• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Biblical predictions and checking data

Originally posted by RufusAtticus


X-Ray Evidence

The precursors of both baby and adult teeth are laid down during fetal development, along with everything else in your body.

Is that link supposed to be a joke, or are you intentionally trying to deceive everyone? Your original assertion was:

Did you know that x-rays of babies will show their adult teeth, or at least the precursors of them?

The X-ray at your link is of a 7 year old, not a baby! Many kids already HAVE their second set of teeth at 7, not just precursors of them.

Originally posted by RufusAtticus

If a third set of teeth were standard in humans, then something should appear on x-rays or in our anatomy. You are going to have to work pretty hard to demonstrate that third sets of teeth somehow bypass the requirements of human development.

There's only one reason why the third set of teeth would have to show up in X-rays of babies (or even 7 year olds) -- because YOU say it should work that way.

I'll take your assertion seriously under one of the following two conditions:

1. When you present the results of a study which shows that, of people who get a third set of teeth in their old age. all of them had precursors of their third set that showed up in X-rays taken when they were 7 or younger.

2. When you can prove that God died and left you in charge.

Until then your assertion is less valuable than hot air.
 
Upvote 0
Originally posted by LewisWildermuth

No they are not a benifit but a problem for most people in whom they continue to grow.

I give you examples of people who get a third set of teeth between 80-110, none of which indicate there were problems. You cite one example (your own) of getting some third teeth at a young age (abnormal) and they don't come in properly (abnormal) and conclude from this that the whole phenomena is an abberation and is not beneficial?

This is a perfect example of what I've been saying about the self-deceived and spiritually blind reasoning of evolutionists.
 
Upvote 0
Upvote 0
Originally posted by LiveFreeOrDie

So you have a couple of anectodal mentions that are decades old and all of a sudden you proclaim third sets of teeth are "VERY common".

It is very common and not restricted to a couple of anecdotes. Do the search for yourself. You'll have to weed through the hits about dental implants, dentures and some very bizarre stories about UFOs, but you'll not only find a LOT of well documented cases where very old people developed a third set of teeth, there was even a dental history study done that turned up a lot of cases where this occurred. I tried to find that study again but I couldn't locate it. If I find the link I'll post it.

Consider these other factors: In almost all cases, the valid hits you get on the search results are not the results of a study. They are simply those times when people mentioned that they got a third set of teeth, and that shows up in an Obit or some other context where it is mentioned "in passing." So how many cases go unreported?

Also, assuming my premise is true (that we are designed to live 900+ years) we have no idea when we're supposed to get the third set of teeth. What if it's at about age 120? In that case, these people are anomalies because they got them much earlier than expected. It's not something we can test unless we can get more people to live to age 120.
 
Upvote 0
Originally posted by npetreley


It is very common and not restricted to a couple of anecdotes. Do the search for yourself. You'll have to weed through the hits about dental implants, dentures and some very bizarre stories about UFOs, but you'll not only find a LOT of well documented cases where very old people developed a third set of teeth, there was even a dental history study done that turned up a lot of cases where this occurred. I tried to find that study again but I couldn't locate it. If I find the link I'll post it.

Consider these other factors: In almost all cases, the valid hits you get on the search results are not the results of a study. They are simply those times when people mentioned that they got a third set of teeth, and that shows up in an Obit or some other context where it is mentioned "in passing." So how many cases go unreported?

Also, assuming my premise is true (that we are designed to live 900+ years) we have no idea when we're supposed to get the third set of teeth. What if it's at about age 120? In that case, these people are anomalies because they got them much earlier than expected. It's not something we can test unless we can get more people to live to age 120.

Nick, you have an opportunity to strengthen your credibility. There are approximately 50,000 people living today that are candidates for the third set of teeth. Give us one example from the medical literature. Go to the library if that's what it takes... Between that and the false premise that we only use 10% of our brains, this is supposed to be the evidence for your theory. You also predict that the appendix turns on every 300 years and does something, but you haven't shown any evidence for that. So what it comes down to is that your theory has ZERO support. You can improve on that by offering ONE example from the medical literature for the third set of teeth.

Maybe the anecdotal evidence does reflect an anomality, and maybe the third set of teeth would come in if folks lived to be 150. But the mere possibility that people get third sets of teeth cannot be taken as evidence for your theory.

You have a theory with no evidence. That is not a good tool for criticizing a theory that has evidence.
 
Upvote 0
Also, assuming my premise is true (that we are designed to live 900+ years) we have no idea when we're supposed to get the third set of teeth.

