No, they are far too early
-the largest recorded australopithecus stood at almost 7 feet tall -right now australopithecus has only been found in Africa there is no proff any where else -Did you know that Australopithecus had an apelike face with a low forehead, a bony ridge over the eyes, a flat nose, and no chin im 12 so don't make fun of the spelling i don't know if i spelt it right or not
10m
from the song "lucy in the sky with diamonds".. this is right but the story behind the naming was incomplete. Don Johanson was closely examining the remains when he got that clue that it was a female bone. The song Lucy in the Sky With Diamonds was gently playing while Johanson is sipping through a bottle of beer. ( Source : Reader's Digest, 1983)
10m
Australopithecus is a genus, it has no plural. You could speak of the Australopithecines though, which are the extinct human-like primates of the genus.
hell no are you kidding me
There is no evidence of Australopithecus fabricating ANYTHING. They did not make tools, they did not make containers, they did not make clothes. They wore nothing contrived.
There is no direct evidence to suggest that Australopithecus, an early ancestor of humans, created art. The earliest known art forms are generally attributed to Homo sapiens, specifically to the Upper Paleolithic period. While Australopithecus did have some capacity for symbolic thought, it is unlikely that they engaged in complex artistic expression as seen in later human species.
Refers to the supplies needed to make a work of artRefers to the supplies needed to make a work of art
Yeah
It depends if you are a good art teacher and who you work for
They did not make any tools.
It depends if you are a good art teacher and who you work for
They did not make any tools.
England's Royal Academy of Art wanted to make history painting the focus of art.
Everything around him.
It is used in art to make things such as rugs, art work varses and other things