Paleolithic animal paintings cannot be described as abstract. The types of art that Paleolithic animal paintings represent are life, nature, and natural habitats.
A porcupine could be referred to as a 'pincushion animal' due to its body being covered with Sharp quills.
An animal with a small head is a weasel. They have heads that are small and narrow. A gerenuk also has a small head that looks too small for its body.
A name for a three-legged animal could be a "tripod."
No ! Serving to avoid an animal - could result in you killing a pedestrian ! Sorry - but... the animal is expendable... people are not !
the animals could be contaminated.
paleolithic animal painting could not be describe as
The cause is "The painter could not sell his paintings" while the effect is "because he loved them very much". The cause is "what" in a statement. The effect could be described as the "why" in a statement.
Rabbits and deer are common examples of herbivores, which could be described as living a vegetarianlifestyle.
Yes, but I dont know how they did!
It could be described as the first bird.
They could be described as prime ministers.
Generic name for animal-like protists would be Protozoa.
This is still being discussed among experts. The simplest answer is: hunting magic. By painting an animal the painter could get a kind of power over it to be used in hunting it.
Wild animals are almost never 'fat'. Although I have never actually seen a Yeti, it could probably be described as stocky, powerful, bulky.
None of his paintings were popular, he could not sell more than one.
hhh
It will be described as destructive