Do you want to believe in intelligent ancient extraterrestrials seeding earth?

I don't really think it's about gods or aliens as much as it is about man and our sins... The company's sins. Things we don't know about that only the company does. David and Weyland acted like priests to Shaw and the crew. They said things acertain way and made each character draw interpretations about what they were looking for. Shaw was looking for her concept of god, while Holloway was looking for another. Weyland had his own... Before the release Ridley hinted that each character has their own agenda. Holloway really did believe the alien astronaut hypothesis, in a way, because he thought these beings were an actual culture and not something way beyond our understanding like Shaw sort of thinks. The proof for this is that Holloway uses an archaeological principle.... aerial photos are taken from above to locate dig sites. Things that are buried can even elevate the ground level in strange ways relative to things around it. When viewed from above the nazca lines tell us that something built them that way, and when we see structures that are linear or have right angles it usually indicates human presence, and can be easy to spot. So Holloway was looking for something and he found it.... He knew they weren't gods... "Gods don't build in straight lines". Very early on Holloway knew we were dealing with a culture that can be compared to humans.... This is why he seems like a jackass to David's not "real boy". We may not be done with Holloway's story and the un-filmed sunken city scene, or mars scenes Ridley has talked about may come back into play. Even though it's not said in the film Holloway has dealt with Weyland before and been on a couple tours. He starts to figure out a lot sooner than everyone else that they are a lot like us. His mistake is thinking it's only a tomb, and not expecting one to be alive. Underestimating their technology because of what he had seen. David is told to keep trying harder to look for the immortality they may possess, and David too knows a lot more than he was saying. The thing that is cleverly hidden in the movie is that Holloway was right... his thesis (talked about in the beginning) was correct, and David is able to speak to them/possibly read their language. Although David may not want to admit this.... Ineffective, or effective as it may be--depending on your viewpoint.

For those who have thought up the possible connection to leviticus, the LV-223 stuff. I like this version of LV-426: "He shall burn all the fat on the altar as he burned the fat of the fellowship offering. In this way the priest will make atonement for the man's sin, and he will be forgiven"

"Faith is the great cop-out, the great excuse to evade the need to think and evaluate evidence. Faith is belief in spite of, even perhaps because of, the lack of evidence." Richard Dawkins Just because something is a mystery does not mean that the extraterrestrial hypothesis is correct. Many of the ancient civilizations are underestimated, when the knowledge and skills of these societies are attributed to the Alien interventions. Even we can say that the proponents of these claims are charlatans who have no idea about ancient symbolism and misinterpret the architecture, art and the religion of these cultures. Also I am a fan of Tolkien's literature, but that doesn't mean that the Hobbits live in my socks. Prometheus for me is a good science fiction movie, but I must confess that I am skeptical about the claims of ancient astronauts, and is not for arrogance as Scott says; is just for lack of evidence as Dawkins says.

The cosmological statistics argue in the favor of the existence of intelligent extraterrestrial life but that is another issue entirely from panspermia - the seeding of planets in the universe either by intelligent life or by microbes piggy backing on asteroids or meteorites. Although is a potential relationship there, just not a direct and sure connection between one and the other.

BTW please differentiate the question that I raised in this post compared to the last one. I am asking each of you if you choose to believe in things because it provides you with security. That is what I was getting at.

I can think a lot about the idea of "Alien seeding earth", because it is an interesting topic. But I don't want to believe in something that is not proven. I want to believe in something that can be proven, depending on the methodology used to arrive at a conclusion, that's what I choose to believe. BTW the meteorites carrying life is very different from what we see in Prometheus, the second is more like Von Daniken's thoughts.

Thanks for clarifying the question nostromo. I did see a distinction between your query and the original in that an affirmative answer to yours requires an additional leap of faith from mere visitors to creators as the role of ancient astonauts. As to the clarified question I must say that I am nominally a chrisitian but I find much of the doctrine difficult to continue to believe as our collective knowledge increases. That being said, one does hope for a paradise despite all evidence to the contrary. I am open to the possibility of other sentient life out there and that they could have visited in the past and been mistaken for gods. Btw I think mala'kak nailed dr shaws beliefs in his expositions

I want to believe in Ancient Aliens. In that there is a circle of Life, Living, Death, Re-birth. But there has to be a start from somewhere. Life in earth is older than we realize. Hints are hidden in folk lore of any civilization anyplace in the world. We are not who we think we are. We are a part of of and a continuation of an Ancient Astronaut. When we arrive in the Planet Mars and find a Weylabnd logo under a rock then we will know our connection to a Star Child and Engineers.

