Our Websites

Wisdom teeth: Evidence that man lived longer

Today, it is estimated that 60% of Americans have trouble with their wisdom teeth; thus, many have them removed. Some of the problems may be related to our modern, softer diets.

Evolutionists argue that wisdom teeth are proof for evolution. In actuality, they are evidence that man used to live longer, mature slower, and grow bigger. For example, if you are growing bigger, by the time you are 18 to 20, as your head enlarges, the wisdom tooth pops through with no problems. Wisdom teeth are not proof for evolution.

Further Study

,

Leave27 Responses to testWisdom teeth: Evidence that man lived longer

  1. andrew Ryan February 11, 2011 at 8:38 am #

    Kent, before you make any more claims, could you, or someone else at CSE, answer my request that you back up some of the claims you have made on past blogs.

    Firstly, you claimed: “LIE ‘“WHEN YOU DIE, YOU CEASE TO EXIST. This is one of the most dangerous lies textbooks teach.”

    Please could you name a textbook that has made this claim. Although you said ‘textbooks’, plural, just one will do.

    Secondly, in your blog: “SCIENTISTS’ QUOTES ABOUT EVOLUTION”, you give us a purported quote:

    “Evolution is unproved and unprovable. We believe it only because the only alternative is special creation, and that is unthinkable” (Sir Arthur Keith).

    You claim he said this in 1959. Given that he died in 1955, and that I can find no record of Keith saying this quote, could you tell us where and when it in fact comes from.

    If it is an error, and you can’t back up the claim, could you simply admit the mistake so that we can move on to a discussion of your latest claims. It would do much for your credibility. I’ll keep asking until you address this request.

  2. Geno Castagnoli February 11, 2011 at 9:26 am #

    Kent Hovind claims:
    Some of the problems may be related to our modern, softer diets.
    ###
    Geno answers:
    When my wisdom teeth were removed, the dentist said nothing about diet. He did mention that because our mouths are too small it’s difficult to properly clean around and behind wisdom teeth which could lead to even worse problems down the road.
    ###

    Kent Hovind claims:
    In actuality, they are evidence that man used to live longer….
    ###
    Geno points out:
    In actuality, our teeth are evidence that man did NOT live significantly longer in the past than now. The ancients ate stone ground grain. This grain contains a lot of highly abrasive rock particulate which causes excessive tooth wear. Their teeth would have worn out long before they had lived hundreds of years. (We can see this in places like Mexico where many people in the villages still grind their own grain on a stone “matate.”)

  3. John Bebbington February 11, 2011 at 9:54 am #

    I don’t think you would want to put your hand into the mouth of a gorilla as his jaw muscles are so strong he could probably bite it right off at the wrist. And big muscles need big bones to attach themselves to which is why apes’ jaws are larger than human jaws and more able to accommodate wisdom teeth. Since humans learned how to cook we no longer need such big muscles with which to rip our food to bits so we don’t need such big jaw muscles or big jaws to attach them too.

    On the other hand, you can believe Kent’s fairy story of how ancient man had larger jaws but the same-sized teeth as modern man. If they had had larger teeth then the jaw would have had to jut forward just like…well, just like an ape’s jaw.

    It’s strange, too, that all the old skeletons which have been discovered do not show the gigantism of which Kent writes – except for a reported small group of American skeletons which magically disappeared shortly after their discovery.

  4. John Bebbington February 11, 2011 at 9:55 am #

    Duane:

    You can’t be this obtuse

    Hell’s teeth! I hope you weren’t having a go at me. I’m innocent of all charges, guv.

    I was just quoting David and then responding but the way you have blockquoted the entire post makes it look as though I composed all of the drivel whereas I can only lay claim to writing some of it.

  5. John Bebbington February 11, 2011 at 9:57 am #

    David McCrea wrote:

    So according to atheists, a lobster, a dandelion, a mosquito and an elephant all have a common ancestor. Since you’re willing to bet eternity on this belief, what was their common ancestor? Please be specific.