Actually, your theory predicts that there will be a third set based on the fact that the adult teeth wear out, so it should predict that they would come in as the adult teeth begin to be very worn. For instance, I have an 82 year old grandmother who still has her adult teeth, but they are worn to nubs. Shouldn't she start losing one or two so the next set can start coming in in their place?
 
Upvote 0
Originally posted by Late_Cretaceous
Hey nick, my grandmother will be turning 102 years old in a few weeks. When can she expect a new set of teeth to grow (no signs of any fo far)?

If I knew, I'd tell you. Why don't you ask her to have X-rays to see if they're forming.
 
Upvote 0
Originally posted by Jerry Smith

Give us one example from the medical literature.

I'd love to, but I don't even know if such a study was done. That's the trouble with a world full of evolutionists. They don't even bother looking at any contrary evidence.

There's also the 'why bother?' factor. So what if people get a third set of teeth at an advanced age? They die soon afterward anyway. So what would motivate anyone to do such a study EXCEPT to confirm that we were designed to live 900+ years? And since most scientists and people in the medical field have the a-priori assumption that evolution is true, they wouldn't ever launch a study like that.

Originally posted by Jerry Smith

You have a theory with no evidence. That is not a good tool for criticizing a theory that has evidence.

I gave you plenty of evidence. And contrary to the so-called "evidence" most evolutionists present, there's no IMAGINATION necessary to see it. The teeth are right there. They emerged when the person got to a certain age range. You don't need to speculate that they would form because you can see them. They obviously don't form for EVERYONE at exactly the SAME age, because not everyone gets them at the same advanced age. But then not everyone gets their adult teeth at the same age, either.

So the evidence is right there in plain sight, and it conforms to the way the second set of teeth form. You just won't accept this kind of evidence becaus it doesn't support your a-priori position of evolution.
 
Upvote 0
Originally posted by Jerry Smith

Actually, your theory predicts that there will be a third set based on the fact that the adult teeth wear out

If that's a problem for you then modify the theory. We get adult teeth (the second set) whether our baby teeth wear out or not. Although the "reason" for getting a third set of teeth is that the second won't last forever, it seems logical to assume the same rule applies to the third set of teeth as for the second. No matter what the "why" is behind getting them, it seems like the mechanism of getting the new set is founded on "time". At a certain age range, they grow in.
 
Upvote 0
Originally posted by npetreley

I gave you plenty of evidence.

You gave us three or four anecdotal accounts. Among these only one was from the 20th century, and it may have been a joke about dentures....

So the evidence is right there in plain sight, and it conforms to the way the second set of teeth form. You just won't accept this kind of evidence becaus it doesn't support your a-priori position of evolution.

Until you cite documentation of this evidence, I would be wrong to accept it. When the evidence comes in, you will have one minor point on which your theory makes a valid prediction. To that extent, it can really be called a theory. It will need more work to become a widely-accepted theory, but you will then be on the right track.
 
Upvote 0
There's also the 'why bother?' factor. So what if people get a third set of teeth at an advanced age? They die soon afterward anyway. So what would motivate anyone to do such a study EXCEPT to confirm that we were designed to live 900+ years? And since most scientists and people in the medical field have the a-priori assumption that evolution is true, they wouldn't ever launch a study like that.

If whole papers are done on adverse TASTE side effects of using heart meds, as this article from the Geriatric Times describes ( http://www.geriatrictimes.com/g020219.html ), then surely at least one doctor or dentist somewhere could be bothered to actually document a third set of teeth in a paper when she came across it??

After all, quality of life issues ( http://www.geriatrictimes.com/g010719.html ) are important to medical research, and a third set of teeth would have quite an impact on quality of life. Surely someone would be looking for a way to accelerate the process so that younger people could grow them?!
 
Upvote 0

chickenman

evil unamerican
May 8, 2002
1,376
7
43
Visit site
✟24,874.00
Like I said before npeterley, you have a few anecdotes about third sets of teeth, but how is this evidence that people have ever lived to be 900 years old, you still have to get around the fact that brain cells stop dividing after adolescence. There's no point having teeth if you are brain dead
 
Upvote 0
Originally posted by chickenman
Like I said before npeterley, you have a few anecdotes about third sets of teeth

There are more than a few anecdotes. I pointed out before that if you simply do a search for yourself, you'll find LOTS of cases of people getting a third set of teeth, especially if they live well over 100. I just did a search and came up with 11 hits before I stopped looking.

