken Nilesh Oak personally.

By offering this book as a free download, Dr Roy needs to be complimented. It shows he is not after royalty but cares for bringing out his version of the truth to as many readers

Your basic premise about accepting the old dates given by Max Muller is wrong. He himself admitted that he had straitjacketed all Hindu texts within the Biblical Creationism framework and it had no scientific basis. And the Sanskrit journals are under the hegemony of the Anglo-saxons who don't even know Sanskrit. It is a select boys club and they scratch each others' backs. It would be great if a Sanskrit scholar with a very good knowledge of Maths and Jyotisha would do the rebuttal

Have guts and call Shri. NILESH OAK for a debate..

Hardly any logic given to debunk Nilesh Oak. In fact, he compares Shakespeare and Valmiki which is nothing but a derogatory attempt to call Valmiki as fictional writer like Shakespeare.

Peer reviews are problematic in the case of Linguistics, astro archaeological dating. Srikanth Talageri has already disproven linguistic arguments of established scholars. He is heavily outnumbered.

TRUTH CAN BE TOLD WITHOUT COMMUNICATION SKILLS...in the same way Scientifically proven things doesn't need Peer reviews.. Nilesh Oak has reference to events and don't require judgemental reviews. Any person having common sense would understand his research.

Please you may differ with nilesh oak but don't mock him. It only brings you down in our esteem

As a learner, it feels it's necessary to know more about date calculations that debunk his theory rather than just calling his theory inaccurate & challenging his knowledge. His theory can be surely debunked but got to have proofs to prove otherwise to what he says.

How do we explain observations about the Saraswati and comparisons with geological findings?

I don't wanna se any Nilesh sir or Dr ram mohan sir's fanboys in the comments fighting.....such shashraths are encouraged in our Dharma so let us take this in a sporting way....

Why are there so many rebuttals to a proposal? Nilesh OAK has proposed a date. You propose your own prediction, why do you need to prove him wrong, without adding any value to the conversation?

I think your focus on the very use of words "scientific", peer-reviewed" and "credentials" gives away your position about your bias. By calling Mr Roy 's book an "antidote" for Shri Nilesh Oaks book, you are naming Shri Nilesh Oak's book a "poison". Possibly many of your followers will part from you for this behaviour of yours. If you present yourself in this manner, it does show a lot more than your words. The vast expanse of various disciplines of research used by Shri Nilesh Oak for corroboration is absolutely mindblowing. A charachter valuation of a person should be done through assessment of persons actions. To ridicule someone in a "peer-review" cant be called scientific. It would be great to see shastrarth or open discussions between Nilesh Oak and Mr. Roy to give each one an equal opportunity to counter their arguments. Shri Nityanand Mishra ji, do you know if Mr Roy has open mind to participate in such open discussions? Or has Mr Roy actually invited Shri Nilesh Oak for such doscussion? If Mr Roy has confidence in his work, it will be a fantastic opportunity for Mr Roy to publicly prove Shri Nilesh Oak wrong and "unscientific" in front of huge crowd. May be even broadcasting it "live" will be more effective. I am sure you will support open un-edited discussions. 🙏

thumbs down

Unfortunately you appeared unusually bitter and vindictive in this video. More facts would help also do not discourage others who may not be at same level of Sanskrit as you are. Exactly this type of elitist view made Sanskrit less popular.

You sound intellectual but Nilesh is intellectual. May God help you overcome this bias which is outcome of jealousy.

Dear friend , you can contradict inferences drawn by Mr Nilesh You have to do it yourself , If he is the same Raja Ram Mohan Roy who spread the propaganda of aboloshing sati rites , then I have all ugly words to throw at him. Nilesh Oak is debating in full public domain, somebody may contradict him।directly Sharing his dias only. All else can be wrong. Astronomical references drawn from Balmiki Ramayan have to be taken as the basis of all proofs. No one even NASA can deny the profound correctness of Hindu astronomy .

So Dr Roy has spent so much time and energy on refuting Nilesh Oak's theory but he has not done any work in identifying the correct dates. This itself creates a doubt that his aim seems just to muddy the waters and keep us confused. A normal person would try and further the research and provide alternative theory but Roy's aim seems to be simply negative. Just a thought. I have read both books and in my opinion the second book smells of an agenda. If first one is not perfect science then the second is also not providing any alternative science either 🙏

Another weak rebuttal of Nilesh Oak's deep analysis for the dating. You are too general, randomly picking up points. Would like to see a detailed, categorized, and structured analysis. "The whole thing is baseless" is jumping the gun in the midst of your rebuttal.

So you want to say that Ramayana is either imaginary or it happened later than what Oak says?

If the review sticks to scientific data, I was fine. This sounds a little personal grudge..and also the inference of right wing couple of times.

As always, a to-the-point and objective analysis. I am sure Koenraad, too, is going to write an article soon! He and Oak have been having these enriching debates on dating of the Ramayana and the Mbh.

Dear Shri Mishra , Pl elaborate what is peer review system? Even Aryan Invasion theory is validated by peer review system. Are we endorsing the Western supremacy and their privilege of gate keeping of knowledge by way of peer review system which is exclusively dominated by West? Or Do we have a peer review system which is fair?

