Larger plot themes and mystery of blue guys possibly solved.
whiskuzMember
Rank: OvomorphXP: 02,708 Views
42 Replies
centrosphereApril 08, 2012
I didn´t know the talk about previous hominids; thanks to bring that, whiskuz. It throws some new directions to the plot, if it´s not only a decoy.
The problem is, I can´t see the rationale of some previous advanced civilization leaving Earth; to me there is only one scenario where this could hold: post-Singularity civilization that leaved organic bodies and live "in silica" (or something like that). But this seems not to go well with Scott, in my opinion; even Blade Runner´s world was not the classic cyberpunk future.

Biehn_BanditApril 08, 2012
We can say with no amount of certainty, but all these points are plausible. The parallels to 2001 are only going to get stronger the more we uncover, that film being one of the defining films in RS's life.
There is imagery we've seen so far that suggests to me to believe we steal something, a physical object, I mean besides the jockey head. I'm leaning towards that kind of simpler answer for the events surrounding the Prometheus mission and crew. The ideas about creation and evolutoin presented throughout the film will be where any complexity is situated.
CementheadApril 08, 2012
Whiskuz I am right with you on the Blue men being original humanoids on earth. Especially as I think the SJ's have not been revealed and will not be until the film is released. I would be up for this scenario of a link between us and the Blue humanoids (Titans) and some sort of retribution delivered on us by the Gods. That sounds more exciting a plot to me!
artyohApril 08, 2012
OMG!......... please, no goofy atlantean/lost knowledge nonsense in this movie! The record reflects that we clearly aren't the first hominids on Earth, but we[i] are[/i] the first to attain anything remotely close to our present level of technology. There's zero tangible evidence for any other conclusion. No pseudo-science fiction, puhleeeze!
JedijohnryanApril 08, 2012
I totally agree with artyoh! Let's leave it to the suspense of the movie. Whiskuz, nice attempt to the explore the plot and make sense of this all but I think you are way off. We will all know the truth once the movie reveals such and I can't wait to tell a lot of folks, "I told you so!"
The blue men are not from Earth. They are a much more advanced civilization than our primitive one. Yes, "primitive" one. Check out my post under the link exploring the Age of the Derelict ship where I shed a lot of light on things. But it's only my guestimate. Any, yes, this planet is the original Alien movie planet, ship and SJ.
NecrofanApril 08, 2012
I am a fan of the idea that intelligent life on Earth has evolved, and subsequently been wiped out by one means or another, several times. Maybe even farther back than the fossil record can show. That, to me, is fascinating. And would fit in well within this story without stepping on too many canon-toes.
whiskuzApril 08, 2012
Appreciate all the comments. And I see all your points.
I will say that Ridley appears to believe that there could have been intelligent life on earth sometime in the 1-3 billion year life of the earth. He says it in several different interviews. Something else to consider is the fact that it also appears the "removal" of that life could be an element of the story and explain why we find no evidence.
Finally, I have to say I think the comment about pseudo science is silly in a forum about alien movies!!!!!!! I understand the difference between science fiction and hard science fiction, but Alien was not hard science fiction, neither was Blade Runner. I understand your concern though.

TheNextLV426April 08, 2012
@artyoh I'm with you. If Xenos or SJs are time travelers or from Atlantis I'll weep

draekusApril 08, 2012
Well the posts in this thread obviously prove that no matter what you do, you can't please everyone.
Not sure why everyone's against the "SJ's are from Atlantis and are ancient Homonids" theory. I've said it before...I don't mInd either way as long as Ridley and the studio deliver a good movie. I guess it's best to keep an open mind until the movie is released.
artyohApril 08, 2012
No, "Alien" wasn't "hard" sci-fi, but it wasn't a fluffy marshmallow of completely speculative silliness, either. The law of averages strongly suggests that there's other life out there, but there's zero tangible evidence for high-tech terrestrial civilizations completely lost to history and the fossil record ( which goes back literally [i]billions[/i] of years. ) I agree with Biehn_Bandit, that this movie is looking like Scotts' twisted take on '"2001." SJ tech may end up "evolving" one or more crew-members, but if that happens, it will be for a much darker purpose than the star-child, IMO. I don't believe the SJ ( or crew-member ) is heading back to Earth in order to wipe us out. There are far worse fates, than that.

