I guess the element of "could simply be chance" is a reverse function of either accuracy or the number of examples or the number of points involved. So I'm more sympathetic to something being deliberately like the plough for instance than something being deliberately like Orion.
T'other thing about Orion, if you look up in the sky and try to draw it, and then represent your drawing on the ground it probably won't be very good - so saying a monument is an accurate representation of Orion involves an extra step - that THEY were extremely good - or lucky.

I think my strongest "belief" is in straight line alignments as they can simply be seen and don't need any extra speculation about whether or not they represented anything else. And if they are very, very accurate in all three dimensions, to an error of perhaps a few feet only over the distance of a mile, well....