Page A
(The Study of Threes)
http://threesology.org
This page is a companion to the following links:
- Evolutionary 3s page B
- Evolutionary 3s page C
- Evolutionary 3s page D
- Evolutionary 3s page E
- Evolutionary 3s page F
The study of Evolution, regardless of specific research interests, is extremely fascinating. My fascination with its many flavors (anthropological, archaeological, biological, geological, historical, mathematical, physiological, psychological, sociological, etc...) is compounded, exponentially, because of the presence of "threes" such as the 1- 2- 3 maturational development sequence, 3 in/to 1 ratios, primary-secondary-teriary structures, pyramidal/triadic conformations, short-medium-long duration intermittancies, etc... However, regrettably, I've never been on an actual anthropological or archaeological hunt for historical treasures. Nonetheless, I have had to dodge unexpected booby traps of falling books from upper library shelves and chart courses around student bodies with their zombie-like stares and half dead reposed sprawls whilst cramming for exams. My "Indiana Jones" treks have been relegated to unearthing discoveries in texts that are themselves frequently lost and require an extensive expeditionary force of several librarians to hunt down that being used by an apologetic janitor as a door stop while they mop a floor and emit below breath murmurings akin to a vengeance-is-mine growl for "stealing" their door-holding assistant to do something less important... such as engage in idle chit-chat with a like-minded researcher when there's real work to be done. Of all the impertinence!
For me, in such a context, new discoveries are to be found by way of identifying patterns that the initial researchers (or/and subsequent material analyzers) did not recognize for one reason or another. The steps I take in this respect (metaphorically speaking), have sometimes worn out the traditional "soles of contemporary imagination" requiring a bit of (triple-folded) cardboard paper to be slipped in so that I don't encounter some irritant pebble waiting in the shadows to lunge out with a pointed remark to which I exclaim "ouch!" and perhaps some other choice word that causes me to bite off a bit of my tongue... to which I should add that this is the reason so many researchers can't spell every word correctly because they have a less than an optimum tongue with which to articulate correctly... the occasional transposition of letters notwithstanding.
But let me also summate (and to some extent Reflexively Reiterate Repetitionally) that the history of material in religious texts is likewise a type of evolutionary study as are languages, weaponry, political models, apparel, etiquette, music, dancing, geometric forms, medicine and its various applications, architecture, technology, social mores, geological formations, etc... Hence, for me, the word "Evolution" has a considerably broader meaning than what some might care to apply the term. Thankfully, not all religious-minded people have trouble with differing models of Evolution and not all Evolutionists have trouble with religious models that attempt to explain the origin, complexity, and diversity of "species". Being faithful one way or another doesn't mean you have to be stupid in the face of new, old, or conflicting information. With respect to the study of threes, which is itself a form of evolution in the making, (if not a type of religious practice for some Threesologists/Triadologists) since many examples are being "newly born" today, many of the examples-of-threes which I encounter and catalog are outdated in the sense of current belief, theory, understanding or evidence... thus requiring that I include some measure of a disclaimer for the many threes examples being used.
For me, the old Christian trinity of Father- Son- Holy ghost/spirit, the Indic (India/Indian) trinity of Brahma- Vishnu- Siva and even the word G- O- D are just other types of archeological/anthropological three-patterned examples; though some readers may have so much emotion attached to these arrangements of alphabetical symbols that they are angered by anyone suggesting they are not what they think and believe they are. In other words, if you don't believe how, when, where, what, and why they do, you are considered an Infidel (Infidelity/Unfaithful). Just because you're emotional (or intelligent) about something doesn't make the object of your desire, your passion, or your professional advocation any more truthful. It simply makes it more truthful to you in your particular circumstances... which binds you to an intellectual immaturity. A defensive or offensive neurotic reaction only indicates the person's mentality is that more conducive to an ancient age. Trying to have a discussion with them would be no different than trying to converse with an ancient Greek (during the Iliad and Odessy era) about "pictures and voices" coming over the air into a box-like structure called a television. They might not think we were insane since it is thought they experienced such a situation with respect to their own era of cultural interests, that is if their mythology is to be believed wholly, partially or if at all. Or we might say that trying to have a discussion with them would be like trying to talk to a Neanderthal. They may have a big brain but it houses a small mind.
