Threesology Research Journal
Novum Organum Threesiarum
(New Instrument of Threes)
- page twenty -

(The Study of Threes)

bones (3K)

Just because all the physicists in the world agree on a given topic, does not mean they are right... despite their application of experimental verification. Since even the methods and manners of the experimental form can well be another variation of a cultural proclivity to align perceptions with a recurring orientation that may take on different words and symbols during different eras, but are the same when looked at in a "bare bones" way. One of these 'bare bones' might well be the pattern-of-three organization clearly evidenced in anatomy and can be represented in different ways (though you may prefer some other seriation):

  • 1 - 2 - 3
  • One - Two - Many
  • Singularity - Duality - Plurality

Looking at the Universe from a particle physics perspective may be viewed by some as a bare bones representation of matter and existence, but the usage of a "three" formula in organizing the information may suggest otherwise. If it is not suggesting a culturally imposed proclivity to organize perceptions in a given way, does the identification of a recurring "three" theme suggest a type of "Natural Law, Logic" that is being overlooked?

particles (9K)

There are three general types of particles which can be characterized as:

  1. Stable particles
  2. Unstable particles
  3. Highly unstable particles

atom (4K)

Clearly, while we humans can conceive of multiple dimensions, the value (listing) of the multiplicity is few and far between. In other words, by noting the recurrence of a tripartite Singular - Dual - Plural" formula existing in various subjects and that the "three" value is predominant, an inability to secure a far larger expansion beyond the "three" with a similar quantity of examples suggests the existence of a constraint that can be referred to as a factor contributing to cognitive limitation. That to which physicists are describing may be a representation of an existing constraint being imposed on the human species' ability to otherwise conceptualize.

For example, whereas we use the term "multi"-dimension to express a value greater than three (or four, when we add "Time" to the classical three) such that some mathematician's formula may suggest ten dimensions; we must either claim such an idea is specific to the realm of physics, or that it represents the imposition of an existing constraint because there is a lack of a similar reference in various other subject areas. Even though a mathematician or physicist might posture their ego by assuming their equation(s) supersedes the vision of anyone previously looking into a given area; their expression details a human capacity for "larger number" thinking but the environment demands that it subserve to its basic, and predominant singular - dual - triple schematic.

More simply put: If you were to attempt to collect all the references from all subject areas which have a "ten" value, you might well find that there are only a few and that examples of the "three" value exceeding dwarf any list you might want to make. The same goes for all other number values exceeding the "three". Whereas we humans are inclined to think that the physics which we see and appear to prove with our designed and directed experimentation as well as follow-up application, may itself be an expression of a spatial determined constraint... like particles aligned according to the strength of a magnetic field.

That which constrains us is a barrier. In several cases, we have noted that the usage of speed has assisted us in breaking the sound barrier and the gravitational barrier of Earth in terms of exceeding its grasp for venturing into space. However, a significant problem arises when we begin to formulate the notion that speed itself may be a barrier and we have to look elsewhere. Take for example the speed-of-light. While it is claimed that nothing we know of can exceed the rate, we must wonder if the rate is already exceeding something such as Time, or if it periodically, under certain conditions, exceeds itself. Whereas breaking the sound barrier produces a sonic boom, let us assume for the moment that Time also has a comparable "boom" that may not be perceivable by what we think of as a conventional auditory process. The Universe itself may be that which is "following" on the coat-tails of light speed, like sound following a jet exceeding the speed of sound; with an eventual "boom" to take place.

Yet, we assume the process may be directional an unimpeded just as we might well assume the same of sound. Most generally do not think in terms of a sonic boom being partially deflected, absorbed or refracted. Most of us also do not think in terms of dissipation. And with such considerations in mind, to thus apply them to the speed-of-light, whether we view it as an incrementally progressive "process" or otherwise. In extension, by viewing the speed-of-light as a maximum, what we are describing is a cognitive limit being imposed on us as a constraint on our conceptual abilities that most are not particularly concerned with, just as a primitive mind is not particularly concerned with thinking conceptually about quantities with which it uses to carry out day to day exchanges of personal accounting or trade with one or more others. The cognitive limit of the primitive has a level of functionality in terms of practicality which serves the day to day business at hand. They have no need nor desire to think their simple value system is a cognitive limitation. Likewise, present theories of physics.