FamishedApril 08, 2012
A recursive evolution is not time travel. It's more akin to the idea that history repeats itself. Nobody here is popping into the future or past.
That said, the ideas inherent to theoretical physics, the nature of time, are every bit as much hard science as aliens and FTL, which you already have going on in this film. Just because it doesn't jibe with your taste for science fiction, doesn't make it any less valid as an idea device for the film.
Again, however, within the narrative of the film, these answers will likely be ambiguous and still debatable, so I'd imagine we'll have similar factions of thought even after the film is released. You'll be led to your own conclusions.
whiskuzApril 08, 2012
Actually, there is a lot of evidence that there were cultures with far greater technology (nuclear reactors/weapons, dry cell batteries, and the ability to manipulate stone in ways we still can't) than the current paradigm suggests [i]within[/i] our reign as the dominant species on the planet. And Ridley obviously buys into the ancient alien explanation.
Before that, yeah not so much. But seriously, what would be left of a civilization that existed 1.5 billion years ago? I'm asking because I'm not an expert in this area. Do you know with certainty that there would be evidence we should have discovered by now? Explain, I'm interested.
Unfortunately for the fans that feel like you guys, Ridley has already said this is a film about the origins of life on earth. That doesn't mean it's a take on 2001, it just means it deals with the same subject matter, which is pretty universal. I think what makes it interesting is that we know a lot more about the universe, previous civilizations, and carbon based life now than we did when 2001 was written. I think weaving that new information into a science fiction movie by Ridley and Damon sounds awesome. I am curious to know what you guys feel would make this a good movie, but I'm starting a new thread because I think it's a good question.

thefaceheadApril 08, 2012
I think we need to take it back to basics and speculate the SJ. IMO the chaired SJ (from Alien, that is given a LOT of screen time (for a mere prop) is of vital importance and with this film tying in to Alien in the last 15 mins (Ridders words not mine) we need to be looking at this dude and........
A) are you in the SJ from Alien?
B) if not, why not?
If you, like me, do believe it's THE SJ from Alien then IMO I think this may actually be a crew member from Prometheus. Wouldn't it be ironic that Peter Weyland was in fact the SJ mutated? Maybe it's HIS distress signal that HIS company's mining ship is sent to rescue/discover??
artyohApril 08, 2012
Dude, there isn't an iota of evidence........of any kind whatsoever.....that there was [i]any[/i] form of life on land, more complex than [i]algae[/i], 1.5 billion years ago.......and it's kinda tough to have an advanced civilization without fire.....which is rather difficult to start under water.
.....and "nuclear reactors'?!?!
*blink-blink* mkay, I give up.

Biehn_BanditApril 08, 2012
It is a take on 2001 if it falls in line with Whiskuz point no. 2. If this is a story Ridley has had on his mind for years, I don't doubt for a second that the impact of 2001 on his formative mind is part of the drive behind it.
artyohApril 08, 2012
I don't have a problem with the notion of ETs meddling with our DNA, but pretty please, leave "atlanteans" out of it.
whiskuzApril 08, 2012
The great pyramid of Giza is the only Egyptian pyramid that isn't obviously designed for humans to move around in. Nobody really knows why. However, recently engineers have found evidence that the pyramid was designed to mix two chemicals, which are both available nearby, to produce gas that releases microwaves. The set up of the chambers is perfect for it and the residue which is a by product of that reaction is all over the larger chamber where the two chemicals would have been poured in to mix. The microwaves would have shot out two horizontal shafts and out into space. Its just a theory, but the point is we really don't know nearly as much as we think about the past. I'm not saying I believe that, but I'm open to any theory that can explain the physical evidence.
It's funny to me that we have sites all over the world that run completely contrary to the current paradigm regarding ancient civilizations level of knowledge and technology, but any explanation that doesn't fit into that erroneous paradigm is "silly."
I'll finish by saying that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
whiskuzApril 08, 2012

