Is God an alien? - Part 1

During the world war 2, an American pilot crash landed in a remote african jungle. The natives of this forest, who were a bunch of isolated tribes, declared him God for the modern day gadgets he carried were totally alien to them. And ofcourse, for them he had landed from the sky. So they elavated him to the position of "God" and built a new religion around him. To date, they worship the left overs, which include a broken cigerate lighter, parts of the fighter plane that had crashed and a rusted knife.
Could this have happened with the ancient cave men on earth. Some one from a distant planet have had visited Earth one of their journey through space. Cave men took them for Gods and started worshipping.
Erich von Daniken in his famous book, "Charriots of the Gods", coined this idea and made us think in this direction pragmatically. Star Trek - TOS, dealt with this idea throught it's 3 season's. But when TNG aired in the 80s they tried not to venture in to it, by forcing "Prime Directive" (by which, humans, do not reveal their presence to a non space travelling race) in to their scripts.
If one looks at the history of mankind, from what we have discovered so far, man lived in caves primitively for centuries and then suddenly one could see the birth of civilizations and structures such as Pyramids, Sphinx, Machu Picchu, whose architectures are difficult to explain even with modern science. So we see a gap between the cave men and the civilizations? Did we get visited by aliens and did they transfer inteligence by which mankind could build cities and eventually build the wonders of ancient civilizations?
Well, we don't have the answers at the moment, modern science is still in its infant stage to explain all this. Only time would tell us.

To be continued....

Disclaimer - I am not proving / disproving the existence of God, and I am not an atheist. But I merely am trying to think about the concept of God from another dimension. Having said this, I truly believe in 'Universal Consciousness’.

Nikon D60 - Is it worth it?

Of late, I have been reading up a lot about photography and DSLR in particular. Having zeroed on to Nikon D40, I now wait for my bonus money to splurge on this gadget. Meanwhile, Nikon discontinued it's Nikon D40X series and has introduced a Nikon D60 at the PMA 2008. Is it worth buying a D60 over D40? I personally don't think so. Why? Well for starter, the price is about 60 % more for very less features.
What's new with D60? Well, you can read all the technical details here. But in a nutshell, these are the new features and what I think of them compared to a cheaper D40 -

Price - This is the deciding factor for an Indian buyer. D40 is selling at about 470$ vs D60 debuing at 750$ (60 % expensive)
Integrated Dust Reduction System - Hmm, Nikon has come out with a feature that Canon had in it's camera for years. Well to be honest, I would rather not pay to Nikon instead spend about 10 $ on a blower and clean the prism when really needed
Active D-Lighting for smoother gradation - Well, this seems like a marketing gimmick
Eye Sensor and orientation - Now these 2 are the most useful feature that I think an amateur would want. Eye sensor would swtich off the LCD when I try to look through the view finder. And the orientation of the menu is a concept copied from iPhone, which also would be very nice to have.
But 60% on a camera which essentially is Nikon D40? Well, not really worth it. Eventually, Nikon would probably phase out the Nikon D40s and make D60 as the entry level with prices dropped. But for now, it makes one wiser to go for Nikon D40 and save up that extra money for better use.

Please read Nikon site here for more details