I hear "post and run" makes someone cool.
Anyway:
Have you ever wondered why people have aches and pains from wisdom teeth? Some people think wisdom teeth may be evolutionary 'left-overs'. Others wonder if wisdom teeth have simply not yet evolved perfectly. What's the answer?
There's no such thing as "evolving perfectly". The author demonstrates his lack of understanding of evolutionary theory by suggesting an evolutionary "end-point" or goal. No such concept exists in proper evolutionary theory.
Orthodontist John W. Cuozzo, DDS, MS, from New Jersey in the United States, says wisdom teeth are definitely not evidence for evolution. He says that from the vast amount of research he has done on Neanderthal children's fossils, the problem seems to be that human jaws are shrinking as time goes on.
Orthodontistry gives him questionable at best qualifications to be making claims on anything to do with evolutionary theory. That aside, there are no citations. Even if he's quoting himself, he needs to provide some journal articles, always from a peer-reviewed source, to back up his work. Either that, or it should be said up front that this is conjecture and not a finished piece of work. Otherwise, the "vast amount of research" he has done means squat.
'Based on my Neanderthal research and current studies', Dr Cuozzo says, 'it seems as if human jaws are becoming smaller over time. This has made the space in the back of the jaws smaller and smaller for the eruption and proper positioning in the bite for third molars, also known as wisdom teeth.'
Not being a biologist I'll leave this to the experts. It may turn out that he's infact correct, but it's also irrelevant. Again, though, there is a complete lack of citation.
Dr Cuozzo believes the reason this is happening is that children are maturing much faster today than in the past.
An excavation in 1990 of some graves in Griswold, Connecticut, dated from the late 1600s-1700 seems to confirm his research. There were 13 children's remains discovered. Only one was found with initials on the wood of the coffin. It read N.B. age 13 and was written in brass tacks.
There are so many things wrong with this I don't even know where to start.
1. The "researcher" went
grave digging.
2. There are NO citations. What reason do I have to believe any of this is true?
3. The basis of this entire article rests on ONE childs remains?
When the teeth of the lower jaw were examined at the Armed Forces Insititute of Pathology (AFIP) in Washington, D.C., the root and crown development indicated that, by today's standards, these teeth should have belonged to a female child of 9 1/2 years, or a male child of 10 years, yet the child was 13.
Citation please. At this point, either AiG is making this up, or it's plagiarizing. In good scientific journals, even quoting oneself is plagiarism if you don't cite yourself.
So, choose, RichardT. Is AiG liars or plagiarists?
'This means', Dr Cuozzo says, 'that three or four hundred years ago a child took 13 years to reach the stage that our children today do in 9° to 10 years. This points to a rapid maturation today.'
No, it means that ONE CHILD from ONE GRAVEYARD developed slowly in comparison to a child today. No details about the nutrition or health of the child are provided or even conjectured. Was the child developmentally challenged? Mal-nourished? We don't know. This isn't good science.
Dr Cuozzo duplicated all of the dental x-rays and photographs of these children at AFIP in 1992.
He says wisdom teeth need more space than can develop in our shortened jaw growth period. Children are taller today, and mature earlier, probably because of improved early nutrition (not evolutionary improvement). But the facial bones need more than nutrition they need time. 'It's time we don't get any more.'
Doc Cuozzo scuppers his own argument here. The change is due to
changes in nutrition. Genetically changes are minor if at all present between the time this supposed child lived and now. The scuppering is more complete later on. Once again, this "Doctor" is basing his entire thesis off of ONE body that he provides no record ever existed.
Not only that, but he and AiG are now also plagiarizing the AFIP, if that research ever even existed.
It is this fact, that the wisdom teeth are trying to erupt into a jaw space too small for them, which causes many of the problems. He says that there are other problems also with the eruption of wisdom teeth, and that many people do not even develop wisdom teeth today.
'This is not from a process of evolution, but devolution' [original emphasis], he says. 'The degeneration and reduction of complexity of the human body is what is really happening.
Doc Cuozzo may well be correct that wisdom teeth develop those specific issues. I won't go into that. What truely scuppers his point is that he contradicts himself.
1. Claims that an increase in rate of maturation is due to nutritional changes
only.
2. Claims that the inability of the wisdom teeth to develop normally is due to
evolutionary forces.
Granted, the author uses "devolution", which is a non-scientific term and again conflates evolutionary theory with Lamarckian evolution, or a march towards perfection. However, even to the author both marches are caused by the same forces, genetic changes over time.
Doctor Cuozzo is presenting an internally contradictory arguement with regards to wisdom teeth.
'This, of course, is due to the fact that Adam fell and we have been suffering and groaning under the curse resulting from this fall ever since.'
Apparently God didn't provide AiG with the ability to cite quotations or references, or to provide a consistent arguement.
All emphasis except that which was noted is my own.