Biehn_BanditApril 08, 2012
I've said this before here, but never underestimate modern man's ability to underestimate the ability of earlier civilizations. Just because we can't fathom it, doesn't mean they couldn't.
whiskuzApril 08, 2012
Yep, I agree 100%. A lot of science fiction short stories are about alien civilizations that discover technology in sequences different than our own.
Imagine how different things might be if we hadn't developed computer technology when we did, but stumbled onto cold fusion instead. That's what I love about good hard sci-fi. It asks questions like that and gives plausible answers. Not that I don't like the more imaginative stuff too, but hard sci-fi has given me some great realizations over the years.
Love the disagreement though.
"thereyouareJonesy"April 08, 2012
Hi
Very interesting read this post lots of stuff to think about.
Regarding the intelligent / civilization before us stuff, i think its fair to say that if there was there would be evidence, when we are gone there will be lots of stuff to say to whatever follows that we were here. Even if all evidence was somehow wiped from the face of the planet what about all the stuff in orbit and pottering about the solar-system ? rover and probes on the other planets too. Surely we would have found things like that.
we have records of fossils like Masons Charnia which is around 610 millions years old and nothing much prior to that, these are the roots of complex life on earth so imagining stuff before that is pushing it a bit.
"thereyouareJonesy"April 08, 2012
Oh yeh, we didnt stumble onto Computer technology we developed it and improved it generation by generation. Abacus then cogs and gears in weaving machines then not much for a bit then Bill Gates then Ping !! your using the offspring right now as am i. I think its right to say that cold fusion or any other high energy technology would be unknowable without computers so one must follow the other skipping isnt going to work.

HeustessApril 08, 2012
"Are we the first hominids? I really, really, really doubt it. In recent memory or legend we keep talking about wonderful, weird things such as Atlantis – what is that?"
Seriously you should all read Doris Lessing's Canopus in Argos series.
GuestApril 08, 2012
There are no fewer than three good, plausible, everyday sites that may explain the Atlantis legend: Santorini island volcano in Greece (ancient explosion & megatsunami destroyed the Minoan civilization), the Canary islands in the Atlantic (volcanic explosions, earthquake landslides, and tsunamis of course), and southern Spain (researchers claim to have found remains of settlements with the curious ringed form described for Atlantis. So really no need for blue Atlantean almost-humans seeding multicellular life; a more alien-looking species than that seeding multicellular life, why not. But the Atlantis angle pushes it into Stilton/Gouda territory. Or Gruyere, given Hans Ruedi Giger is Swiss. As for recent memory and legend, those are merely echoes of the pre-writing age, when oral tradition was everything; some of those stories were kept, and then blown up out of all proportion.

Synthrimonger94April 08, 2012
@Whiskuz
I disscussed this possibility in one of my previous posts
http://www.prometheus-movie.com/community/forums/topic/2965
GuestApril 08, 2012
The thing about this are we the first stuff is that Books and arguments and tales and legends are not proof !. Dinosaurs - fossils ! ok good, cave men - cave paintings and bits of flint napped to make cutting tools and some carved bones and stuff hinting at culture so ok fairly evident. Ghosts - er no not really anything just some dodgy photos. Aliens - well not yet no, and its not like we arnt trying, nothing in a museum or suitable to be taught in schools or anything. Atlantis - again not much to show is there, where was it ? dunno, are there any relics in say roman or greek historical archives we can see ?? nope, well not anywhere any self respecting professor of ancient history would put his name to no.

