Earliest cave paintings produced by humans Discovered , 40,000 years old

a reply to: Kandinsky

Hi Kandinsky thanks for the info mate , I'm left handed

I think art is hardwired into us like religion , I think maybe they both serve some sort of function for the brain , perhaps they are part of evolution and the reason we are who we are.

a reply to: gortex

Absolutely!

Art has enabled one individual to express ideas to others through time and space. There'd be no schematics for the Voyager II if it wasn't for some hairy ancestor scratching a symbol into a piece of wood or a rock surface.

Even in this thread, at least one person will go away and be changed by the actions of those paint-spraying vandals from 40kya. I bet there were some elders tut-tutting at the new-fangled decor in the caves. 'When we were kids, plain cave walls were good enough. Now it's all la-de-dah and showing off...'

originally posted by: EnigmaAgent
a reply to: rickymouse



No they fill their mouths with dye/paint and blow/spray the mixture over their hands.lol

Well, to be fair, that IS a form of spray paint, just not in the conventional sense.

originally posted by: Kandinsky
a reply to: gortex

Absolutely!

Art has enabled one individual to express ideas to others through time and space. There'd be no schematics for the Voyager II if it wasn't for some hairy ancestor scratching a symbol into a piece of wood or a rock surface.

Even in this thread, at least one person will go away and be changed by the actions of those paint-spraying vandals from 40kya. I bet there were some elders tut-tutting at the new-fangled decor in the caves. 'When we were kids, plain cave walls were good enough. Now it's all la-de-dah and showing off...'

......When I was growing up and some A-@#$% wanted to paint a stupid picture he had to go kill a antelope and tan the skin now days they use oup valuable torches and fat to mark up these caves, horrid I tell you horrid.

a reply to: stormcell

Whoa, I think you are on to something there.

This discovery is very cool, and very important. It puts to bed the long-held assumption that the human 'creative explosion' was a strictly European one. I admit that I always sort of accepted it, but I also found it odd that it wasn't thought to have happened elsewhere until later. This is proof that art came with humanity out of Africa, maybe even pre-dates modern humans.

There are hand stencil paintings from Spain that are nearly identical as these new finds, and on the other side of the planet! And dated to roughly the same time. That's pretty interesting.. I guess prehistoric folks felt an impulse to leave a sense that they as an individual was at a certain place, and not being able to scribble their names with a Sharpie on a bathroom stall, they stenciled their hands on the wall.

It's also really cool that they were able to say that people had been painting at that specific cave over a span of 13,000 years.

originally posted by: igor_ats
That goat drawing is strange. . . it's very intricately designed and well-drawn for a "primative".

Look at all the other cave drawings around the world. . . they pale in comparison. . . like a 8 year old compared to a teenager. Hope you get what I mean.

That's not true. Have you ever seen the pictographs in Lascaux or Chauvet? They're very sophisticated. In fact, Picasso visited Lascaux and when he left he said, "We have learned nothing" meaning that art had not advanced beyond the quality in Lascaux cave.

originally posted by: Hanslune
a reply to: SLAYER69

On skins and wood I would suspect or on rocks outside the cave, they probably painted all over and on everything but only those protected by the cave survived.

That's the point I was getting at. I wonder just how much further back articulate drawings/representations really do go back. Some of the ones that we do know of are pretty darn impressive considering the time they were made.

originally posted by: Monger
This discovery is very cool, and very important. It puts to bed the long-held assumption that the human 'creative explosion' was a strictly European one. I admit that I always sort of accepted it, but I also found it odd that it wasn't thought to have happened elsewhere until later. This is proof that art came with humanity out of Africa, maybe even pre-dates modern humans.

There are hand stencil paintings from Spain that are nearly identical as these new finds, and on the other side of the planet! And dated to roughly the same time. That's pretty interesting.. I guess prehistoric folks felt an impulse to leave a sense that they as an individual was at a certain place, and not being able to scribble their names with a Sharpie on a bathroom stall, they stenciled their hands on the wall.

It's also really cool that they were able to say that people had been painting at that specific cave over a span of 13,000 years.

It's likely that much of this is ritualistic. In the case of hands, it might have been part of an initiation ritual. The work in caves like Lascaux and Chauvet is very sophisticated and done by highly skilled artists. It was far from doodling. Some of the rock art not deep inside caves (on rock overhangs, for example) functioned as markers indicating water sources and significant locations or directions or events. Of course the purpose of much of it is unknown. Petroglyphs (ie. rock is chipped away) took a great deal of time and effort to create. Get a rock and try to create one using antler or rock. It takes massive effort. This makes it highly unlikely that it was created as doodles.

Also, take into account that venturing deep inside a cave with only a torch that could go out was probably very frightening. The most magnificent rock art is found in such places and likely placed there by shamans who took people into the cave for transformative rituals. Very few modern humans with flashlights dare venture deep into caves.

originally posted by: SecretKnowledge
a reply to: gortex

40,000 years ago?