I have gone through many videos and book of Nilesh Oak, they are well explained. But you do not want to accept that he is right. Peer review is not the only way to be proven scientific. There are many theories like Aryan came from Outside of India, but they all proved false now. So keep your peer reviews with you. Keep your ego aside and re read Nilesh oak's book, and instead of POORVAAGRAH, use intellect.

Wow, so by the same standards a comment on this video would be. A self proclaimed Sanskrit scholar who has no background on research and has not even a bachelors degree in any scientific study has foreword a book by a self proclaimed Vedic researcher who has studied in material sciences thinks that peer review is mandatory because out of the box thinking with data points and logic has to be approved by Saahebs who left and remaining stayed here. Also by the same standards because his children still study a fake date in the book and believe in it. We should not revise NCERT books and teach our children that Columbus discovered America and Vasco da gama discovered India. Also by the same standards, He is leftist because if someone approved Nilesh Oak’s theories is a right winger. Also he has called Rajiv Malhotra Ji and Jaipur Dialogues etc. also right winger who offered Courtesy to host this self proclaimed Sanskrit Scholar. Who has no research experience on Sanskrit itself. The best I have seen is reading from different Dictionaries and translating words. That’s not a research. Take this as a challenge:- “Are you saying that you have correct translations available for the Sanskrit written orated by Maharishi Valmiki? “ So what expert of Sanskrit is saying by quoting is it is unacceptable by Linguistic point of view. Now for dharmik readers I do not have to explain what Saaheb who stayed is saying. ( Linguistics and it’s accuracy is covered by Rajiv Malhotra ji in details) if this leftist expert says it is unacceptable because saahebs who defined linguistic Dont agree and his interpretation is only truth then again let me say he has never done “research” . Also is he really claiming that Maharishi Valmiki has written a poem and it is factless!!!! Wow what a claim. I mean it is waste of time in responding to a revengeful Video review. For Dr. Roy, such efforts should be encouraged but not in pulling leg but by coming up with your own logic and dates. I would not comment on his book yet because I have logical reason by which I will weight and see if he has any competitive edge with facts over Nilesh Oak Ji. So far no one has. But I am ashamed of following Mr. Mishra and subscribing his channel. He has used his platform for personal agenda to influence against a fellow Indic researcher just because he has no capacity to understand logic and research. But I am not so shallow minded and still appreciate Mr. Mishra’s contribution for which he does good. And responded with this message where he has damaged his own image.

Misra ji I like your scholarly videos but this "book review" just sounds like you have an agenda to peddle. The fact that you wrote the foreword for this book automatically makes you prone to conflict of interest and not a neutral reviewer. Also, like others have said mere comparison of dates by the two authors without any substantiation does not lend this exercise any credibility.

The sad part is Sanskrit texts have commentaries in English. I am working on the subject and studying the language and hope to deal with the lacuna as far as I am concerned. I do not have the intellectual wherewithal to deal with the contentious parts. I repeat my earlier observations in the comments of other of his videos, that Misra ji is a closet libtard, this is based on my watching tens of his videos and the little bits he throws here and there, one example the use of the term "South India". Regarding Oak, I disagree with Misra ji on one count atleast, entertainability, no they are not so, Oak's books are unreadable. I have copies of all three of his books.

It will be great if मिश्रा जी invites नीलेश जी for a friendly discussion. He is scientific in his methodology and uses ine among the top software. It will be greatly appreciated

I have heard Raja ram Mohan Roy on Sattology. He is no where convincing. It is well known that Nityanand Mishra has some personal issues with Nilesh Oak. This exercise Nityanand and Raja Ram Mohan is waste of time.

you cant say him not knowing sanskrit doesnt mean he cant discuss the issue of dating the ramayan. you dont have to know how the entire car works in order to change the tires. one can do just fine. mr. oak uses the descriptions of the position of the moon and timing of the day based on descriptions in the ramayan. so the positions of the stars as described in the ramayan us used to find out when such position had to have happened..

ऐसी किताबें हिंदी में भी आनी चाहिए जिससे कि ज्यादा से ज्यादा लोग इसे पढ़ सके और ज्ञान अर्जित कर सके।

what authority, or understanding you have to call nilesh;s work as "ridiculous"" levels ? what if, if he is actually correct ?? instead of proving your own self as "ridiculous"by talking as a know all, look at noth nilesh and raja ram work critically to actually arrive at the correct dates

Raja Roy's paid *'ADVERTISEMENT'* wasted my time but exposed unscientific lier *'NityaNand Mishra'* 😂

I am not sure about Nityananda Ji's background in science, but dismissing the whole branch of archeoastronomical research tells me he is not well versed with modern scientific advancements. It's specially useful for our culture given the long written evidence of Astronomy (Surya Sidhanta, Vedanga Jotish...) by our Rishis. Regarding Nilesh Ji's limitation in Sanskrit, please mind he works with Jeofry Armstrong (Kavindra Rishi) who is an expert in Sanskrit and in the filed of linguist. Nilesh Ji not only uses archeoastronomy evidence, he uses geological evidence as well. These are very well established fields in modern science. In a nutshell, this review is totally outside of your domain of expertise, unwarranted. Please focus on brining the glories of Sanatana texts to the masses and leave the dating of the historical events to the experts.

