Religion happens. Eventually science comes along. Islamic and Christian apologetics start defending their religions by denying science. Brahminism starts appropriating science.
While conservative Abrahamics say science is wrong, Hindus say that everything science says was already known to them. And that their religion even knows things science will one day know. Of course, no methodology or data is ever provided for these claims. It's all retroactive refitting and post-hoc rationalisations.
Every scientific development is claimed, including cutting edge hypotheses like string theory, quantum mechanics, and the multiverse. Unlike other religions, Hindus are not in competition with science. They're in competition with the MCU. The thrust of their apologetics mostly is that there is no conflict between modernity and historicity.
And when the conflict becomes undeniable, like the historical oppression of backward castes or other marginalised groups, these things are sought to be painted in pleasant colours. The caste system, we're told, wasn't really an oppressive practice. Or that the British created it.
Never mind that there is scriptural support for these practices as well as an overwhelming amount of contemporary social evidence that demonstrates that not only is caste a reality, it is even accepted and encouraged by people from dominant castes. Though race and caste seem different, the way they are defended are much the same. The differences between Abrahamic faiths Brahminism are many, but in all the ways that matter, Hinduism is just another religion. Its apologetics are only executed somewhat differently. They're not fundamentally unique.