But, but, but are'nt we only 6,000 years old ????

Do we have any real scientific data on the dating methods, is it rock solid in accuracy...no... so you assume your belief, science is right and the dates are good, thats faith in action.
Can someone show me how they deduced the art to be 40000 years old please.

Another bizarre concept is the belief that these cavemen were backwards. I think its time we stopped thinking these early people were less intelligent than modern people.
Many people today live simple hunter gatherer lifestyles like those who created those pictures did.

As for the left and right handed assumption, seriously?
So because of the amount of left handed outlines you assume that they were left handed, why?

a reply to: borntowatch

Do we have any real scientific data on the dating methods

Yes.

To date the Indonesian paintings, Aubert and his colleagues looked at calcium carbonate deposits known as “cave popcorn” that formed as mineral-rich water trickled down the cave walls. The deposits contain low levels of radioactive uranium which decays into thorium at a known rate, providing an effective geological clock. The age of cave popcorn that formed on top of paintings gave the researchers a minimum age for the images, while samples from underneath the cave art gave them maximum ages.
www.theguardian.com...

So because of the amount of left handed outlines you assume that they were left handed, why?

Why shouldn't they be ?

originally posted by: SLAYER69

originally posted by: Hanslune
a reply to: SLAYER69

On skins and wood I would suspect or on rocks outside the cave, they probably painted all over and on everything but only those protected by the cave survived.

That's the point I was getting at. I wonder just how much further back articulate drawings/representations really do go back. Some of the ones that we do know of are pretty darn impressive considering the time they were made.

i would throw out the idea that artistic expression goes back before HSS say around 500-750,000 years ago when people, working on stone tools came across ochre and charcoal and noticed they could make marks on things - beside cutting wood/bone or scratching stone.

originally posted by: borntowatch

Do we have any real scientific data on the dating methods, is it rock solid in accuracy...no... so you assume your belief, science is right and the dates are good, thats faith in action.

Actually... It is pretty rock solid. Its not an assumption nor is it a belief in the science and its not faith in action. Te only action I found was Ignorance in action at your outright dismissal without bothering to engage in the most BC due dilligence. Its pretty sad honestly.

Can someone show me how they deduced the art to be 40000 years old?

Here, since you can't be bothered to do your own research prior to just dismissing it because of your irrational fear and complete ignorance of science take my hand and we can tiptoe our way through this like big kids.

uranium-series dating of coralloid speleothems directly associated with 12 human hand stencils and two figurative animal depictions from seven cave sites in the Maros karsts of Sulawesi, we show that rock art traditions on this Indonesian island are at least compatible in age with the oldest European art11. The earliest dated image from Maros, with a minimum age of 39.9 kyr, is now the oldest known hand stencil in the world.

This has lots of pictures so it should be easy to follow- www.academia.edu...

Another bizarre concept is the belief that these cavemen were backwards. I think its time we stopped thinking these early people were less intelligent than modern people.

Who exactly is perpetuating this 'bizarre concept'? You? Certainly not Anthropologists. Its always been recognized by people who study this period of the paleolithic that those HSS were at least as smart as people are today. And for the record, just because they chose to place their art in caves doesn't exactly make them cavemen. Its statements like that, that perpetuate the ignorant point of view you were just complaining about that is perpetuated in mainstream portrayals.

Many people today live simple hunter gatherer lifestyles like those who created those pictures did.

Has there been some sort of disagreement on this view?

As for the left and right handed assumption, seriously?

Oh...Totally seriously. Fer real.

So because of the amount of left handed outlines you assume that they were left handed, why?

Mostly because nobody at the journal Nature was sure that there was going to be enough for you to nit pick or make squinchy faces at so they just threw it in to F# with you. There's obviously no science behind or scientific merit to such a silly idea.

If you hold a reed in your right hand to blow pigments over your left hand against a wall, that would make it highly probable that you are right handed. If someone else is blowing the pigments, then a right handed person may put his right hand on the wall. Who can be certain what hand was used in some cave ritual 40,000 years ago?

originally posted by: Hanslune

i would throw out the idea that artistic expression goes back before HSS say around 500-750,000 years ago when people, working on stone tools came across ochre and charcoal and noticed they could make marks on things - beside cutting wood/bone or scratching stone.

500-750,000 years ago?

Did I mention anything before that period?

Also, 500-750,000 years ago is a long period in which to practice before 40,000 years ago eh? Maybe there are submerged caves and other locations which were lost to time/rising sea levels along those lost Ice Age coast lines ?