Such a circumstance as the foregoing is succinctly identified in the recent (April 20th, 2012) Vatican admonition of Nuns for their "feminist" activities in pursuing social improvements that the Vatican thinks is anti-scripture in terms of not following the explicit directives of what the Vatican thinks is appropriate scriptural doctrine... like women having to "know their place" in terms of not being permitted to hold the upper eschelons of church offices. If Jesus, Mohammed and Buddha can practice social reform in word and deed, it behoves the Nuns and other religious-minded people to do the same. While they are not Jesus, Mohammed nor Buddha, if they sincerely want to follow in their footsteps, let it be at their heals. Whereas the Vatican approves of Nuns bathing, feeding, and changing the diapers of Jesus, because it is "the woman's place" to do so, it is the Vatican who says it knows best how, when, where, why and with what such things are to occur.
Surely Jesus, Mohammed and Buddha were closer to God than any who consider themselves worthy of a similar recognition simply because they have been given a title of religious authority by a minority of others whose titles are likewise supported in a symbiotic form of reciprocation; that won't tolerate perceived threats to such close-minded authority. The Vatican, as are most religious leaderships, whose majority is male, is considerably Neanderthal... if not Australopithecine in its thinking. Adam needs to evolve and will not, just like most species under God's plan and maturational/growth (evolutionary) directives, be able to do so without the direct assistance of Eve in body, mind and deed. Eve's back has been burdened by the monkeys of Adam's projected feelings of inadequacy, personal guilt and low self-esteem for far too long. If the Nuns permit the Vatican to shroud their enlightened views in the dark corridors of antiquated traditions, their God-guided spirit will be buried in tombs that generations of young girls and women yet to come will think they must follow suit. It's time for the Vatican and all other bodies of religious repository to either evolve or become extinct.
In the foregoing image I am not trying to suggest that Nuns are masculine. It merely reflects the typical male-centered representations repetitively found. While there may be a similar lineage line-up depicting females, I didn't come across one during the moment I was searching.
And by the way, Homo Cro-magnons would be Homo (1) sapiens, while present day people are Homo (2) sapiens - sapiens and, quite humbly, Threes researchers are Homo (3) sapiens - sapiens - sapiens...
Philosophically, we must wonder if the usage of television, motion pictures, radio, phones, collectively chanted mantras, prayers, etc., are modern day extensions of the ancient "hearing voices and seeing images (signs/wonders)" phenomena experienced by those in a distant past age. Without the usage of such devises or collective assemblages as an excuse to cover-up wide-spread instances of hearing voices, for example, such instances might well be defined as socially or organizationally improper behavior... "madness," by those who band together to impose sanctions when they are fearful of losing control to those who won't "toe the line" of traditional presumptions that may or may not have been put into some written form such as a tenet, law, scripture, etc... See the discussion of this on the "I hear voices" pages starting at:)
http://www.threesology.org/i-hear-voices-a.php
As for providing examples of "threes" under a heading such as "Evolution," you might open up two or more texts and find that there has indeed been a type of evolutionary change even if the change is not talked about by those who appear to be particularly knowledgable about a given subject. You may not be an expert physicist, but you can nonetheless provide three-patterned examples from the discipline of physics, both old and new theories, if and when you encounter them. You might well encounter some example that I don't even know exist. Likewise, you may not be an expert audiologist but you can still provide patterns-of-three examples from the field of audiology. No less, you may not be a physician, dentist, nor geneticist, but you can provide examples-of-threes from these fields, whether or not the example came from a book written decades ago, a sign on a door, information booklet or phamplet, or by way of some unconventional pathway. It really doesn't matter with respect to cataloguing various patterns-of-three. Whereas I collect examples from a variety of interests (like a curious kid left alone to explore a multi-storied Museum of Natural History), you may prefer to focus on one, two or just a few. In addition, you may or may not want to develop a personal philosophy to explain the "phenomena of threes." In fact, you may enjoy collecting threes but have no interest in producing a web page. If this is the case, send your examples to me. I will post them and give you full credit for all your efforts and all of us in the "threes community" will be grateful for your assistance... those living today and those yet to come in the future.