Someone mentioned that some of the links I provided refer to people who died quite some time ago. Considering that there were only 4,000 people over 100 in 1960, and the population above 100 gets even smaller as you go back in time, that actually strengthens my case because the number of reported cases is much more statistically significant as you go back in recent history.

Add to that the fact that the information you normally find when you do Google searches are just side-notes from obituaries, etc. We're lucky anyone ever mentions it at all, otherwise we wouldn't get as many hits as we do from such searches.

Someone also asked if there was medical literature on this. I found this reference in one of the hits on the topic:

Gould and Pyle in Anomalies and Curiosities of Medicine published in 1896 mention 24 cases of a third set of teeth from medical literature. The grandfather of a Dr Slare retained all his second teeth until 80, when they fell out. After five years, he grew another set. His hair went white at 80, but darkened as his new teeth grew. they lasted until he perished aged 100 years. A Bangladeshi woman grew a third set of teeth after being toothless for 50 years.

So I looked for the Gould and Pyle book, and found it. Here's a link. Note that the "anomalies and curiosities" referred to here is longevity not the fact that these people got new teeth. Back in the late 1800s, was anomalous for people to live that long. The extra teeth were just an observation about these people who had unusual longevity. Once again, if Gould and Pyle could note this occurrence in 24 subjects back in 1890, then the statistical significance is quite remarkable.

http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/toc/modeng/public/GouAnom.html

Finally, take these tidbits into account:

1. We lose our teeth much faster these days than pwople used to, because of the vast amounts of simple carbs we eat (sugar, chips, etc.) Lately, however, we've been keeping our teeth longer due to advances in dentistry. But if I had to take a wild guess, I'd say that given a more natural diet, we'd keep our teeth longer than we generally do now.

2. A dentist site I stumbled on said that of his patients over 100 years old, 60% still had their natural teeth. I'm assuming he meant their 2nd set of teeth.

The above would imply that we're more likely to be programmed to get them well after 100. This seems to be reflected in the data. While some people do get their third set as early as 80 (and there are some rare cases of people getting them MUCH earlier), most people seem to get them at 100 or afterward.
 
Upvote 0
Originally posted by npetreley

There are more than a few anecdotes. I pointed out before that if you simply do a search for yourself, you'll find LOTS of cases of people getting a third set of teeth, especially if they live well over 100. I just did a search and came up with 11 hits before I stopped looking.

Someone mentioned that some of the links I provided refer to people who died quite some time ago. Considering that there were only 4,000 people over 100 in 1960, and the population above 100 gets even smaller as you go back in time, that actually strengthens my case because the number of reported cases is much more statistically significant as you go back in recent history.


Someone also asked if there was medical literature on this. I found this reference in one of the hits on the topic:


So I looked for the Gould and Pyle book, and found it. Here's a link. Note that the "anomalies and curiosities" referred to here is longevity not the fact that these people got new teeth. Back in the late 1800s, was anomalous for people to live that long. The extra teeth were just an observation about these people who had unusual longevity. Once again, if Gould and Pyle could note this occurrence in 24 subjects back in 1890, then the statistical significance is quite remarkable.

http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/toc/modeng/public/GouAnom.html

Have you ever gotten an e-mail that was passed around to you claiming all kinds of "interesting" facts, just at the edge of believability? That is where anecdotal evidence gets you. Off the cuff comments from Uncle Billy's cousin Marvin just cannot be construed as evidence for third sets of teeth, especially coming from the 1800's or 1700's - when these people may have seen a doctor once or twice in their lives. No one could have even made an effort to verify the claim, and playing jokes on "city doctors" was not unheard of then.

If a city doctor came out to the farm town and visited with cranky old Mr. Mulligan, and Mr. Mulligan wanted to play a trick on the old Doctor, he and his family might have gone into fabulous detail talking about his extra set of teeth. The doctor might have made a note of it in passing as a "curiosity", and never been able to verify the fact.

On the other hand, what if Emily Johnson made a joke in the general store about her dentures being a third set of teeth, and cousin Sue heard her and misunderstood? What if later, after Ms Johnson was dead Sue told the story of Cousin Emily's third set of teeth to the country Doctor? What if the doctor, knowing Sue to be a trustworthy member of the community decided that it couldn't hurt to take her word for it, and wrote it up in his report?

What if an unethical doctor (or maybe 2 unethical writers) included accounts such as these just two bump up their book sales (see Ripley's Believe It Or Not for an example)?