While physicists have recognized the recurrence of a "three" pattern, there is no attendant philosophy, no construed Empirical Methodology, no formulaic logic being applied to the question of the "threes phenomena" occurring in other fields as well. The Novum Organum Threesiarum is attempting to do so.

See a reference to the question of the "threes" in physics here:

Why are there 3 of everything?: By Jon Butterworth

...Likewise for religious and political perspectives. For example, some religions of the present age use some model of "three" such as the Christian Trinity or Trimurti of Hinduism; but little is said about our present day perspective of organizing a past culture's gods into a three organization such as the Egyptian triads; when they may not have had either a word or acknowledged concept involving a trinity, triad or the like. While Jung thought the (copy-cat) origin of the Christian version lay in the ancient Babylonian and Egyptian triads, he did not consider that such a perspective might be the result that we in the present were imposing this organizational pattern on the past; when, stating again, they may not have used such a pattern as any coherent identifiable formula... since their usage may have been a copy-cat variation of an earlier theme from another culture and was not an originality of purposeful thought. Just because we see a distinct pattern-of-three, does not mean the people of the past did, nor arranged their gods in such a grouping... whether or not they had a word which was equivalent to our own "trinity", "triad", or "triunity".

Did ancient cultures portray a "trinitarian" (three-god) organizational formula, or do we of the present impose such a pattern on them? Just because we discover three main gods, does not mean this constitutes a trinity. Using the word "Trinity" as if it has no variable meaning is misleading. The same goes for the usage of the word "triad". There may not have existed any three-god grouping that could be called a triad or trinity. Just because an historian places three gods on a single page for you to read does not mean these three were placed together by the people in the ancient culture. Historians write with their inclined proclivity, which includes biases and a lack of self-reflection with respect to their organizational methodology. Threes researchers must freely admit that particular uses of language to label a "threes" example may be incorrectly identified, labeled and catalogued.

In addition, we of the present might be able to notice that there were no, at least recorded uses of triads-of-gods sets in more ancient cultures. We don't similarly acknowledge that the "three"-pattern is a developmental out-growth of singular, dual and multiple god observances. And, many don't recognize this singular - dual - multiple gods reference as itself a pattern-of-three "relativity" that may have occurred over long expanses of time; which may or may not be a reflection of the "one - two - many" words-for-quantity association used by various ancient peoples in the development of number-quantity concepts. Similarly, the patterns of Singular - Dual - Multiple, Singularity - Duality - Plurality, can be analogously applied.

See the following page for a reference:

One -Two- Many page a

Another integral part of this analysis is that while a culture may be using various patterns-of-three in different subject areas, this does not mean everyone is using a pattern-of-three orientation as part of their own mental framework, in terms of an acknowledged specificity. Most people, it would appear, do not take time to think about how they think. In other words, people do not typically place themselves in the role of a detective trying to determine the "M.O." (Modus Operandi: mode of operation) of their thought processing. Mimicry and imitation do not necessarily constitute an inherent brain pattern as part of an underlying genetic endowment. Such items could be cultural and/or familial (family) impositions. The susceptibility towards being influenced to mimic and imitate might well be construed as a genetic endowment... even though some would say that mimicry and imitation are genetic endowments from an ancient primate past.

For example, just because a parrot or mynah bird can imitate a human voice does not mean there is a human intelligence to be associated with the vocalizations, unless we want to say that some humans have bird brains. Another example would be the adoption of clothes, life style and mannerisms of a sports or other entertainment personality, and think that we have also become the person themselves. The same goes for those countries which adopt social observances of health, education and welfare of other nations, thinking that such will make them achieve some parity with the nation which they copy. Such people give the appearances of another nation, but they still remain imitators. Its like the religious "Cargo Cults" of New Guinea and Melanesia who believe that by ritualistically aping the European society they do not understand, they can persuade supernatural powers to give them European wealth—"cargo". Often worshipping John Frum, a messianic figure, the cults have even involved building airstrips to receive "cargo".

If the nation that they have copied begins to change, the imitator may well follow suit, after a period, or attempt to remain an imitation of that which they have adopted. But this does not mean that their brains have acquired the structure which enabled the "role model" nation to acquire their orientation in the first place, nor any genetic ability to grow beyond this. Growing beyond this may constitute an acknowledgment of the "threes phenomena" to determine if the wide spread usage in some cultures is a genetic influenced replication or mere mimicry. If the triplet codon system in genetics has influenced a usage of a "three"-patterned organizational formula, then why doesn't every culture exhibit the same type and level of influence? Is there much more variability in genetic's influence on culture than we think? Is a "three" orientation a brain that is wired differently, and those that recognize the "three" another wiring form?

