Fine Art and Music Emerges Earlier Still

Posted on May 25, 2012 in Darwin and Evolution, Dating Methods, Early Man, Mind and Brain

With the “best came first” art of Chauvet cave fresh on our minds (5/09/2012), another discovery shows that exquisite art and music existed even further back than evolutionists expected.

Hand-crafted flutes found in caves in southern Germany, dated by radiocarbon at 43,000 years old, show that humans were possibly singing and playing musical instruments around their campfires far earlier than previously supposed: “The bone flutes push back the date researchers think human creativity evolved,” Jennifer Walsh wrote for Live Science. No pre-flutes were reported.

Science Daily reported, “Oldest Art Even Older: New Dates from Geißenklösterle Cave Show Early Arrival of Modern Humans, Art and Music.”  The evolutionists attempted to dress up the surprise with a theory that the cultured elite of the period moved up the Blue Danube to spread their culture, but they clearly were only guessing: “Whether the many innovations best documented in Swabia were stimulated by climatic stress, competition between modern humans and Neanderthals or by other social-cultural dynamics remains a central focus of research by the archaeologists,” the article pointed out, continuing with the theme that many questions remain: “High-resolution dating of the kind reported here is essential for establishing a reliable the [sic] chronology for testing hypothesis [sic] to explain the expansion of modern humans into Europe.…”  This implies no such reliable chronology is established, and no hypotheses have passed the test.

Well, if this was published in the Journal of Human Evolution, the journal editors are not going to let it undercut their reason for existence, are they?  They have to concoct an evolutionary tale even when evidence appears that humans were artistic and musical from the beginning (remember Jubal? Genesis 4:21).  For reasons why radiocarbon dates beyond about 5,000 years are unreliable, see CMI’s list of articles.

Ignore the jargon words in the articles like Aurignacian culture, Kulturpumpe Hypothesis, Danube Corridor hypothesis, etc.  These are modern placeholder names covering up ignorance.  How can you tell it’s ignorance?  First of all, by the composite explanations: “Whether the many innovationswere stimulated by climatic stress, competition between modern humans and Neanderthals or by other social-cultural dynamics.”  This splattergun method of explaining is like your doctor saying, “your pain is caused by your genes, your diet, the weather, or other social-cultural dynamics.”    Well, which is it?  Come back when you know.  Until then, don’t call it knowledge.

The other way you know it’s ignorance is that it requires believing the preposterous corollary that humans who were anatomically indistinguishable from us and were smart enough to migrate around the world, make musical instruments, paint art that rivals Picasso’s and wear jewelry sat around in caves for another 25,000 years before figuring out how to ride a horse or build a house.  If that is considered knowledge, don’t ask the Journal of Human Evolution what constitutes folly.  (Their answer would undoubtedly be, “intelligent design”–thus proving our point.)

 

No comments have been left

Leave a Reply