Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
23 June 2012 | NewScientist | 3
THE world’s oldest known cave art is millennia older than we thought. A single red dot on a Spanish cave wall is now known to date back at least 40,800 years, meaning it was made around the time that modern humans arrived in Europe – or even earlier.
This unassuming bit of wall painting could help us learn more about the sudden proliferation of cave art that is notable by its absence in our ancestral Africa. Pinning down the date so closely suggests that it might have been a reaction to first contact with Neanderthals, who were already living in Europe when our ancestors arrived.
Or perhaps the Neanderthals were the artists (see page 10) – a possibility that would once have been dismissed out of hand, but which has become steadily more acceptable as evidence of their
culture has grown, from burying their dead to decorating their bodies. It’s not the first time Neanderthals have been put forward as artists: earlier this year, it was claimed that they were the ones who painted seals on the wall of a cave in southern Spain, though this remains contentious.
That, for the moment, is about
as far as science alone can take us. But a host of questions remain unanswered, particularly about why the paintings were created. Addressing those requires the combination of archaeology, anthropology and, most implausibly, art appreciation.
Adopt this approach and
intriguing possibilities emerge. Some researchers suggest that the positioning of many hand stencils indicates that they mark places of veneration, or possibly signposts. Others link cave art with shamanism, suggesting that it reflects enduring beliefs about the supernatural quality of caves.
Of course, this is inevitably subjective; an attempt to read the minds of humans who lived tens of thousands of years ago from the scant markings they left behind – if they were from our species at all. But it’s one of the few ways we have to start assembling hypotheses about prehistoric people’s beliefs and culture, in the hope that we can one day test them with newer scientific techniques.
There’s a lot of meaning yet to unpack from that single red dot. But then, isn’t that what science – and art – is all about? n
Ancient art appreciation
EDITORIAL
Science is starting to decipher prehistoric paintings – with a little help
THE problem with adding years to your life is that they come when you’re too old to enjoy them. This well-established bulwark against giving up bad habits is specious, of course. Give them up now, and you’ll benefit for the rest of your life, not just near its end.
A similar argument comes to mind when contemplating the effects of cytomegalovirus (CMV),
an insidious infection which seems to “wear out” the immune system, stealthily shortening the lives of the many who carry it (see page 6).
Treating older people with antivirals might extend their lives, but this is buying back time after the damage has been done. Prioritising child vaccination, with the goal of securing
lifelong gains, might be better.CMV is symptomless in healthy
adults, making the potential benefits and risks of vaccination hard to define and evaluate. Even if the evidence supports it, the argument may prove uniquely difficult to articulate, particularly to the sceptical.
It will be years before CMV vaccination becomes a real possibility, but we should start thinking now about ways to assess and present its value. n
An ounce of prevention
“The art might have been a reaction to first contact with Neanderthals, who were already in Europe”
LOCATIONSUKLacon House, 84 Theobald’s Road, London WC1X 8NS Tel +44 (0) 20 7611 1200 Fax +44 (0) 20 7611 1250
AUSTrALIATower 2, 475 Victoria Avenue, Chatswood, NSW 2067Tel +61 2 9422 2666 Fax +61 2 9422 2633
USA225 Wyman Street, Waltham, MA 02451Tel +1 781 734 8770 Fax +1 720 356 9217
201 Mission Street, 26th Floor, San Francisco, CA 94105Tel +1 415 908 3348 Fax +1 415 704 3125
TO SUBSCrIBEUK and InternationalTel +44 (0) 8456 731 731 [email protected] The price of a New Scientist annual subscription is UK £143, Europe €228, USA $154, Canada C$182, Rest of World $293. Postmaster: Send address changes to New Scientist, PO Box 3806, Chesterfield, MO 63006-9953, USA.
CONTACTSEditorial Tel +44 (0) 20 7611 [email protected]@[email protected]
Picture desk Tel +44 (0) 20 7611 1268
Who’s who newscientist.com/people
Contact us newscientist.com/contact
Enquiries Tel +44 (0) 20 7611 1202
Display Advertising Tel +44 (0) 20 7611 [email protected]
recruitment Advertising UK Tel +44 (0) 20 8652 [email protected]
Permission for reuse [email protected]
Media enquiriesTel +44 (0) 20 7611 1202
MarketingTel +44 (0) 20 7611 1286
Back Issues & MerchandiseTel +44 (0) 1733 385170
SyndicationTribune Media Services InternationalTel +44 (0) 20 7588 7588
UK Newsagents Tel +44 (0) 20 3148 3333Newstrade distributed by Marketforce UK Ltd, The Blue Fin Building, 110 Southwark St, London SE1 OSU Tel: + 44 (0) 20 8148 3333
© 2012 Reed Business Information Ltd, England
New Scientist is published weekly by Reed Business Information Ltd. ISSN 0262 4079.
Registered at the Post Office as a newspaper and printed in England by Polestar (Colchester)
IT’S a tale of two bots.Years of effort have yielded a
“child” robot that starts uttering random words after just a few minutes chatting with a human teacher. Impressive, though no
human would be fooled for even a moment by its conversation (see page 19).
On the flip side, criminals have ripped off innocently designed chatbot software to create digital sweet-talkers that trick the unwary into giving up their credit card numbers or clicking on dubious links (see page 45).
Childbot and chatbot each reflect facets of human nature. While the former learns from our willingness to teach, the latter exploits our foibles. Learning takes dedication and hard work; exploitation takes ruthlessness and opportunism.
Perhaps the moral of this tale is that we get the bots we deserve. n
Our technology speaks volumes
120623_R_Editorial.indd 3 19/6/12 17:24:25