Yet, perhaps we should say wiring "formula" since "form" implies a rigidity and "formula", implies a plasticity... though such motility is nonetheless a "form" in terms of kind or type. In any case, an understanding of the "threes phenomena" as an artifact of culture or genetic endowment, forces us to consider it in terms of an unexpected "physical" presence that we are trying to diagnose. Is it a disease brought on by food type and/or preparation, a genetic mutation, or some wide-spread idiosyncratic cultural expression? For example, do Americans, as a third (later) born (baby of the) Indo-European group (family) exhibit a usage of more threes than other Indo-European groups; or do Russians—, as detected in Literature and expounded as such by American Researchers interested in Russian Literature? Or is it that only those engaged in writing Russian literature are prime users of the "three" reference? Why is it that American researchers of Russian Literature are identifying a "Threes" usage but no Russian researchers?

Different cultures may have different underlying mind-sets though they appear to share the same views. In other instances, different cultures may appear to be quite different, but share the same underlying mindset which is obscured by mannerisms, language, diet, music, etc... Georges Dumezil attempted to unravel a common mindset amongst different cultures in his notion of a Tripartite Ideology. However, he may have simply imposed his own three-part mental patterning on one or another social structure which did not in fact have it in the same length- depth- and breadth in all instances. He also, from my perspective, misinterpreted the so-called "four" caste system of India by offhandedly dismissing the fourth:

...Let me describe a stumbling block circumstance encountered by Georges Dumezil when examining India's cultural groups stratification. Whereas he identified the existence of the three sought-for functions in his developing tri-partite model, he also encountered the existence of a fourth "lower caste" (out-caste) social order that, by way of a linguistically applied turn-of-phrase, frequently becomes dismissed into some irrelevance so as not to act like a wrench thrown into the utility of a "threes function" research wheel.

In short, when he encountered the "out" caste group of people, he himself cast it out so that by so doing, it didn't cast a shadow on his tripartite socio-religious model of Priests - Warriors - Artisans/Cultivators; to which the present day usage of Executive - Judicial - Legislative branches in the U.S. government are said to have some parity with, though others might want to say the a closer approximation is the Government/Corporations - Military Complex - Citizenry.

However, by including the additional Indian caste item into an extended three-patterned model termed the 3 -to- 1 ratio, Dumezilian research efforts help to describe the existence of a "threes function"— related pattern frequently overlooked (or dismissed in one way or another). A 3 -to- 1 ratio is part of a tripartite model with respect to our developing human cognition just as are single and double configurations. Such instances don't detract from an "threes" pattern, they are complementary thereto. In order to appreciate different representations of the 3 -to- one 1 ratio phenomena, it is necessary to view a collection of examples:

See 3 to 1 examples starting here:

Three -to- One ratios page a

In effect, the imitators are a superficiality of the actual representation. For the "Threes" researcher, it is of value to keep in mind that there are a lot of patterns-of-three references which are little more than imitations. Such a realization is extremely important to those who are interested in seeking an origin of one, another or "THE" initial three pattern. The "GREAT- GREAT- GREAT- GRANDADDY" of all threes, so-to-speak.

They could all be wrong and have convinced the public they are right. Just like authority figures in past cultures held and expected others to agree with the perspective that the Earth was the center of the Universe. Just because the majority of people in the world today no longer believe this, doesn't mean they don't share other absurdities of perspective. Just because you may not believe in some foolish notions of the past doesn't mean this automatically makes you immune from being an idiot about other ideas. The human mind might well have a mindset for stupidity and simply exchanges one dumb idea for that of another while at the same time claim it is more intelligent than its fore-bearers because it doesn't believe in "their" nonsense. We may well have replaced their nonsense with out own. (The present topic excluded of course. HA!)