Now that you have found some references from the medical literature, you are one step closer to having enough evidence to confirm the fact of third sets of teeth, but not really very close yet. There have been thousands of people in the 21st and 20th centuries who lived to or past 100. It should not be hard, if the extra teeth are a fact, to uncover a few WELL DOCUMENTED cases of extra teeth in the medical literature. Now we keep dental records and have all kinds of means of actually confirming this phenomenon... is that why instances of it have dropped off so significantly in the past few years?

On the book reference you cited, I have this chart from the book:

It may be interesting to review the statistics of Haller, who has collected the greatest number of instances of extreme longevity. He found: --

1000 persons who lived from 100 to 110 ; 15 persons who lived from 130 to 140 ; 60 `` `` `` `` 110 to 120 6 `` `` `` `` 140 to 150 ; 29 `` `` `` `` 120 to 130 ; 1 person `` `` `` to 169

Comare to this:
There are several geographical areas that have claimed inhabitants with extreme longevity, but after closer examination, these claims have been found to be false. Vilacamba, Ecuador almost became a tourist attraction because natives claimed their water was a fountain of youth leading to the many super-centenarians in that region.

What about the reports of people in the Russian Caucases living to 150 years and beyond? Remember the Dannon yogurt commercials? In fact, those purported super-centenarians were taking on the identities of their parents, aunts and uncles. Again, the oldest person from whom we have multiple forms of proof-of-age is Madame Calment.

Madame Calment was 122 when she died..

Life span is the maximum age obtainable for the species and is defined by the age of the oldest living individual. In the case of humans, that individual was Madame Jeanne Calment who died at the age of 122 years in August, 1997. Madame Calment therefore had a tremendous responsibility ... in her later years, every day she lived, she extended the human life span by a day.

from http://www.bumc.bu.edu/Departments/PageMain.asp?Page=5749&DepartmentID=361

So either the BUMC is lying, or the authors of this book were relaying some questionable statistics. I think the BUMC study is more likely to be accurate.

If the authors of the book are passing on inaccuracies in one case, why should I take their mention of extra teeth as strong evidence that this phenomenon takes place?

Rigor is important to science. You may have been doing this all as an excercise in uncovering the methods (or prejudices?) of science, but if you are really interested in whether there are cases where third sets of teeth grown, you would be doing well to look for confirmed medical evidence, not recycled anecdotal accounts from folk-lore and from sensationalist books.

One other question: is it clear from the book reference that any of the "reported cases" were definitely a third full set of teeth of the kind you describe and not a misunderstanding or misdocumentation of supernumerary teeth like LewisWildermuth described?
 
Upvote 0
Originally posted by npetreley


I'd love to, but I don't even know if such a study was done. That's the trouble with a world full of evolutionists. They don't even bother looking at any contrary evidence.


A quick search of PubMed (which Nick could have done) returned 54 articles that contain all the words "third set of teeth". Only one article seemed relavent however. I could be wrong about this. I read the abstracts but I am not up on my dental nomenclature (sp?). Anyway the one article is here:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=2209970&dopt=Abstract

There is no abstract and the article is in German. It is not clear what it is talking about.
 
Upvote 0

LewisWildermuth

Senior Veteran
May 17, 2002
2,526
128
52
Bloomington, Illinois
✟19,375.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
quote:
Originally posted by LewisWildermuth

No they are not a benifit but a problem for most people in whom they continue to grow.

quote:
I give you examples of people who get a third set of teeth between 80-110, none of which indicate there were problems. You cite one example (your own) of getting some third teeth at a young age (abnormal) and they don't come in properly (abnormal) and conclude from this that the whole phenomena is an abberation and is not beneficial?

This is a perfect example of what I've been saying about the self-deceived and spiritually blind reasoning of evolutionists.


Npetreley...

Is that all you can do? Insult those who you think are wrong? We are all imperfect, all blind in a way compared to God. Is it wrong for us to even try to understand the world around us?

If your attacks filled with hate are what most people face who dare even question how the world around them works from "true" Christians it is no wonder why they would steer clear from the "true" Churches.
 
Upvote 0
Yes, Nick, I did post a link to an x-ray of a seven year old. Suprisingly there aren't many dental x-rays of babies floating around the internet. It was intended to illustrate that x-rays can detect the tooth buds for adult teeth long before they irrupt from the gum line.

