(Translate this site) | Search this site | Site map | Latest site updates |


CONTENTS of entire timeline

CONTENTS of 59,999,999 BC- 51,000 BC Large land and aquatic mammals appear; many kinds of primates appear (almost as many go extinct); an island continent finally disappears for good; the Mediterranean valley turns into the Mediterranean Sea; human beings emerge, develop housing, clothes, lamps, and drugs, breed dogs, use horses; Mars dies (or goes dormant)

This page last updated on or about 10-31-05
a - j r m o o n e y h a m . c o m - o r i g i n a l


Approximately 2,300,000 BC: MAJOR CATASTROPHE: A Stone Age "tool factory" is in operation in Kenya, and a possible 0.5+ km asteroid impact in the deep southeast Pacific Ocean may increase atmospheric water vapor sufficiently to eventually bring about the next Ice Age

-- "Researchers Amazed to Find Tools More Than 2 Million Years Old" Compiled by Times medical writer Thomas H. Maugh II , May 6, 1999, Los Angeles Times, Science in Brief

-- DID AN ASTEROID IMPACT TRIGGER THE ICE AGES? From Science Frontiers Digest of Scientific Anomalies ["http://www.knowledge.co.uk/frontiers/"] #59, SEP-OCT 1988 by William R. Corliss, citing Frant T. Kyte, et al; "New Evidence on the Size and Possible Effects of a Late Pliocene Oceanic Asteroid Impact," Science, 241:63, 1988

Around 2,200,000 BC the approximately one km in diameter asteroid Eltanin impacts the Earth in the Bellingshausen Sea between South America and Antarctica, creating tsunamis 1 km tall, which themselves strike parts of South America and Australia. Severe changes to the Earth's climate follow.

-- TWO CATASTROPHE SCENARIOS From Science Frontiers Digest of Scientific Anomalies ["http://www.knowledge.co.uk/frontiers/"] #117, MAY-JUN 1998 by William R. Corliss, citing Jeff Hecht; "A Bigger Splash," New Scientist, p. 11, November 1, 1997, and Anonymous; "The Splash Felt 'round the World," Earth, 7:12, April 1998

Homo erectus will appear to be butchering animals trapped in a natural fissure with stone tools in the vicinity of eastern China around 2,250,000 BC.

Perhaps most intriguing are hints that Procynocephalus monkeys may be serving Homo erectus in a semi-domesticated fashion in this region and during this time-- or at least hanging around in a scavenger role much like some wolves may be doing later on. If such service or related scavenging is ever confirmed by other finds it could offer a myriad of surprising implications and new questions regarding human development. Keep in mind that much later in the game humans may tolerate wolf scavengers hanging about their camps because of various advantages they can offer, such as alerts to incoming threats at the periphery of camps, and a contingency food source in hard times. Monkeys too could offer similar benefits perhaps...

Fossils of Homo erectus and monkeys similar to Procynocephalus seem to be commonly found together in Asia and east Africa...

-- EARLY HOMO ERECTUS TOOLS IN CHINA by RUSSELL CIOCHON and ROY LARICK, NEWSBRIEFS, Archaeology, Volume 53 Number 1, January/February 2000, the Archaeological Institute of America, http://www.archaeology.org/0001/newsbriefs/china.html

Even as late as 2000 AD there will be primitive human tribes which possess extraordinarily close relationships with other primates and/or other animals-- even going so far as their women from puberty on nursing baby monkeys, raccoons, and pigs, as takes place among the Awa Guaja tribe of the Amazon.

The Awa Guaja (a matriarchal society) consider monkeys to be sacred, and will raise baby monkeys among their own human children, with perhaps little difference in care.

Some arbitrary observations: the Awa Guaja expect women to continuously breast-feed needy animals as well as human children from puberty onwards, and regard non-producing breasts as a curse. Could similar ways among much of prehistoric humanity over a million years or so have been one reason why human female breasts on average became more prominent than those of other large primates, by the dawn of recorded history?

In primitive human societies-- especially those not far removed from apes themselves, such as those of seven million to two million BC or so-- baby monkeys might often have served mothers as welcome replacements for true children lost to disease, accident, or predators. Such monkeys may have often grown into helpful and loyal pets or aides for their human foster parents-- perhaps even performing chores taught them by their families, to help out with gathering food, preparing it, and even chipping stones for tools. They may also have helped enhance the vigilance of a camp against predators or hostile humans.

If the practice of incorporating monkeys into human family units became sufficiently widespread, and continued on long enough in terms of generations, eventually the monkeys themselves might undergo certain evolutionary pressures of their own as a result. Imagine multiple generations of monkeys raised as human children reproducing amongst themselves, within and alongside their human host tribes. The smartest and most helpful monkeys might be favored and encouraged to breed by their masters, much as the wolves of later millennia will be transformed into obedient and capable dogs.

Only monkeys can be more intelligent and versatile than wolves/dogs. They could be trained to do more and understand more than wolves/dogs. And their ultimate evolutionary potential would certainly rate considerably higher than wolves/dogs-- after all, primates begat human beings.

-- Salon Health & Body | Suckling monkeys ["http://www.salon.com/health/sex/urge/world/2000/05/03/jungle/index.html"] By Jack Boulware, May 3, 2000

But if human predecessors and one or more species of monkeys early on worked together in some sort of substantive, long term, cooperative partnership, similar to that which would later develop between humans and wolves/dogs, what happened to that development? Did an unfortunate plague kill off the majority of the humans and/or monkeys participating in this arrangement, thereby ending the evolutionary experiment? Note that both would have been vulnerable to such a possibility-- especially if they were gathering together in large, concentrated communities-- like villages, towns, or cities. Or perhaps their cooperation began to turn more into a competition-- in which case they might part ways as enemies rather than friends, perhaps both losing precious evolutionary ground as a result. Indeed, there would have been plenty of opportunities for such an alliance to go wrong, as climatic disasters made food scarce, or one primate line found another they liked better than the previous partner (note that both the monkeys and human predecessors suffered competition from close relative species). Maybe it was even the growing fondness for wolves/dogs themselves that in the end displaced such monkey allies-- or some combination of several of the elements listed above.

Whatever the truth of the matter, if such a parallel monkey ally evolution ever occured (and lasted long enough), more discoveries on the subject could prove fascinating...

In one of the latest trends, gangs in Paris France were using Barbary apes rather than outlawed dogs like pitbulls and others to attack their enemies in 2000. Orchestrated fights between the apes of rival gang members are also being held. Baby apes are being carried around in diapers.

-- Apes new weapon of gangs in Paris suburbs ["http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/world/2000/0927/wor19.htm"], September 27, 2000, (Guardian Service)

The true source of this page is

Copyright © 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005 by J.R. Mooneyham. All rights reserved.
Anything you see below this point was put there by a content thief who stole this page and posted it on their own server.