AIG: Cave Art Proves Creationism

We have yet another gem of creation science from the Institute for Creation Research (ICR) — the granddaddy of all creationist outfits — the fountainhead of young-earth creationist wisdom. Their latest article is Stone Age Art Holds Hints of Language. Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us:

Ancient cave art can give modern observers a unique glimpse into the minds of people who lived long ago. Stone Age art in European caves is best known for its beautiful paintings of animals like deer, horses, and mammoths. Recently, researchers investigated seldom-studied symbols appearing non-randomly among the paintings that may indicate that Stone Age people could communicate with written symbols.

Symbols? ICR seems to have done their creation science “research” by reading this article in the Guardian: Did Stone Age cavemen talk to each other in symbols? It has a graphic showing many of the cave symbols. Their article describes the work of Genevieve von Petzinger, of the University of Victoria in British Columbia.

Here’s an article she wrote: Geometric Signs – A New Understanding. It appears at the website of the Bradshaw Foundation, with which we’re not familiar, but they seem to be a factor in anthropology and archaeology. We found this information about them in Wikipedia: Rock Art Research and the Bradshaw Foundation.

One of von Petzinger’s assistants, April Nowell, is quoted by the Guardian as saying:

“We cannot use the ‘L’ or ‘W’ words [language or writing] yet,” says Nowell. “This is not writing as we know it or language as we understand it. However, in these caves we are looking at the patterning of symbols, and if we can unravel that, we can get to their meaning.”

Let’s get back to ICR’s article:

The problem is that if these previously overlooked patterns do represent some form of writing, then they appear “25,000 years earlier” than when researchers believed writing originated. Some of the cave markings are supposedly 30,000 years old.

Observe, dear reader, that ICR puts quotes around that 25,000 year estimate, because their loyal readers know such an age is scripturally impossible. The ICR article continues:

But Scripture indicates that the very first humans were able to read and write. Adam may have even signed his own name at the end of his written portion of Genesis, recorded as “This is the book of the generations of Adam.”

Well! If Adam could write, then there’s no problem here. Those cave people probably could too. How did von Petzinger and Nowell overlook such an important fact? They must be fools!

ICR concludes with this:

But it isn’t necessary to wait for cave art studies to discern that ancient people were the same as modern people in terms of language and art. This follows from the Bible. And from that reliable record, one can also obtain a date correction for the Ice Age that shortens it from 10,000 to 2,500,000 years ago to about 3,400 to 4,400 years ago.

Once again, we are enlightened by the creation scientists of ICR.

Copyright © 2012. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

add to del.icio.usAdd to Blinkslistadd to furlDigg itadd to ma.gnoliaStumble It!add to simpyseed the vineTailRankpost to facebook

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article

14 responses to “AIG: Cave Art Proves Creationism

  1. earlycuyler

    “This follows from the Bible. And from that reliable record, one can also obtain a date correction for the Ice Age that shortens it from 10,000 to 2,500,000 years ago to about 3,400 to 4,400 years ago.”

    Thanks. Now I have to go to the pharmacy to get some ointment for my stupid burns.

  2. ashley haworth-roberts

    This lying TOSH about one ‘Ice Age’ is – on THIS occasion – being disseminated by the ICR rather than AiG.

  3. How come there are no dinosaurs in cave paintings?

    Makes sense that symbolic language would evolve from some more basic set of symbols, though. Cool stuff.

  4. Ed asks: “How come there are no dinosaurs in cave paintings?”

    The Darwinists erased them all.

  5. Gabriel Hanna

    I supposed I’m most surprised to hear that they think Adam literally wrote part of the book of Genesis. There’s no Biblical authority for that, and religious tradition ascribes Genesis to Moses.

  6. Ceteris Paribus

    ICR says: “[A]dam may have even signed his own name at the end of his written portion of Genesis, recorded as “This is the book of the generations of Adam.”

    I have it on good authority that most likely Adam had lost interest in the writing project, and actually it was Eve who collated the heap of random manuscript pages, forged Adam’s name, and mailed it off to the publisher.

  7. No offense, but while I enjoy most of your threads, your “X proves creationism” series is one of the least interesting. Nevertheless, I’d like to recommend one for the future. I call it “Curmudgeons prove creationism.” It starts out as you expect: If “Darwinism” is true, natural selection would have weeded out curmudgeons like us long ago. I’m sure you can fill in the details better than I can. 😉

  8. @Frank J: Bah! I think these are some of the most interesting posts. I love reading just how out of touch with reality the creationists are.

  9. retiredsciguy

    Along with Gary, I’ll cast my vote for the “x proves creationism” series as well. They serve the very worthwhile purpose of pointing out the misinformation we need to counter.

    Besides, they let us feel intellectually superior. (But with some of these eye-rollers, that’s not much of a challenge. Ice Age just 4,400 years ago? Ha!)

  10. retiredsciguy says:

    I’ll cast my vote for the “x proves creationism” series

    Most of ICR’s stuff is far too stupid to bother with, but they’re good filler when there’s no news to write about. And even then, they have to be about something that’s somewhat interesting. I like cave drawing, so …

  11. I enjoy all the “x proves creationism.” I am surprised that the ICR has decided to ignore the centuries-old tradition of Moses’ authorship in favor of giving Adam…er….on what and with what was Adam supposed to be wwwriting? Oh, waiting a moment. This is the ICR. He probably had a few sheets of vellum and a fountain pen.

  12. Curmudgeon: “Most of ICR’s stuff is far too stupid to bother with, but they’re good filler when there’s no news to write about.”

    “Filler” is a good word. Sometimes whan I find myself reading some loopy YEC stuff I catch myself and realize that ought to be doing something else (like cleaning). It’s the Discoveroid “big tent” scam that really interests me.

  13. OK, back to work in a few minutes, but this train wreck is too good to pass up:

    ICR: “This follows from the Bible. And from that reliable record, one can also obtain a date correction for the Ice Age that shortens it from 10,000 to 2,500,000 years ago to about 3,400 to 4,400 years ago.”

    Anyone else see the irony? The group founded by the very one (Henry Morris) that turned creationism from “honest, mistaken belief” to full-blown pseudoscience is slouching towards Omphalism! I have been noticing that in some of AiG’s propaganda too. Despite their whining about ID being insufficiently Biblical, these groups have taken the Discoveroid kool aid, and are now tacitly admiting, though in a very different way than the DI, that the very basis of “scientific” creationism – evidence that independently validates their particular interpretation of Genesis – does not exist.

  14. I’m also going to cast a vote in favor of the “x proves creationism” series. Very interesting, and as retiredsciguy points out, “They serve the very worthwhile purpose of pointing out the misinformation we need to counter.”

    Although most of SC’s readers probably know this, let me mention it anyway. Two excellent essays on cave art, what it means, and what we can learn from it, are “Up Against a Wall” and “A Lesson from the Old Masters,” essays #8 and #9 in Stephen Jay Gould’s “Leonardo’s Mountain of Clams” collection.