Prometheus was a first

I think that the pop culture movie Prometheus was the first Science Fiction movie to give credence to the idea of Intelligent Design of the human race.

In the plot some scientists were searching for the "engineers" who created human life. Now that's a first.

In one of the Star Trek movies you had the Voyager spacecraft journeying back to earth from deep space searching for ITS maker - man. But in Prometheus you have, what I think is a first. You have man searching for his maker of "engineers" who have designed (sorry) the DNA of human life.

This was the first time that I can think of in SciFi motion pictures that credence was given to the concept of Intelligent Design of humans.

Debunk - lol!

Originally posted by jaywill
I think that the pop culture movie Prometheus was the first Science Fiction movie to give credence to the idea of [b]Intelligent Design of the human race.

In the plot some scientists were searching for the "engineers" who created human life. Now that's a first.

In one of the Star Trek movies you had the Voyager spacecraft journeying back to ea ...[text shortened]... that credence was given to the concept of Intelligent Design of humans.

Debunk - lol![/b]

2001 A Space Odyssey came first I think.

Originally posted by jaywill
I think that the pop culture movie Prometheus was the first Science Fiction movie to give credence to the idea of [b]Intelligent Design of the human race.

In the plot some scientists were searching for the "engineers" who created human life. Now that's a first.

In one of the Star Trek movies you had the Voyager spacecraft journeying back to ea ...[text shortened]... that credence was given to the concept of Intelligent Design of humans.

Debunk - lol![/b]

From 2008:

http://io9.com/5016361/the-happening-is-the-biggest-intelligent-design-movie-of-the-year

Originally posted by avalanchethecat
2001 A Space Odyssey came first I think.

Hmmm.

2001 Space Odyssey was the first in what I would call the mystic Big Question philosophy SciFi films. But you would have to tell me why you think ID of human life was seen in Kubrick's film.

I don't recall that as a theme. You did have pre-human intelligent civilization sending advanced knowledge in the form of a monolith. Back that is not, to me, the same as saying this civilization were the engineers of humans.

Do you see my point ?

Originally posted by JS357
From 2008:

http://io9.com/5016361/the-happening-is-the-biggest-intelligent-design-movie-of-the-year

Correction. You may be right.

Originally posted by jaywill
Hmmm.

2001 Space Odyssey was the first in what I would call the mystic Big Question philosophy SciFi films. But you would have to tell me why you think ID of human life was seen in Kubrick's film.

I don't recall that as a theme. You did have pre-human intelligent civilization sending advanced knowledge in the form of a monolith. Back that is not ...[text shortened]... , the same as saying this civilization were the engineers of humans.

Do you see my point ?

The monolith-builders did far more than just providing advanced knowledge. I guess it's not illustrated very well in the film, but if you read the book there's a strong implication that they engineered the evolution of humankind.

Originally posted by jaywill
I think that the pop culture movie Prometheus was the first Science Fiction movie to give credence to the idea of [b]Intelligent Design of the human race.

In the plot some scientists were searching for the "engineers" who created human life. Now that's a first.

In one of the Star Trek movies you had the Voyager spacecraft journeying back to ea ...[text shortened]... that credence was given to the concept of Intelligent Design of humans.

Debunk - lol![/b]

First you evidently have not read or watched much sci-fi if you think that Prometheus was first for really anything,
apart from maybe the latest generation special effects. Cos it did look pretty, which is about the only thing it did right.

And second, it hardly advances your case if your example of ID in films is a film that is being roundly and rightly
criticised for being utterly and spectacularly crap in it's representation of science, scientists, and the scientific method.
As well as bad script writing of both plot and dialogue. (hint, if you have to make everyone epicly stupid for your plot to
work and you are not making a B-movie horror spoof, you are doing it wrong.)

Note, many many spoilers in links...

http://freethoughtblogs.com/axp/2012/06/10/prometheus-pandering-to-anti-science/

http://digitaldigging.net/prometheus-an-archaeological-perspective/

http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/the-science-of-prometheus/

http://blip.tv/the-spoony-experiment/vlog-6-8-12-prometheus-6194523

Originally posted by avalanchethecat
The monolith-builders did far more than just providing advanced knowledge. I guess it's not illustrated very well in the film, but if you read the book there's a strong implication that they engineered the evolution of humankind.