Well malex234 I disagree that Mala'kak nailed the question. I was not asking after the opinions of Drs Shaw or Holloway, but on that subject no one has mentioned here that Holloway, in the extra blu ray material that showed both shaw and holloway talking about the Prometheus project before they left earth, Holloway stated that his purpose was to show that the engineers genetically constructed us not God so he wanted once and for all to smash organized religions based upon God. He was an atheist. OK now back to the subject at hand. Shambala and malex234 both came the closest to answering my post as stated followed. To answer the question exactly in the spirit that it was given you would have to say something like: IMO it is an error in logic to choose to accept a philosophical idea just because of wishful thinking. Like not wanting to believe that our consciousnesses just dissipate when we die as apposed to thinking there is a soul or integral consciousness that either goes on to an afterlife or is reborn in reincarnation. That is a question of faith. While we are all entitled to our philosophical/ spiritual beliefs, the problem comes into play in two ways: 1) The Church has long placed a premium on faith, which is the belief in things without the burden of proof. Jesus preached this idea saying blessed be those who have faith in God and in so doing also love him with all your heart and soul. Since he was the original source of Christian philosophy, I have no problem with his stating such a precept as it is a spiritual idea. In this context it is reasonable if you value his words. Now the Roman Catholic Church and all its spin offs used the idea of faith as a tool to control the flock and act as the intercessor between God and man. Therefore you needed the church and tithes to it to support it if you wanted to go to heaven. They made themselves necessary in the lives of their flock and rich by doing this. 2) the second context where faith has little place is in the realm of science. Its OK to have a gut feeling and follow that because the process of coming to a scientific epiphany often comes from knowledge and information that may be buried in the mind or subconscious. In such cases it can manifest as an intuition or even in a dream but the important distinction here is regardless where the source, all hypotheses at some point need to be proved either through physical experimentation where repeatable results are obtained, or if not possible as in the case of advanced theoretical physics, though initial rigorous mathematics and hopefully in the future through experimentation when the ability to setup the conditions necessary to demonstrate the principle in question exist.

Indy, don't forget to qualify your statements and beliefs. You got off to a good start but it falls apart after the third sentence: 4) "Life in earth is older than we realize. Hints are hidden in folk lore of any civilization anyplace in the world. 5) "We are not who we think we are. We are a part of of and a continuation of an Ancient Astronaut." 6) "When we arrive in the Planet Mars and find a Weylabnd logo under a rock then we will know our connection to a Star Child and Engineers." Starting with statement 4), Life is older than who realizes? There are many reputable modern scientists who believe there may have been ancient advanced cultures that became obliterated either due to internal cultural forces, or by a natural catastrophe. The hints you refer to have found their way into popular culture unfortunately through Eric Von Daniken, who made major mistakes by going too far out on a limb and saying that his data didn't just suggest but rather PROVED that ancient extraterrestrials seeded the earth. That is a cardinal mistake in science. All major hypothesis must be supported by references and other sources or stated in such a way that the data supports that etc..... Do you see what I mean here. After he publishes in the scientific journals, panels of his peers read his articles over and if they all agree then, and only then, can it be published. Statement 5) is just far too broad and is lacking in data. What this statement really is, is an opinion. Opinions are fine as long as you state that it is your opinion. Statement 6) falls under the category of wishful thinking. Sure it would be cool if we found archaeological evidence on Mars of any thing to do with life but that is what you 'choose to believe.', like Dr Shaw.

In response to the posed question my answer is: 1) I believe in GOD because I choose to do so, through my faith. 2) I will believe ancient aliens seeded the Earth when I see proof, or the sequel to Prometheus.

to follow cerulean blues answer format i dont beleive in god..... although sometimes [i]i wish i could[/i] i dont beleive in ancient aliens.. no truly compelling evidence OP asked do you [b]want[/b] to beleive..... well i can see how it would have advantages over encountering aliens in the future who have no ties to us, if like in prometheus we had an advanced ancestor species we would have the opportunity to say "hey you gotta help us out were family" of course you could get a smack in the face as an answer but.....