Some people prefer to use sketches, paintings, or pictures to record something of interest that may or may not be elaborated on by being placed into a larger system of indexing such as an album with specific details. For example, someone may take pictures of unusual natural landmarks and simply record it was sighted at such and such a place on a certain date, whether or not a surviving relative would have wanted a bit more information to see the recorded landmarks for themselves. In short, collecting examples is one thing, using the examples for a specifically outlined purpose is quite another.
Years ago I encountered a page on Wikipedia which was about the number 3. So I placed several examples of "threes" on the page, only to find sometime later, that some had been removed, because the information was considered outdated... yet other examples remained, even though they likewise were outdated. Specifically, a list of hominid fossils was provided which exhibited groupings-in-threes, as they were once classified. However, not to belabour the point, let me forewarn all diehard purists of up-to-date information that many "Evolutionary 3s" are of relevance to a list of threes that spans multiple disciplines from a variety of perspectives. Just because I provide an example of one or more particular "threes" does not necessarily mean I believe in the existence of the example as "THE" truth. The truth, with respect to a given example, may no longer be valid in the present, but it nonetheless represents a truth of occurrence at some time in history. I don't believe in a three-headed dog named Cerebus who guards some sort of underworld, but it is a "threes" example concerning ancient Greek mythology nonetheless. It needs to be recorded whether or not the recorder themselves places the example in a group of examples labeled mythology or not.
I've never actually seen three chimps exhibit the Hear no evil, See no evil, Speak no evil ensemble, but it is a relevant "threes" example nonetheless. And in brief, let me recount an experience I had many, many years ago while in a public library: I was seated at a desk with some college students who were trying to impress upon me the need to look at a book's copyright date in order that the information being looked at was the most up-to-date. They thought it was stupid of me to be reading and taking information from old texts. They had no idea what I was doing but tried to make me see in the "error of my ways" to coincide with what they thought was right. Thankfully, I didn't give in to their peer pressure tactics. Thus, I pursued my interest in collecting threes the way I wanted to and now take time to share some of them with you:
In the following information, as with all three-patterned examples, you may find other dates and measurements by perusing different web pages or books. Change them according to your research preference. When there are conflicting values presented, a researcher is simply left with making a choice that for one reason or another someone may take exception with. I've never been involved with a process to date a fossil and must therefore rely on the information culled from a variety of areas. Sometimes I will look at several and, if I am busy, I may look at only one, two, or three sources with which I combine the information to provide a "ball park figure." And believe it or not, I misspell words and sometimes my computerized spell checkers are wrong or deficient also. If you find an example that you want me to change, please let me know and provide the source whose information I should reflect, according to your tastes.
(Not everyone thinks this, but it has been suggested we are.)
3 "Out-of-Africa" hominid migrations based on variations of DNA analysis by Alan Templeton:
Image adapted from:
http://cogweb.ucla.edu/ep/Templeton_02.html
Do the three migrations out of Africa represent the origins of the three major races labeled Negroid, Mongoloid, Caucasoid?
Note: Just because you might prefer multiplicity over singularity, duality or triplicity, as if in doing so you interpret yourself to be less prejudice, less segregationistic, and have a greater universal openess/acceptance of/to/for all things, does not in any way automatically equate with a greater understanding thereof. "Universality" does not equate with a greater godliness disposition simply because you define your concept of God with all things labeled the Univers. You may want to view all humans as part of a single race, but this doesn't change the fact that there are medical differences amongst men and women, because of race, and do to culture-fashioned diets, etc..., not to mention we "all" have a triplet codon DNA structure (as far as our universal application of generalization assumes because not every human has actually been tested for such evidence). An advanced alien species might well exploit this human tendency towards "Universal Generalization", thereby utilizing a variety of Duck Blinds and influences for good or ill purposes.