For example, while there are those who claim that there exists a higher standard of living in the U.S. and other countries to make them enviable and assign credit to their governing systems; I also see a parallel increased standard of poverty. While many have heard of poverty and think of it as a condition portrayed by those living in a third-world country, the absence of such destitute conditions in one's immediate day-to-day encounters makes many unable to recognize poverty in terms of relatedness to an observable standard of acceptability. This same behavior occurs in researching the "threes" phenomena. Without defining a clear pattern of research criteria, a researcher can include and discard examples at will and not be questioned for a standard for which they haven't described. It's like the old fairy tale of Rumplestiltskin. If it isn't named, you're safe... at least until someone begins to question your methodology as they interpret it and you have no ready-made defense or reason for. This is the forthcoming circumstance of Islam. It tries to remain safe by not permitting (1) the attempted naming of God (ineffable), or (2) a portrayal of Mohammed, or (3) true religious scholarship. Islam will eventually face an internal war of profound proportions.

Some people do not easily recognize the hardships being experienced by others when they themselves are either experiencing a surfeit, or are experiencing a hardship themselves and are either blinded by it due to self-absorption or think that hardships are an acceptable commonality for which nothing is to be done about them. Similarly, many people do not easily recognize the "threes phenomena" in themselves, in others, or that exist around them. For one reason or another, and despite the widespread usage and appearance of multiple day-to-day examples, most people are not actively cognizant of "threeness". Yet, even if they are and may have an on-going collection, they might well confess they too overlook numerous examples because they are over-whelmed to the point of exhaustion.

Some people have difficulty seeing the existence of wide-spread homelessness and unaffordable housing in the U.S., and others that do, conclude that they can't do anything about it and so must specifically take care of themselves and their own. And many are not aware that government-subsidized living arrangements such as for the handicapped and elderly require them to pay at least a third of their income... and increases in a similar manner if they get an increase in their pension. And these are considered to be not-for-profit services, yet no one in the public actually gets to see how much is made in comparison to how much is spent in terms of maintenance, costs for utilities, etc... Such a lack of interest in these types of intricacies in terms of related efforts in "threes" research, runs parallel to a lack of interest in the intricacy of threes. In other words, a diminished depth of consideration in one respect can suggest a lack of depth consideration in another or all respects. I have met people whose entire spectrum of interests relies on a superficial interest thereof. Any exhibited depth of knowledge is merely the echo of someone else's.

While the absence of a government program can lead to an intricacy of social problems, most of them deal with very simple and superficial needs and do not really have any depth, not only because immediate solutions are easier to address, but because delving deep into the origin(s) of a similar problem experienced by many people frequently requires a different type of thinking. For examples, while there is need for governments to provide services for aging citizens, a situation that is becoming more-so critical in the U.S. due to the "baby boomers" generation, it must be noted that such services are not the advocacy programs as some might assume. In a similar manner, "threes" research should not be assumed to advocate particular "programs" such as a specific, or for that matter: any, religious perspective, despite personal claims to ownership based on a long-held three-patterned belief said to represent supremacy.

Government programs such as Aging Services, are not structured nor specifically set-up to be a surrogate family member, legal assistant, or medical advisor for each person's individual circumstances and to ensure it gets everything a person wants as they think they deserve. Whereas on the one hand the government places itself in the position of being a "Big Brother", its role is diminished to that of a stand-offish neighbor when departmental guidelines have been offered... even if individual aging services workers would like to be able to do more... they are constrained from doing so or quite possibly place themselves in a position which might lead to unemployment for breaking rules, regulations and policies which are meant to take the guesswork out of personal judgments which frequently are faulty and might, in some cases, lead to lawsuits by those they honestly wanted to help in a more in-depth manner.

Delving deeper in a subject matter can lead one into a morass from which it is difficult to free oneself. And the more you struggle to free yourself, the deeper you seem to get. Particularly if the subject is an area where most explorers have ventured only superficially into. If not a quicksand, than a jungle or a coral reef from which a previous trail has become inundated by a tide with a cyclicity quite uncommon from other types of over-growth. There are a lot of canyons and beautiful vistas which entice the imagination with respect to threes research. And unfortunately, human life at present is quite finite. A researcher has only so much time and they must make some decisions as to whether to continue as they are, or make an effort to relay what they have thus far discovered and leave future explorers either to confirm, deny, or improve upon their research... if not in fact developing a whole new insight. So, I make occasional forays back and forth to leave some measurable record of my travels instead of venturing onward to a point of being lost and leaving but a journal or two (or three) that may or may not be found by some adventurer in a future age.

