The cave paintings of Lascaux

The article aruges that ensuring a successful hunt is purpose of the cave paintings of Lascaux. In response, the professor redutes this idea by expalining that the the author's presented us little supports. Frist, the author supports his argument by indicating that the subjects of the paintings of Lascaux are large animals that were very important for prehistoric hunters, and there are some animal wounded by arrows in the paintings. However, the professor tells us that many of the animals in the painting are not anilmals that are haunted. In fact, there are animals like cats and dinasours in the paintings too. Moreover, liitle arrows are shown in the paintings. Therefore, the author's cliam rejected. Second, the article puts forth his idea by explaining that there are human figures with animal heads in the paintings which indicates there were hunters. In contrast, the professor refutes the idea of author by highlighting that the animal heads human figures are not shown in the hunting postion. In fact, these human figures are not in the satnding postion at all and are in sleep postion. In addition, there are no another picture around them, which makes difficult to interperate these animal heads human figures. Third, the reading explain that the paintings were depicting, as one of an old belief of many cultures, in purpose of bringing an event to reality. In response, the professor refutes this idea by explaining that the paintings would have been depicted for diffrent magical cermonies too. He explains that in another magical cermony people depict the animal to communicate with their anssectors. Therefore, the author's reason does not convincing.