It’s definitely not anti-science. In fact, if anything I think it’s pro-science because it advances the idea that part of our own programming as human beings, we’re many ways just as governed by our programming as David is. We have to seek out the answers to these questions, even though we know we’ll never get satisfying answers. We’re curious about what happens as we die. We need to know where we come from. What the meaning of life is. What kind of life we’re supposed to lead. These are all sort of nonscientific, philosophical, religious, and spiritual questions. But the idea that we can find some comfort in science, that science can sort of give us a path to follow in understanding our roots. I think we’re better off from understanding that we’re descended from apes than we are looking at some book that was written 2000 years ago that gives us an explanation for our own roots.

Though Lindelof makes a valid point that the book, presumably the Bible, written 2000 years ago (more like 3000, but the point is made) is worthless in understanding science. However, we didn’t descend from apes, we actually descended from a common ancestor to humans and apes. Lindelof, even in trying to make a valid point about science, doesn’t get it right!

I went to see the movie again (I went with a friend only on the condition that I don’t pay for the ticket, since I couldn’t bring myself to give more money to Ridley Scott).  I noticed something else that bothered me quite a bit. Near the beginning of the movie (after the alien provided the seed of DNA on a planet that apparently already had evolved plant life), the archeologists, Elizabeth Shaw and Charlie Holloway, discover a cave with the star map on the Isle of Skye, a windswept peninsula along the west coast of Scotland. They claim that the cave is 35,000 years old. Which would be interesting save for two large issues:

• Approximately 35,000 years ago Europe was in another cold period, and ice covered all or parts of Scotland during this time, part of the numerous glacial periods (interspersed by warm periods) between 100,000 and 12,000 years before present. 
• At around 35,000 years ago, Homo sapiens had just entered Europe and had no chance of making it to the British Isles at that point in pre-history.
• The earliest evidence of human occupation of the British Isles is around 25,000 years before present.

These aren’t difficult points to uncover. Even the relatively useless Wikipedia could provide the writers with some data to determine if human occupation of the Isle of Skye was even partially reasonable. All they had to do was move the date to 25,000 years ago might have been a better choice, though still probably not very reasonable even then.

Again, either the writers were lazy, disrespectful of science, or were trying to make some other anti-science point that isn’t clear. 

I’m rarely this picky about a movie. Except, I was a big fan of Alien and Aliens. I enjoyed the crazy biology of the alien. I like the spookiness. I waited years for a prequel that kind of explained some of the story. I know that Prometheus isn’t supposed to be a prequel, but that’s a contradictory claim, since one of the very last scenes shows us an alien evolving that looks just like the aliens in the later (in the Alien timeline) movies. The movie wasn’t scary. It had lame characters. The female characters didn’t have any of the strength and leadership of Ripley, played by Sigourney Weaver in the original movies. And the overt anti-science, pro-creationist tones of the movie demolished any interest I might have had.

Don’t waste your time with this movie.