3 known and recognized hominid genera all arose in Africa:
- Australopithecus
- Paranthropus
- Homo
- Homo habilis "capable man"
- Homo erectus "upright man"
- Homo sapiens "wise man"
- Paranthropus robustus
- Paranthropus boisei
- Paranthropus aethiopicus
- Catopithecus browni
- Aegyptopithecus
- Proconsul
- Proconsul africanus
- Proconsul major<;LI>
- Proconsul nyanzae
- Australopithecus afarensis
- Australopithecus africanus
- Australopithecus robustus
- Australopithecus aethiopicus
- Australopithecus boisei
- Australopithecus crassidens
- Ardipithecus
- Australopithecus
- Paranthropus
- Pan Troglodytes Schweinfurthii- (Eastern Common Chimpanzee)
- Pan Troglodytes Troglodytes- (Central Common Chimp)
- Pan Troglodytes Verus- (Western Common Chimp)
- Western Lowland
- Eastern Lowland
- Mountain Gorilla
- Prosimians
- Monkeys (old & new world)
- Apes (lesser & greater apes, as well as humans)
- Orangutans (Solitary).
- Gorillas (Harems)
- Common Chimps (Live in territories defended by related males)
- Human and chimp DNA differs by 1.24%
- Human and gorilla DNA differs by 1.62%
- Human and orang-utan DNA differs by 1.63%
- Orang-utans were the first to separate, between 12 and 16 million years ago.
- Gorillas between 6.2 and 8.4 million years ago.
- Humans and chimps went their different ways between 4.6 and 6.2 million years ago. (Those who lingered too long together because of one or more "love children" produced through unrestrained promiscuity or whatever "togetherness" philosophy they followed, led to an eventual extinction.)
-
Hylobatidae- include the so-called lesser apes of Asia, the gibbons and siamangs.
-
Hominidae- include living humans and typically fossil apes that possess a suite of characteristics such as bipedalism, reduced canine size, and increasing brain size such as the Australopithecines.
-
Pongidae- include the remaining African great apes including gorillas, chimpanzees, and the Asian orangutan.
- Alpha male
- The second most dominant is the Beta male
- And thereafter, they assign numbers to all other monkeys.
- Were they killed off by a disease specific to them?
- Were they killed off by 1 or more other types of hominids?
- Were they absorbed into a more dominant species of hominids?
- Northeast Asia
- Northwest Europe
- Western Africa
This reflects the view that both Neanderthals and modern humans derived from a widespread ancestral species called H. heidelbergensis.
However, evidence is growing that Neanderthal features have deep roots in Europe so H. neanderthalensis might extend back over 400,000 years.
- Hats, caps are worn reversed because they don't know if they're comming or going.
- Dark glasses are worn, even at night, in an attempt to mimic the environment of a cave with walls that are blank. Thus their blank stares are highly suggestive thereof.
- Garments are worn to fit the available torso and give the impression of being normal.
- Artiodactyla- Modern Artiodactyls include sheep, pigs, camels and giraffes.
- Perissodactyla- Today's Perissodactyls include horses, tapirs, rhinos and zebras.
- Primates- The mammalian order that includes humans.
(and some researchers might include another such as Ardipithecus ramidus, which brings the selection to a 3 to 1 count. And other researchers prefer to use the triad of Ardipithecus~ Australopithecus~ Homo.)
3 distinct species of the genus Homo:
(If we add Homo sapiens sapiens "wise wise man" to the list, we have another 3 to 1 ratio.)
|
Use this link for a reference to http://www.threesology.org/321-a.php |
If we choose to include all presently known varieties of Homo in a list, we find there is a divisible by 3 (or 2, or 4, or 6, or 12) quantity:
| Homo antecessor Homo erectus Homo ergaster Homo floresiensis Homo Gautensensis Homo georgicus Homo habilis Homo heidelbergensis Homo neandertalensis Homo rhodesiensis Homo rudolfensis Homo cro-magnon (Homo sapiens) (and by including Homo sapiens sapiens, we are the infamous number 13 in the series. |
3 distinct species of the genus Paranthropus:
(If we include the Paranthropus crassidens selection as do a few researchers, we have another 3 to 1 ratio.)