Yet, even with my efforts to leave evidence that such a journey presents us with a larger continent for exploration, I can not help but notice that my thinking has and continues to change. In order to grasp greater subtleties and devise the necessary organization of thinking required to fully appreciate the information, I grow further from the common-senseness of those that I have known for years. But in hindsight, I never really did accept their common-sense views. They are cultural artifacts for which I can no longer wear as items by which I can be recognized as being "one of them". All they hear is the drum-beat, while I hear the drum-beats pattern-of-three. It is a distinct difference in perception that I carry over into other perceptions and considerations... and they do not. Perhaps I am of a different tribe and my research efforts are that which unconsciously seek to locate the tribe I lost. I do not know where this "lost tribe" or "lost world" or "lost perspective" is, if at all it does in any forthcoming cultural sense; but I will seek it out... be it a figment of imagination or not... perhaps I am but one of three founders of a new age in the making.

(Analogously, I want to relate that whenever I hear Scottish bagpipes, something stirs to the very marrow of my bones. I do not know why this is, unable to account for such an affinity in the absence of past experiences... but it is there nonetheless. For a very long time I have had an "urge" to go to Scotland to find that which beckons me there. I have musefully thought to write my name as "MacBuckland" or "McBuckland", but I have refrained from doing so because of my dislike of the food at McDonald's. Besides, it only has two arches and that does not sit well for a "threes" person.)

The novice of threes research may no doubt want to imbue my expressions in the same manner to which they apply to comic books, science fiction, or some other make-believe genre. They are not yet accustomed to someone using words, ideas and phrases of contemporary ideas to convey that which the vocabulary of language does not permit us to portray in a more definitive sense. While this makes it difficult to illustrate "exactly" what a person is getting at, it must suffice until such time as a greater means of explanation is available to be imparted in conversational form.

Artists know well this situation when they try to convey a vague impression upon a sculpture, canvas, stage, screen, architecture, etc... They are either left with some abstraction or some contemporarily identifiable representation that others may delight in but the artist themselves know is a poor likeness of that which they wanted to capture; and remains ever elusive like some sprite, Leprechaun, or genie. They have not yet learned to train their two-part hand -and- eye coordination into a three-part hand, eye and mind ensemble. It's as if the hand and eye are interpreting the mind's impressions along an habitually reflexive contour... despite all their attempts to alter the patterns of learned behavior by breaking the chains of their thought. Some wonder if it is going to require a new type of species. Not by way of inter-breeding with other races, nor necessarily by inter-breeding with an extra-terrestrial, but perhaps by simply thinking much more differently than has been customarily considered, much-less practiced.

Democracy in America frequently exhibits and practices varying social forms of Communism, Socialism, Monarchicalism, Plutocracy, dictatorship, etc... The latter case, for example, can be seen in the form where the "lecture method" is being used in classrooms, which is a 'dictatorship' model in that an educator dictates information to students. Likewise at places of employment. Also, jails and prisons do not run on a democratic program and permits the usage of alternative social governing types that is re-enforced by adopting the policy that prisoners are not entitled to full citizenship rights: for example, they are not allowed to vote. While many justify the loss of privileges as part of the punishment, as part of the person's "penance" so that they might be more "penitent" in a place called a "penitentiary"... all of which were derived from religious notions; the consciousness of society and even educated researchers have not recognized the lack of privileges as being a carry-over from the days of enforced slavery. Clearly, dealing with the problem of crime and criminals needs to be addressed from a whole new perspective... one of those "deeper" considerations which must be derived in a wilderness of contemplation that the common perspicacity overlooks.

Such is the same in researching the "threes phenomena". Though the landscape exists everywhere, it is taken for granted. An example of a commonly occurring event that is taken for granted by those in the vicinity of being able to perceive a particular phenomena, is like that which I witnessed while in the Marana/Cortero area of Arizona. During the early hours of a 2013 December morning, I witnessed what at first appeared to be a stream of smoke, like a low hanging trail from a jet. I stopped the vehicle and got out to take a more concerted observation and realized I was watching thousands and thousands and thousands of birds streaming in a wave-like cloud which gave me the impression of a "3" symbol being repeated. Though of course someone else might have called it a "W", "M", "E" or pattern similar to that seen on an oscilloscope or geometric pattern that was a referencing graph depicting lows, troughs and highs such as one might view when the performance of the stock market is plotted over a given length of time.