Sir, your knowledge of Sanskrit is amazing but please don't extend your advice to areas which you don't know anything of. Nilesh Oak has done amazing work in astronomy and tested and validated it with astronomy evidence in our ancient texts. Please read his books again so that you understand it better.

I'm ready to read alternative theories Nilesh oak has been researching for 30 years of his life on single topic . Even Nilesh oak says " If anyone comes with facts and figures and say his date is inaccurate due to provable evidencs , he will change his theory"

First let us agree that we approach every issue connected with our itihasa with a colonized mind set .Until such time we are washed off completely of our inferiority complex and lowself esteem,let the experts continue to dig for and establish the correct time frame for the various events that took place in the past which we rightfully call itihasa.We will not find the right answers if we keep wasting our time and energy in trying to prove the other wrong.

Mishra babu... Is it ETHICAL TO peddle a book where one has written a foreword while demeaning the opponent's work.. Just asking? 🤔🤔🤔

मान्यवर आपके अनुसार Nilesh Oak जी ने स्वीकार किया है उनकी संस्कृत की First Hand जानकारी बहुत कम है। यह उनकी simplicity है। इस संबंध मे मै ज्यादा Argument नही करूंगा लेकिन Nilesh ji को मैने Frequently एवं spontaneously संस्कृत के श्लोक उद्धृत करते हुए सुना है। इस video मे मैने आपको भी कुछ संस्कृत के लिखे हुए श्लोक पढते हुए सुना। उससे प्रतीत होता है कि Nilesh ji को संस्कृत भाषा की पकड़ बहुत अच्छी है। आपका उनकी Mahabharat date को debunk करने का जो प्रयास है वह unconvincing है।

Why are you not providing your research of our ramayan and mahabharat dates ? what you will get by critisizing Nilesh Oak ? First do your own research and them make such childish comments.

We must discount those who claim to profess themselves as the arbitrators of SCIENCE.

Raja Ram Mohan Roy hated hinduism and used to look down upon Lord krishna ,he said lord krishna lower than his servant in everything morality and character...

Britishers were smart they created Indian side representatives by themselves who talk for British

I am very appalled at this new India where internet popularity is confused as THE truth. The comments here are proof of this insane crowd psychology. Nilesh Oak will remain a fringe element worthy at best as an entertainment as long as he does not publish evidence in a scientific manner. If he does not know Sanskrit and yet goes around publishing books then all of it just bonkers ! Thanks to you and the author of this new book for going against the silly crowd.

Aap log Nilesh Oak ji ke dhool ke barabar bhi nahi hai

Before buying the book, can you pls tell whether Mr. Roy has some dates on Ram and Ramayana than pointing fingers?

I just realised that this Raja Ram Mohan Roy is doing his own research in these areas and got offended because oak's work must have proved this guy wrong in some aspects.

Such a disappointment. The moment the peer review aspect was put forth I knew there were no solid counter arguments to present. Dr Nilesh Oak on the other hand prsents very compelling astronomical, geological & archeological evidences that together corroborate the historicity of events .

I was expecting some scholarly critisism but it is full of hate.Dont give reference of other's books write your own book and give point by point reasons.

U lost a subscriber. I see u r another Dhruv Rathee + Devdutt Patnaik + Romila Thapar hybrid. All you do is attack and call the person you are countering as ridiculous and ludicrous and etc every one and half sentences. I smell huge jealousy! Boo boo. Blah blah....This metaphor is a simile, but not a indication of a description of a season! Ah...when liars have no facts, they fall to semantics. I pity those who fall for your ill concealed bias.

I am ex muslim and only sanatan religion can be analysed rest all christian islam are not even .01% of sanatan dharm in knowledge

9:00 We are not finding pattern by picking up the claim dates to give up our guesses. Therefore we have no basis why to see something as outlier. For me those saying 1700 BC are outlier as then when we will place Gautam Buddha time ( 700 BC ?) and when we place Maurya and Gupta periods? ( 200 BC? and 300 AD? ). This seems in line with earlier leftist claims which are lacking evidence.

So what's the date according to you? Thanks to Nilesh Oak we have many experts come out to debunk them.

I have two points: 1. How peer review is the only parameter of correctness? 2. Who said Ramayan is a poetic creation? Ramcharitmanas can be a poetic work based on real historical work of Shri Valmiki! You too don't have any degree in Sanskrit, so as per your logic your are also a self proclaimed scholar. In this case, how can you say anything to anyone! Technically astronomical data is much more correct then any peer review. Peer review always sufffer from someone's thought process and prejudices! And how does any judgement given in USA is milestone for Bharat? It has no significance and should not be even looked upon!

I Ignored this video after watching first few seconds..not the right attitude to critisize any work

Rishi Oak has been reviewed by millions of peers.

Nilesh has produced more scientific paper in support of 12204, what Dr. raja ram produced that is Zero. I think this book has write for specific purpose and will fail it.

Thank you for making the ebook free until tomorrow. I got my copy!