mlb127April 08, 2012
Has anyone noyiced that the full appearance of the Big Blue SJ's are restricted to the orrery room?They might night even exist any more,they could be a Hologram.And why isn't the Blue SJ we see pulling up the chair not in one of the suits we see hanging?
And I agree that the Atlantean theme would be lame.Ridley goes to his marquee achievement as an artist and only copies a myth? Bay and Emerich would do that but noy Ridley(hopefully!!).
GuestApril 08, 2012
I didn't say that we stumbled upon computer technology, I said developed. And I said "stumbled" when referring to cold fusion because without computers, there would likely be some stumbling involved. And there have been countless major discoveries that were stumbled upon while investigating something else or just tinkering.
My point is this: to think that the order in which we have discovered various aspects of the rules we understand the universe to follow, and thus related technologies, is the only order that is possible wouldn't be correct. Science is like a tree with a lot of branches; discoveries spur research in one direction and pull resources from others. There's no telling what would be different about our society if instead of harnessing the electro-magnetic force via a slew of early discoveries, we learned how to harness gravity as a source of power. Its very easy to say that electricity is just "easier" to harness, but that would be circular reasoning barring an explanation I've never heard: it's easier because we harnessed it first, and we harnessed it first because it's easier.
We discovered unbelievable amounts of information about our universe without computers and I think you have to accept the fact that there are things we haven't discovered yet which could very easily have been discovered a long time ago. There are a lot of discoveries that are very closely related to things we've know for a long time, but which, for various reasons, aren't discovered until much later. The opposite is true for other things.
Look at the Aztecs for example. They had no beasts of burden so they had no real system of roads like Europe did, but they were far more advanced in city planning, mathematics, and a number of other areas. They also didn't try to exterminate their enemies, so there weapons were designed to maim so that enemies could be used for sacrifice. European warfare was much more focused on killing everyone on the opposing side, so they had far more sophisticated armor and weaponry. Imagine this on a cosmic scale.
Just my opinion.
centrosphereApril 08, 2012
The topic is very interesting.
Maybe you don´t know, but there is no other species on Earth whose individuals are as big as humans living in such big numbers as us around the globe. This means that the premium mother Nature pays us for our competitivity in the darwinian race is: huge human biomass around.
This means that if the Earth ever was home to another intelligent species in the deeps of time, we should be able to see their fossils. But we aren´t. This probably happens because there wasn´t other intelligent species.
BTW this is one of the more disputated variables in the Drake Equation, the equation that try to stablish the number of advanced civilizations around in the Universe: the probability of intelligence arising. The time lag between emergence of life on earth and the rise of intelligent life (us) seems to correlates well with the fact that the Universe seems relatively empty (there are no signals from space - nobody is broadcasting us).

artyohApril 08, 2012
@Centrosphere
This is from an unfinished original sci-fi screenplay I was fooling around with several years ago: "Intelligent species that employ technology as their primary survival strategy may represent an aberration…an evolutionary blunder down a dark, dead end alley…… that would have chilling implications…… It might be the general rule that technological civilizations nearly always fry out like an overloaded fuse, instead of burning slowly and steadily like a candle…. We already know the light of knowledge can be applied either way.

birdmanApril 08, 2012
I'm thinking about the resurrection process Weyland's site has mentioned. The space jockey head/helmet is set upon their medical lab scanner and we see it being scanned in the preview. At one point, Shaw is looking at the head in amazement from across the room, with the head in the foreground. Maybe they utilized Weyland's resurrection process on it and the blue meanies don't dig it? Maybe they're thinking we're too advanced and corrupt to bring back the dead?
GuestApril 09, 2012
In my theory it turns out that many of the myths that appear cross-culturally, like the flood story and/or myths about a lost island empire, were true... in a way more horrible than we could ever imagine. What you have to understand is that in this theory they were punished by a second more mysterious race and left Earth to challenge the true gods while gaining the terraforming/world flooding tech. They use an alien bio infection followed by a massive worldwide flood that they cause to clean up everything they've just inflicted upon a world that's misbehaved. Submerging continents, raising new ones. Destroying Pangaea. Saving some humans the next times the ice age/ rapid melting are brought on. Moving all traces of possible evidence into the realm of underwater archaeology, which is a huge area of debate right now when it comes to some of the underwater ruins that are over 7 000 years old. What's funny is lack of oxygen can lead to better preservation in certain cases. Speaking as someone who works with archaeologists, there's a lot more support for Atlantis possibly existing at one time than there is for ancient aliens. Definitely no where near as far back as Ridley was saying. He even got his numbers wrong about the age of the Earth, which is closer to 4.6-4.8 billion years old. Hopefully he has other writers in charge of the numbers... Even when you accept stuff like the Annunaki they could have been talking about the same group as there are many similarities... and one god-king had control of the oceans. There's a lot more yet to be explained in the form of literally 1000's of now submerged stone complexes that predate some of our earliest civilizations, all around the world.
The flood's also used to wipe out all traces of the infection until the infection changed in the ancient past; like was hinted in some of the EU stuff about the space jockeys once being at war with another race, and being nearly extinct.
The blue guys are successful in overthrowing them and become the new gods and acquire even more of their tech. The true gods tried to save us from the flood, as well as punished the ancient humans who were becoming more like the Atlanteans and misusing the gifts we'd been given.