While I have seen large groups of birds swarm about a given area before, the flight pattern of birds in those events did not readily portray an identifiable pattern, quite possibly because of the speed involved. No doubt time-elapsed photography might well assist in such instances. With respect to the incident in Arizona, I did not encounter anyone making a comment about the birds and nor did I read about the event in the Newspaper. In an attempt to discover what kind of bird was involved, since in that early pre-dawn light they all looked like small black birds, I couldn't find a ready-made reference on the internet. It was not until several days later that I had an opportunity to mention the event to someone who vacations frequently in Arizona. While he acknowledged the event as a frequent occurrence, he was not of the mind-set to be interested in the type of bird it was. And if a reader learns of the kind, I would be obliged if they would pass on the information to be included herein.

Events can occur so frequently that, over-time, no one takes heed and no discussion takes place in any effort which might arouse an interest in a more thorough contemplation. Because it is dismissed, not even taking on a superstitious appeal, the event is no doubt entirely over-looked by some. It is placed into some "irrelevance genre" of perception, if at all it is placed for any length of extended consideration. No doubt other "unusual" events at different locations throughout the world take place not only in the perception range of human sight, but perhaps singularly or combined with qualities which the human range of perception can detect.

Then again, there is no telling how many similar events take place where no human is nearby to witness. The world remains a vast unexplored area when looked at from this perspective.... Just imagine how many events might well be taking place all around me but I am, due to the limits of human sensory abilities, unable to readily perceive. Yet, imagine if someone is able to perceive such subtleties but no one else in their immediate social sphere has the same ability. It might indeed be very unsettling by trying to describe something for which no one else (in their immediate presence) can imagine, much less perceive.

Some readers might indeed want to claim that remarks about the existence of a "threes" landscape was born from the hallucinations induced by some drug, deranged mental state, or a very vivid imagination. While in my youth I might well have taken such suggestions to heart, my experiences since then have made me realize the threes wilderness is quite real. And when I use the word "wilderness", I am merely referring to an as yet largely unexplored area and do not mean to imply an inhospitable environment. Now some readers may think I'm daft, just like many who may have thought Christopher Columbus' ideas were insane, but I tell you we need to launch a much larger expedition into this realm. I don't want the exploration to take place in a piece-meal fashion by those seeking some sort of revenue-producing effort such as the gold, furs and slave seeking individuals of old. And we don't need flat-footed wannabe (want to be) authority figures trampling over evidence like police and political figures did of old (and still do on occasion such as after the destruction of the Twin Towers in New York, which helped to conceal the evidence that segments of the US government were involved).

...Or perhaps like many in history who are not really understood by their contemporaries like the poet, painter and prophet William Blake. Not to mention Einstein whose ideas had to be ruminated on for awhile before anyone grasped what he was trying to convey. But there are no doubt thousands of people throughout the world who are either misunderstood for awhile or are never understood because their views are being expressed to those who are not their intellectual contemporaries. Another problem is the type of language being used to employ a description. And I am not talking about the usage of metaphor, simile and similar variations; what I mean is that the language being employed is not being translated into other languages with which their ideas can reach out to a larger repository of people who might easily grasp what is being said because they think similarly.

Some professionals exploring the realm of "threes" do so with the sole intent of supporting their personal convictions. And of those that I have encountered, none have made mention of the consideration that their particular "three" pattern may be just another example of the overall threes recurrence in different subject areas. Nor do they openly make known any contemplations as to whether or not their three-organized perspective can exceed its own structure as based on the premise of some coherent logic. In other words, is it a basic scaffolding applicable to other tasks such as the usage of scaffolding that can be assembled and disassembled for different job sites as occurs in the construction industry. In yet other words, does it profess an underlying schematic like the triplet code found in DNA, RNA and Proteins, or is it merely just another species that owes its existence to a fundamental three structure... yet its particular fundamental threes structure is not as adaptable as one might like to believe?

And what if the triplet coding in, for example, DNA, is but a recurring species of yet a more fundamental pattern-of-three not yet recognized? And I'm not talking about any threes-formula applied to particle physics. And at the other side of the spectrum, what if the "threes" usage by some humans is the DNA-like expression of a new species in the making? What if we who come to be aware of the "threes" presence in a larger sense, are mutagenic forms of the human species? And those that can not clearly "see" the threes in the larger context and not merely singularly such as from the perspective of a religion; are giving us an indication that they are not mutating... that they are not evolving...

Initial Posting Date: Tuesday, April 22, 2014
HTML (4.01) update: Monday, June 10, 2019... 6:54 AM

Your Questions, Comments or Additional Information are welcomed:
Herb O. Buckland