Some researchers believe that our early humans can be traced through the following lineage:
3 Proconsul species:
3 Australopithecines:
(and some researchers include another set of 3 for one reason or another such as on morphological grounds:)
3 genera of Australopithecine by some researchers:
3 Pan troglodyte sub-species:
3 names: Bonobos~ Pan paniscus~ Pygmy Chimpanzee...
3 types of gorillas:
...and if we add the "cross river" variety, we have a 3 to 1 ratio. (This sounds equivalent to the "jumping the fence" variety of humans with respect to mating practices.)
3 types of primates:
3 social group types of the Great Apes:
3 (colloquial) references to primates: Chimps (monkeys)~ Gorillas (apes)~ Humans (neanderthals)
3 primates compared to humans for differences in DNA:
(It has been considered that in the distant past, an early form of "proto-human" (Tarzan-like) primate, after "separation" from a Cheetah-like past may have interbred with chimpanzees for awhile, prior to a complete "divorce" in which both took up their own Condo tree housing. Had the separation and eventual divorce not occurred, one must wonder if present humans would even exist or exist in the manner we tend to perceive ourselves to be. (Unless you are one who considers the possibility that we are less hairy version of Cheetah on stilts and some sort of hormonal therapy.) If some early "human" type of species continued to mate with chimpanzees after the two started to diverge (separate), it could be suggested that those who did not "divorce" themselves entirely from the practice ended up dying off because their inter-breeding gave birth to those too smart to be a regular chimpanzee, but too dumb to be included in the species which made a full break from their past... and their was no Jesus at the time to reintegrate them back into main-stream society from their death-like ostracism as he had done for Lazarus.)
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/05/humans-chimps.html
3 recurring references regarding lineage separation of Orang-utans, Gorillas, and Chimps, when compared to humans:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/1333730.stm
Do Chimps, Orang-utans, and Gorillas represent ancestral links of 3 different lineages that diverged from 3 separate origins for the three dominant human races? In other words, instead of a single human ancestor for the three dominant human races Negroid- Mongoloid- Caucasoid (African- Asian- Indo-European/Caucasian), there were actually three separate lines of divergence from which each of the three more primitive primates took their leave?
Three traditional families of hominoid:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2001/12/1204_hominin_id.html
3-part grouping strategy used by Primatologists to identify and catalogue differences in roles of dominance in monkey groups:
3 pongids: Pan~ Gorilla~ Pongo
3 investigative teams working together: American~ Ethiopian~ Japanese, were responsible for naming a new species called Australopithecus garhi.
3 questions concerning the disappearance of Neanderthals:
3 Miocene hominid groups: Sivapithecus~ Dryopithecus~ Proconsul
|
[1] The Candelabra theory poses that homo erectus alone migrated out of africa to become Archaic Homo sapiens which evolved into modern humans. [1] The Out Of Africa "1" theory poses a two "person" migration beginning with Homo erectus which is considered to have ended in a dead end. [2] The second part of this 2-part migration involved the modern-shaped (archaic) human of which we of the present are thought to be direct descendants thereof. [1] The Out Of Africa "2" theory poses a three "person" (three waves of people) migration beginning with Homo erectus which is considered to have become a dead end. [2] The second part of this 3-wave migration of people to leave Africa involved Homo ergaster which eventually also became a dead end and that some researchers consider to have evolved into Neanderthals. [3] The third part of this 3-wave migration of people to leave Africa involved Archaic Homo sapiens from whom we of today are thought to be descended. |
Three very separate regions of the world are said to be the locations that the human inhabitants of the Western Hemisphere largely derive from:
The above image shows the geographical and temporal distribution of hominid populations (for Europe- Africa- Asia), based on fossil finds, using different taxonomic schemes. The new finds from Herto (H) represent early Homo sapiens.