Mala'kakApril 09, 2012
In my theory the ideas in this movie are huge and it turns out that many of the myths that appear cross-culturally, like the flood story and/or myths about a lost island empire, were true... in a way more horrible than we could ever imagine. What you have to understand is that in this theory they were punished by a second more mysterious race and left Earth to challenge the true gods while gaining the terraforming/world flooding tech. They use an alien bio infection followed by a massive worldwide flood that they cause to clean up everything they've just inflicted upon a world that's misbehaved. Submerging continents, raising new ones. Destroying Pangaea. Saving some humans the next times the ice age/ rapid melting are brought on. Moving all traces of possible evidence into the realm of underwater archaeology, which is a huge area of debate right now when it comes to some of the underwater ruins that are over 7 000 years old. What's funny is lack of oxygen can lead to better preservation in certain cases. Speaking as someone who works with archaeologists, there's a lot more support for Atlantis possibly existing at one time than there is for ancient aliens. Definitely no where near as far back as Ridley was saying. He even got his numbers wrong about the age of the Earth, which is closer to 4.6-4.8 billion years old. Hopefully he has other writers in charge of the numbers... Even when you accept stuff like the Annunaki they could have been talking about the same group as there are many similarities... and one god-king had control of the oceans. There's a lot more yet to be explained in the form of literally 1000's of now submerged stone complexes that predate some of our earliest civilizations, all around the world.
The flood's also used to wipe out all traces of the infection until the infection changed in the ancient past; like was hinted in some of the EU stuff about the space jockeys once being at war with another race, and being nearly extinct.
The blue guys are successful in overthrowing them and become the new gods and acquire even more of their tech. The true gods tried to save us from the flood, as well as punished the ancient humans who were becoming more like the Atlanteans and misusing the gifts we'd been given.

GavinApril 09, 2012
In the empire magazine interview (see news section) Ridley makes comment, in passing, of the possibility of a pre-history humanoid race on earth, as per what the OP is suggesting.
Depending on what point of history this race existed, it is possible that the fossil record for such a race would no longer exist, because the layer of rock in which it resided has since been reconstituted into the magma and lava beneath the Earths crust. Any remaining evidence would have been [u]so[/u] broken down by other processes it wouldn't even be recognizable anymore.
I'm not saying that I believe such a race existed, but that it may be a possibility. The scientific community of today believes it holds most of the answers, when in reality they only hold some. The rest are either half-wrong or completely wrong. We are, after all a primitive, post-industrial race with limited intelligence.
centrosphereApril 09, 2012
@artyoh
Very good; do you know the short story "Swarm", from Bruce Sterling ? You can find it in "[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schismatrix]Schismatrix[/url]".
At the center of the plot, actually, is a race of beings that have intelligence in low consideration, and only use it when they are at risk at the hands of other intelligent races. I don´t buy all the aspects, but it put me to think about the actual evolutionary fitness benefits of intelligence in other, very strange, light.
centrosphereApril 09, 2012
Snorkelbottom,
"[i]Depending on what point of history this race existed, it is possible that the fossil record for such a race would no longer exist, because the layer of rock in which it resided has since been reconstituted into the magma and lava beneath the Earths crust. Any remaining evidence would have been so broken down by other processes it wouldn't even be recognizable anymore[/i]."
You couldn´t possibly think of intelligent life before the emergence of multicellular organisms, since intelligence is based in a vast network of specialized cells (the neurons). Multicellular organisms evolved circa 1.6 - 1.0 billion years ago, in an geological age known as Mesoproterozoic. The oldest rocks on continents are regularly dated from circa 3.8 - 2.5 billion years, with the most ancient registered dated from 4.0 billion years. So, the existing crust should be littered with fossils of any intelligent species who lived in so great numbers and predominance of biomass as us.
I agree that the fossil record is "holed", but these numbers, I think, put a low probability to the existence of previous intelligent races.