I did not read the book. And the ending of the film left me puzzled.
Someone once told me that the ending only made sense if you had read some book by Fredrich Nietzsche which I also hadn't read.

You know more about it then if you know the book 2001 Space Odssey..

Originally posted by googlefudge
First you evidently have not read or watched much sci-fi if you think that Prometheus was first for really anything,
apart from maybe the latest generation special effects. Cos it did look pretty, which is about the only thing it did right.

And second, it hardly advances your case if your example of ID in films is a film that is being roundly and ri e-science-of-prometheus/

http://blip.tv/the-spoony-experiment/vlog-6-8-12-prometheus-6194523

And second, it hardly advances your case if your example of ID in films is a film that is being roundly and rightly criticised for being utterly and spectacularly crap in it's representation of science, scientists, and the scientific method.

I think ID does well enough on its own.

I also think while loud and proud die hard Evolution Only guys are hooting down any suggestion of any other possible theory, something else is going on. The really smart Evolutionists are scheming how they can take credit for ID in the future.

Mark my words. Soon Evos will be bragging that ID was their idea all along anyway.

As well as bad script writing of both plot and dialogue. (hint, if you have to make everyone epicly stupid for your plot to
work and you are not making a B-movie horror spoof, you are doing it wrong.)

That may be true. But people who are not stupid realize that Intelligent Design is not as bad an idea as some militant Evolutionists want everyone to think it is.

The loudness of critics is not always the best gage of what a large portion of the populace believes.

Originally posted by googlefudge
First you evidently have not read or watched much sci-fi if you think that Prometheus was first for really anything,
apart from maybe the latest generation special effects. Cos it did look pretty, which is about the only thing it did right.

And second, it hardly advances your case if your example of ID in films is a film that is being roundly and ri e-science-of-prometheus/

http://blip.tv/the-spoony-experiment/vlog-6-8-12-prometheus-6194523

Spoiler alert

Prometheus crew training exam Q1

You are on an unknown alien planet. You become separated from the only members of your crew with any medical or scientific knowledge. An alien creature pops its 'head' up out of some form of ooze flowing round the room you are in. Do you:

A. Evacuate the room bemoaning the fact that, despite the mission's apparent technological sophistication, you are wholly unprepared for predictable contingencies of this nature.

B. Evacuate your bowels. (More realistic than what happened)

C. Try to tickle it under what appears to be its chin but, for all you know, could be its acutely inflamed and painful sexual organs.

Ridley Scott - what were you thinking?

Originally posted by avalanchethecat
The monolith-builders did far more than just providing advanced knowledge. I guess it's not illustrated very well in the film, but if you read the book there's a strong implication that they engineered the evolution of humankind.

If we are dealing with movies only, ignore this; but Vonnegut's novel The Sirens of Titan, which IMO should be made into an animated movie, has...

spoiler alert!

Reveal Hidden Content

some might say this theme trivializes human history, but from the POV of the Reveal Hidden Content it completely justifies that history.

Originally posted by JS357
If we are dealing with movies only, ignore this; but Vonnegut's novel The Sirens of Titan, which IMO should be made into an animated movie, has...

spoiler alert!

[hidden] ...human history being all about getting a replacement part to a robot/person(?) for its/his spaceship. The part looks just like an old fashioned beer can opener, the Great Wall ...[text shortened]... ry, but from the POV of the [hidden]robot/person[/hidden] it completely justifies that history.

one of my most favorite books of all time!!!

Originally posted by jaywill

And second, it hardly advances your case if your example of ID in films is a film that is being roundly and rightly criticised for being utterly and spectacularly crap in it's representation of science, scientists, and the scientific method.

I think ID does well enough on its own.

I also think while loud and proud die hard Evolut ...[text shortened]... udness of critics is not always the best gage of what a large portion of the populace believes.

You are talking complete and utter rubbish as normal.


Stick to talking about the views of religious nut jobs...

You evidently have no clue how scientists and skeptics think.

Originally posted by JS357
From 2008:

http://io9.com/5016361/the-happening-is-the-biggest-intelligent-design-movie-of-the-year

HalleluYah !!! Praise the Lord!

Originally posted by googlefudge
You are talking complete and utter rubbish as normal.


Stick to talking about the views of religious nut jobs...

You evidently have no clue how scientists and skeptics think.

You evidently have no clue how scientists and skeptics think.

I know enough to recognize that you're lousy at both.