After rereading this thread and a bit of pondering of the thoughts, I would like, if I may, to pose a scientific question and follow it up with a theological question: 1. What would constitute scientic proof that we were seeded by aliens? 2. In the face of such proof could you maintain a belief in god? In response to the first I must admit that my background is in liberal arts, so short of the saucer landing and the alien showing us how it was done I can only guess at the correct answer to that one. Assuming proof of seeding is shown would undoubtedly undermine all organized religion, but couldn't one still believe in a universal creator. Perhaps the seeders are no more than servants/instruments of a higher power. I personally would want to believe that there is more.

I’m more of a Deist because God is a mnemonic even in the mind of a non-believer. What I choose to believe, is that faith is a tool that is used when faced with those dark corners and moments of existence. It’s an internal force for survival, irrelevant of any religious dogma, but also a convenient mechanism for religious dogma to hide behind. My belief is based on the proof of the natural power of the mind. If we were seeded by aliens, then so what. It does not change my belief system one bit. We have evolved our own mind states along our own unique paths of individual experience and existence. I am, I’m me, stuff em.

@Cerulean You believe in an invisible, all powerful God because of 'Faith' (even without a shred of proof and evidence to the contrary) and yet demand concrete evidence when faced with any other theories. This is just like those who demand proof of the "Theory" of evolution. It's okay for you guys to claim and believe whatever you like, again with no evidence at all. (And please don't say 'scriptural evidence' ) And yet still demand to see the Missing Link in between the missing link in between the missing link. Which, btw are widely available for anyone who can walk into a museum- or read a book less than 2000 years old. Wouldn't devoting your life to the worship of a higher power be the one decision you would want to make in a careful and methodical way, and demand proof for? Anyway, to answer the post: -I believe that Ancient Aliens is much more plausible than any religion I have ever been presented with. It is logical, scientifically possible, and the theory doesn't constantly contradict itself, which is refreshing. -I waver in my belief in an afterlife; believing on darker days, that this thought is just a pacifier for those that cannot bear mortality. Like telling a child "if you're good, Santa will come" Except its "if you're good you get into the most magical, happy place where everyone you love is and nothing bad or scary ever happens!

[img]http://laurendate.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/i_want_to_believe_01.jpg[/img] The truth is out there :-) I believe in other intelligent life.... There are billions of galaxies in the universe= big and reliable evidence for me..

Some of the problems with believing in a God and a heaven is what do you do about Lucifer and Hell? I could never buy the idea that a loving God who made us very imperfect and some people are totally incapable of acting nonviolently and they wind up doing some heinous crime like killing their mother with a hammer - that happened to Jim Gordon, the drummer who played with Eric Clapton and wrote the piano portion on the song Layla. Anyway the point is there is just a lot that doesn't make sense once you start accepting the idea of God , the devil heaven hell purgatory or limbo. Anyway that's enough for now...

As I have stated previously I am a Deist. That means I can have a belief in God, but also completely ignore any ancient scribble relating to the concept of heaven and hell, or Lucifer for that matter. I believe Shaw is a Deist as well, which is why she is a scientist. The reason she wears a crucifix is a sign of respect and remembrance of her Christian upbringing. Not all Deists are the same. Some believe in an afterlife and some don’t. [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deism]Deism...[/url]

What we believe or think we believe will affect our life's work. If you believe in God in any context of that word yiou will see the world filled with references to that God. If you don't believe in anything and just observe, detail, compare, experience you would, it seems to me see more truth. I don't know what life is al about. In our movie we see storylines, charactors and events presented in a format that RS seems to think we may have interest in. And that is of interest to me. No matter what we believe the truth is the truth. The different viewpoints are expressed here reflect each poster's beliefs. I enjoy reading of the different thoughts. But let's not kid ourselves. No one is 'right'. Everyone just has not seen all of the truth yet. We will see RS's truth, his storyline, in the next few episodes. That wil begion a new round of belief's presented by posters. And I find that intersting and worthwhile. Now about that 'goo'.......

To answer the question "Do you want to believe in Ancient Aliens?", I have to answer yes. Otherwise, it seems like an awful waste of space (as was pointed out by Ted Arroway in [i]Contact[/i]). Do I want to believe in an ancient visitation to planet Earth? No. I'd like to think that the building blocks of life can appear and result in intelligent life right across the cosmos. There's no evidence for this, of course, but even quite conservative estimates of factors used in the Drake Equation suggest that new life could be springing up (and perhaps dying out) at upwards of 1,000 civilisations per second. The universe is [i]that[/i] big. However, I wouldn't say that I choose to believe that there are extraterrestrials. In the absence of evidence one way or the other, one's mind should be open to all possibilities. But I certainly [i]want[/i] those civilisations to exist.