Diana Yelenets
Randee Goodstadt
HIS-111-YD1
16 January 2016
The article I chose to discuss is “Ancient Women Artists May Be Responsible for Most Cave Art” by Rachel Nuwer. I was drawn to this article because I have never heard about such a possibility before and this was a new concept for me. The article started talking about how most scientists have always assumed that the artists who drew cave paintings were males because they often depicted animals and hunting. It is known that during the paleolithic and neolithic era, men were usually hunted while women were the gatherers. The article explained how the scientists studied the handprints left by the artists. Using an algorithm that calculated things like the ratios of fingers to one another, …show more content…
The writer is Rachel Nuwer, and from what i can tell she does not have any credentials. The only description that was given is that she is a “freelance science writer based in Brooklyn.” After doing some research on her I found out that she has two master's degrees and she studies biology. However, none of this information is included in the article itself. Another reason I was uncertain about the credibility of this article was the amount of ads this site had. I saw ads for clothing, mcdonalds, and taxslayer around the article. It definitely led me to question the accuracy of this article. When I finished reading the article I continued the scroll downwards to see if there were any other recommended articles. I found that there were many articles or videos, yet none of them seemed to be educational or quality content, many of them were linked to buzzfeed. The only reason I even considered this article to be remotely accurate was because there was a link to national geographic. The link led you to a similar article, written by national geographic. National geographic is thought to an accurate sources so i decided to give the article a chance. A secondary source is the writing of someone who was not present during the time that the event was occurring. Anyone can write a secondary source. They may either be experts in the field or someone who is simply interested in it. This is why secondary sources might be more misleading or not as accurate as a primary source might be.
There was a connection i saw in the article to what we have been studying in class. The article talked about cave paintings and who they were drawn by. In class we have been discussing the paleolithic and neolithic time
Randee Goodstadt
HIS-111-YD1
16 January 2016
The article I chose to discuss is “Ancient Women Artists May Be Responsible for Most Cave Art” by Rachel Nuwer. I was drawn to this article because I have never heard about such a possibility before and this was a new concept for me. The article started talking about how most scientists have always assumed that the artists who drew cave paintings were males because they often depicted animals and hunting. It is known that during the paleolithic and neolithic era, men were usually hunted while women were the gatherers. The article explained how the scientists studied the handprints left by the artists. Using an algorithm that calculated things like the ratios of fingers to one another, …show more content…
The writer is Rachel Nuwer, and from what i can tell she does not have any credentials. The only description that was given is that she is a “freelance science writer based in Brooklyn.” After doing some research on her I found out that she has two master's degrees and she studies biology. However, none of this information is included in the article itself. Another reason I was uncertain about the credibility of this article was the amount of ads this site had. I saw ads for clothing, mcdonalds, and taxslayer around the article. It definitely led me to question the accuracy of this article. When I finished reading the article I continued the scroll downwards to see if there were any other recommended articles. I found that there were many articles or videos, yet none of them seemed to be educational or quality content, many of them were linked to buzzfeed. The only reason I even considered this article to be remotely accurate was because there was a link to national geographic. The link led you to a similar article, written by national geographic. National geographic is thought to an accurate sources so i decided to give the article a chance. A secondary source is the writing of someone who was not present during the time that the event was occurring. Anyone can write a secondary source. They may either be experts in the field or someone who is simply interested in it. This is why secondary sources might be more misleading or not as accurate as a primary source might be.
There was a connection i saw in the article to what we have been studying in class. The article talked about cave paintings and who they were drawn by. In class we have been discussing the paleolithic and neolithic time