Tracing our ancestors at the bottom of the sea

More than 2,500 submerged prehistoric artefact assemblages, ranging in age from 5,000 to 300,000 years, have been found in the coastal waters and open sea basins around Europe. Only a few have been properly mapped by divers, or assessed for preservation or excavation. These remains contain information on ancient seafaring, and the social structures and exploitation technologies of coastal resources before the introduction of agriculture some 10,000 years ago. To understand how prehistoric people responded to changing sea level, researchers combine examinations of these deposits with palaeoclimate models, reconstructions of ice-cap and sea level curves, and sophisticated survey and excavation techniques.

originally posted by: peter vlar

originally posted by: borntowatch

Do we have any real scientific data on the dating methods, is it rock solid in accuracy...no... so you assume your belief, science is right and the dates are good, thats faith in action.

Actually... It is pretty rock solid. Its not an assumption nor is it a belief in the science and its not faith in action. Te only action I found was Ignorance in action at your outright dismissal without bothering to engage in the most BC due dilligence. Its pretty sad honestly.

Can someone show me how they deduced the art to be 40000 years old?

Here, since you can't be bothered to do your own research prior to just dismissing it because of your irrational fear and complete ignorance of science take my hand and we can tiptoe our way through this like big kids.

uranium-series dating of coralloid speleothems directly associated with 12 human hand stencils and two figurative animal depictions from seven cave sites in the Maros karsts of Sulawesi, we show that rock art traditions on this Indonesian island are at least compatible in age with the oldest European art11. The earliest dated image from Maros, with a minimum age of 39.9 kyr, is now the oldest known hand stencil in the world.

This has lots of pictures so it should be easy to follow- www.academia.edu...

Another bizarre concept is the belief that these cavemen were backwards. I think its time we stopped thinking these early people were less intelligent than modern people.

Who exactly is perpetuating this 'bizarre concept'? You? Certainly not Anthropologists. Its always been recognized by people who study this period of the paleolithic that those HSS were at least as smart as people are today. And for the record, just because they chose to place their art in caves doesn't exactly make them cavemen. Its statements like that, that perpetuate the ignorant point of view you were just complaining about that is perpetuated in mainstream portrayals.

Many people today live simple hunter gatherer lifestyles like those who created those pictures did.

Has there been some sort of disagreement on this view?

As for the left and right handed assumption, seriously?

Oh...Totally seriously. Fer real.

So because of the amount of left handed outlines you assume that they were left handed, why?

Mostly because nobody at the journal Nature was sure that there was going to be enough for you to nit pick or make squinchy faces at so they just threw it in to F# with you. There's obviously no science behind or scientific merit to such a silly idea.

Sorry I trod on your toes, late night? Hangover?
Uranium series dating is subject to faults, constants are not always constant. but, hey, believe what you want.

Many people believe "cave men" were not advanced, I dont. That was my position, sorry if you got confused.

As for the left and right handed thing, what!

originally posted by: SLAYER69

Just imagine all the 'Practice/learning' attempts before they created such well proportioned images. When I see cave art, I always wonder where they practiced before they were able to create such nearly anatomically correct representations.

That's the really interesting part here. The cave paintings are not unusual at all, but their location is.
As the article states, the location lends support to a theory of a more ancient practice, possibly in Africa.

Harte

originally posted by: igor_ats
That goat drawing is strange. . . it's very intricately designed and well-drawn for a "primative".

Look at all the other cave drawings around the world. . . they pale in comparison. . . like a 8 year old compared to a teenager. Hope you get what I mean.

I believe you ought to look at other cave paintings before making that remark.
Chauvet Cave, France:



This is a small section of a long mural-like painting there of several different animal types. It dates to approximately the same age as the paintings this thread concerns.

These lions make the Sulawesi "pig-deer" painting look infantile in comparison.

Harte

originally posted by: borntowatch

Sorry I trod on your toes,

Oh no, my toes are just dandy but thanks for inquiring.

late night? Hangover?

Seeing that I posted that a little after 9PM not so late and I'd have to have one heck of a drinking problem to have been hung over already. You might not demonstrate jack for knowledge of the science involved here,but your inner compassion so early in the day and reply is rather heartwarming.

Uranium series dating is subject to faults, constants are not always constant.

And those faults would be what? You're evidence of uranium and thorium constants not being so constant would be? Normally I'd just shrug it off but since you opened the can let's see the worms.

but, hey, believe what you want.

Its not so much a belief system as it is seeing first hand how its done and doing the requisite research into the particular methodology, potential flaws, its margins for error etc... Whereas you have simply dismissed it, made a blanket statement and offered nothing to support your position. That, to me, seems far more like a vapid belief but who am I to judge

Many people believe "cave men" were not advanced, I dont. That was my position, sorry if you got confused.

I wasnt confused at all, merely attempting to clear up your confusion by offering the distinction that anthropologists do not have this belief. Its really mostly people who grew up on Hanna-Barbera cartoons like Captain Caveman or don't bother to read who perpetuate ignorant thoughts. There's also the point of what exactly one considers "advanced" for 50KYA

As for the left and right handed thing, what!

Huh... I thought it was pretty self explanatory.