    Well, as a lobster, mosquito and elephant are all animals and the dandelion is a plant (David probably thought it was a species of smartly-dressed African cat) all we need refer to is the common ancestor of plants and animals which was probably something like a primitive algae. Sorry, I can’t be more specific than that because, sadly, the last remaining specimen got washed away in Noah’s flood.

    The buttons on your shirt had an intelligent designer, but the atheists would have us believe the universe, the earth, and human beings did not.

    The buttons on my shirt are there for a purpose – to keep my wife busy sewing them back on again – but for what purpose was the universe? Why would a perfect being feel so dissatisfied with eternal life that she found it necessary to distract herself by creating all this mayhem?

    Nice try but I’m not trying to sell what you are incapable of buying.

  6. raymond February 11, 2011 at 10:22 am #

    I agree fully but in school( I matriculated in 2008) I had this special biology teacher. She believes in the “Gap Theory” So I felt sad for her and gave her some of your dvd’s (seminars of “the age of the earth” etc.) and to this day I don’t know if she wathed your fantastic seminars. One day my younger brother, Rudolph asked her and said ” Why do you believe that God made the world through evolution? and she said: Why do we have wisdom teeth? He did not know why, and he turned and left the classroom. Obviously I believe that people in those days matured slowly and lived to be 900+. What should my brother prove to her that wisdom teeth are not proof for EVIL(ution) nevermind the “Gap Theory”. My name is Raymond from Oudtshoorn, South Africa

  7. Marjolein De Rooij February 11, 2011 at 10:48 am #

    Hovind,

    You’re right!
    I’m a BIG fan.

  8. Catherine Cook February 11, 2011 at 2:50 pm #

    From ape to man is fairy tale…there is only scientific evidence for ape to ape, anything beyond that is science fiction.

  9. Duane February 11, 2011 at 3:33 pm #

    @John Bebbington

    Yeah, sorry. This blog is really difficult to post in. We all use our own methods of responding and quoting, it’s hard to really know who or what one is really talking to or responding about.

  10. David McCrea February 11, 2011 at 5:19 pm #

    John B:

    Your belief that ALL life on earth “probably” descended from a “primitive algae” is incontrovertible proof evolution is a faith-based system and therefore a religion.

    Or were you just messing around when you wrote that?

    Seriously.

  11. David McCrea February 11, 2011 at 6:15 pm #

    Andrew Ryan:

    I don’t pretend to speak for anyone at CSE, but regarding your two questions I tend to agree with your skepticism.

    As for the first part regarding lies in the textbooks, government schools use science books that 1) don’t teach life after death, 2) don’t teach there is a “God,” intelligent design(er), or special creation, 3) do everything in their power legally and otherwise to keep creation and God out of the government schools, and 4) based on the first three points it is strongly IMPLIED there is no life after death. Proof is in the pudding. Ask the average government school student if they believe in life after death and the majority response will be “No.”

    As for the Sir Arthur Keith quote, I can’t find any credible evidence to support creationists’ claims that Sir Arthur Keith actually made the quote attributed to him. When in doubt, take it out.

    Thank you for listening to my thoughts.

  12. Corey February 11, 2011 at 6:21 pm #

    Man was probably larger in the past

    Yet, there are no giant human skeletons and all known human fossils, including skulls, are smaller than modern humans . Also, one should note that humans have grown taller in the past century.

  13. Corey February 11, 2011 at 6:30 pm #

    @ David McCrae

    Some people believe that a supernatural entity (God/Satan) creates natural phenomon such as rainbows, earthquakes, etc. The Bible states that God created the rainbow as a sign.

  14. Corey February 11, 2011 at 6:34 pm #

    @ andrew Ryan

    Maybe if you asked about the Sir Arthur Keith quote on Kent Hovind’s own blog, he has replied to some people’s questions and answers. But I doubt you would get a straight answer.

  15. Carl M February 12, 2011 at 12:32 am #

    Evolutionists argue that wisdom teeth are proof for evolution. In actuality, they are evidence that man used to live longer, mature slower, and grow bigger.