The roots of H. sapiens might be similarly deep in Africa, but this figure represents the alternative view that the ancestor was a separate African species called H. rhodesiensis.
Different views of early human evolution are also shown in the above image. Some workers prefer to lump the earlier records together and recognize only one widespread species, H. erectus (shown in a). Others recognize several species, with H. ergaster and H. antecessor (or H. mauritanicus) in the West, and H. erectus only in the Far East (shown in b).
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v423/n6941/fig_tab/423692a_F1.html
| 3.5 million year old new fossil found:
Kenyanthropus platyops. Discovered
by Meave Leakey and her team in 1998 west of Lake Turkana, Kenya, K. platyops
was described in 2001 in Nature as a new genus dating back to the middle
Pliocene, (3.5 MYA.,) positioning itself as a possible direct ancestor of
modern humans. [Skull KNM-WT-40000, Kenyanthropus platyops. Photo credit:
National Museum of Kenya.] http://www.kenyanthropus.com/ |
 |
List of Hominid Species:
| Species | Approximate age of fossils |
|
Sahelanthropus tchadensis Orrorin tugenensis Ardipithecus kadabba Ardipithecus ramidus Australopithecus anemensis Australopithecus afarensis Australopithecus bahrelghazali Kenyanthropus platyops Australopithecus africanus Paranthropus aethiopicus Australopithecus garhi Paranthropus boisei Australopithecus Sediba |
7 million 5.8 to 6.2 5.2 to 5.8 4.4 3.9 to 4.2 2.9 to 3.85 3.5 3.5 2.1 to 3.3 2.3 to 2.7 2.5 1.2 to 2.3 1.78 to 1.95 |
| Homo Reptilicus criminalensis:
This is a species I (humourously) postulated in reference to an explanation about
criminal behavior. (That those who commit criminal activity have some link to a
separate species' linneage.) Please see commentary at the following link: http://www.threesology.org/criminal-2s5.php | |
|
H. habilis H. rudolfensis Paranthropus robustus Homo antecessor H. ergaster Homo erectus H. gautengensis H. georgicus Homo cepranensis H. heidelbergensis H. neanderthalensis H. sapiens sapiens (this is us of the present age) H. rhodesiensis H. sapiens idaltu H. floresiensis (hobbit) Denisova hominin |
1.78 to 1.95 1.8 to 1.9 1.2 to 1.8 800,000 to 1,200,000 1,400,000 - 1,900,000 143,000 to 1,890,000 1,500,000 to 2 million 1,800,000 350,000 to 500,000 350,000 to 400,000 28,000 to 200,000 present to 200,000 13,000 to 190,000 150,000 to 160,000 17,000 to 95,000 40,000 |
If each species represents a single "year" in the life of humanity's development, we are now 29 years of age. In other words, we are at the threshold of beginning our middle age years. Interestingly, the book of Genesis mentions three of Adam and Eve's children: Cain, Abel and Seth, but geneticists, by tracing the DNA patterns found in people throughout the world, have now identified lineages descended from 10 sons of a genetic Adam and 18 daughters of Eve, which makes the count 28. And now we have another missing link... It's probably a teenager "hanging out" with their apish friends who like to monkey around. Oh are they going to be grounded when they come down to earth.
http://www.webfamilytree.com/The%20Human%20Family%20Tree.htm
Possibly a New Species
HMMM... COULD BE!!!
They are referred to as "homo slackass-erectus" created by natural genetic downward evolution through constant spineless posturing and spasmodic upper limb gestures, which new research has shown to cause shorter legs and an inability to ambulate other than in an awkward shuffling gait. The "drag-crotch" shape also seems to effect brain function. Expect no eye contact or intelligent verbal communication. History shows that this species mostly receives food stamps and full government care. Unfortunately, most are highly fertile.
Three important mammal groups thought to have arisen from primitive mammals due to a comet collision with Earth around 55 million years ago that created a greenhouse warming effect:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/education/2997404.stm
Herb O. Buckland
herbobuckland@hotmail.com