Furthermore, it is well established in the science of developmental biology that our body parts, including teeth, are laid down in some form during fetal development and early childhood. That's why we can't regenerate lost limbs. It a complex topic that requires at least 3 years of college level science to even start to understand it. I suggest you get a primer and start reading. I would like to see some evidence that your mysterious third set of teeth is the exception to this rule. Can you provide an explaination as to how these teeth form and what trigers their development?

You might want to check outthis site too.

I'll take your assertion seriously under one of the following two conditions:

1. When you present the results of a study which shows that, of people who get a third set of teeth in their old age. all of them had precursors of their third set that showed up in X-rays taken when they were 7 or younger.

Provide me hard evidence that such a phenomonon even exists. Your folk tales are not convinging evidence that most of us will get additional teeth if we live to an old enough age.

2. When you can prove that God died and left you in charge.

Provide me hard evidence that your God is the one true god and we'll talk.
 
Upvote 0
Originally posted by RufusAtticus
Yes, Nick, I did post a link to an x-ray of a seven year old. Suprisingly there aren't many dental x-rays of babies floating around the internet. It was intended to illustrate that x-rays can detect the tooth buds for adult teeth long before they irrupt [sic] from the gum line.

I've got to hang this one on my wall. Here you have it, folks. A classic example of evolutionist thinking.

You failed to provide any evidence whatsoever -- NOT EVEN ANECDOTAL EVIDENCE -- that babies have a second set of teeth already formed (or as "nubs" below the surface. Now I must admit that this is actually fairly logical, since they're going to get their second set in as little as 5 years. But logic doesn't prove anything, it just presupposes something. What you REALLY need is EVIDENCE. EVEN ANECDOTAL evidence would help -- at least that would give you a start.

So do you provide any?

No. Instead, you provide the X-ray of a 7-year old -- a child that is actually IN THE PROCESS OF GETTING HIS SECOND SET OF TEETH.

This fascinating X-ray shows that the second set of teeth are present.

DUH! HE'S IN THE PROCESS OF CUTTING HIS SECOND SET RIGHT NOW -- OF COURSE HIS SECOND SET OF TEETH WOULD BE PRESENT IN THE X-RAY!

But that simply obvious fact doesn't deter your imagination. You extrapolate that because you can see them when he's 7, he must have had these teeth in his gums when he was a baby! Again, no evidence whatsoever. You just IMAGINE that this is true. Whether or not it is true is totally irrelevant -- it may very well be true. But YOU HAVEN'T DEMONSTRATED IT EVEN WITH ANECDOTAL EVIDENCE YET, so most reasonable people would stop there before even postulating the next theory.

But no -- that's not evolutionist thinking works.

On the basis of the unproven first extrapolation -- that the second set would be present in babies -- YOU EXTRAPOLATE THIS FURTHER A SECOND TIME TO ASSUME THAT THE THIRD SET OF TEETH WOULD ALSO BE PRESENT IN BABIES, EVEN THOUGH THEY WON'T CUT THEM FOR ANOTHER 100 YEARS.

Again. No evidence whatsoever, NOT EVEN ANECDOTAL EVIDENCE. But you ASSUME it must be true, because that's how YOU PERSONALLY BELIEVE IT SHOULD WORK. In fact, you are so vehement in your assumptions that you won't even believe that people can cut a third set of teeth (in spite of evidence to the contrary) unless their body obeys the rules of your imagination.

In other words, your imaginary rules take precedence over any substantial evidence whatsoever, because wherever the evidence is lacking, you have the ability to fill in the gaps with your imagination.

That's the core philosophy of evolution.
 
Upvote 0
From:
http://www.parentsplace.com/expert/dentist/qas/0,10338,239366_106871,00.html

When we are born, our primary teeth are still developing. Except for the first permanent molar, no permanent teeth have begun the calcification process. Just like certain cells in your body are programmed to develop certain tissues, the teeth also have cells which are programmed to develop each layer of tooth structure. This development takes place within the jaw bones.

The primary teeth all begin formation in utero, usually between 14-19 weeks. Crown formation of the primary teeth is not complete until several weeks to several months after birth. Complete root formation takes even longer.

Permanent tooth development can begin shortly after birth with the incisors (front teeth) and 6 year molars. Several years after birth, especially for the wisdom teeth or 3rd molars, the canines and posterior teeth begin their calcification process. Again, root formation will be completed after the tooth has erupted in the oral cavity.

So Nick -- How come this third set of teeth isn't showing up on the x-rays of 80- and 90-year olds?
 
Upvote 0