    These are not mutally exclusive ideas therefor claiming one disproves the other is the logic fallacy of false dichotomy.

    If fact, the “evolutionist” argument is that wisdom teeth are a vistigal structure from when jaws were larger and diet consisted of more plant material.

    Ironically, both sides are claiming wisdom teeth are vestigal structures. But only the creationist is simultaneously claiming vestigial structures don’t exist.

  16. Markus Benthin February 12, 2011 at 12:51 am #

    I agree with Dr. Hovind’s perspective.
    The fact that this perspective is not mainstream, doesn’t make it implausable or wrong.
    1/2 of America’s population suffers from self-caused illnesses, such as obesity or cardio-vascular disease, also. In compare, the idea that vitamins and minerals in high dosages and a mainly vegetarian diet would prevent them,, is not mainstream as well, yet doctors and pharmacists cure only the profitable symptoms of malnutrituion and not the cause.

    In the wisdom teeth issue, non-young earth creationists have to change their whole paradigm of thinking. This can be very challenging, especially for an indoctrinated and self-censoring mind, that is guarded and protected by the mainstream society. It is uncomfortable to not swim with the stream. Once an idea gains momentum though, the weak minded would seek rapport with the next generally accepted world view.

    Sadly, this phenomenom can be exploited by liers, as long as they control society from various angles. Be it in the medical or nutritional world, the financial and political sector or in regards to family matters etc.

    You can observe the phenomenon in politcs very easily, where the establishment gives you a choice between 2 options of both parties that they control. You need a paradigm shift in order to overcome the reocurring disappointments. The Constitution and Bill of Rights offers in many aspects a solution, while the establishment candidates want to draw attention away from the Constitution by proposing two non-Constitutional choices, where the voter can choose the lesser evil or develop a bully authority fetish, and go straight with the more evil…

    This has to do a lot with Psychology, emotions and hierachy in society rather than logic and common knowledge. Also myths for that matter withstand the test of time also, even though science and facts point to the contrary.

    In conclusion, if you have been told that humans evolved and you buy into it, it sounds rediculous whenever something doesn’t fit the paradigm or theory. The minds of these people filters out facts or plausable explanations, even though it is reasonable and in some cases admitted by their own leaders and authorities.

    I mean, how often have notable evolutionists admitted they were wrong and have no evidence whatsoever! Nevertheless, they keep on repeating the mantras, thus fooling millions of well-meaning but gullable people. Oftentimes, they even fool themselves into believing what they are teaching, even though they know better…

  17. H. Bosma February 12, 2011 at 5:26 am #

    Hmm, wisdom teeth are better evidence of evolution. But if you want to believe this fabricated fairytale, feel free.

    What puzzles me in this story is why people started growing faster and smaller after the flood? What has changed in humans that they are physically not able to become more than a hundred something of age?
    Presumably Noah and his family had the potential to grow to be 900.

    For arguments sake, if we presume the bible is the truth. Why is there nothing about Methusalem being a giant and people being larger before then after the flood?

    Another thing that puzzles me is the distribution of animals after the flood. A snail (presume the ‘kind’ snail is not able to get from the arc (in the Middle East ?) to South America, especially not when there is a boundary called an ocean.
    And why do we have freshwater fish and saltwater fish? Either one of them would not be able to survive during the flood.

    Let’s face it. A worldwide flood is not the answer to the worlds biodiversity. Evolution does explain this, whether you like it or not.

    @Raymond. I think it’s respectless of your brother just walk out of the classroom. It shows he (and you) do not respect other peoples opinion, because you do not feel obliged to explain why you are right.
    If you ask some one a question and they reply with another question. Curtosy requires you to asnwer of prose anther question, not just avoid.
    If you believe wisdom teeth are not prove of evolution, then explain and try to convince. But it will be hard………..

  18. Jeff Brace February 12, 2011 at 2:46 pm #

    Wow – look at all these teeth experts. Amazing :)

  19. Mark James February 13, 2011 at 3:41 pm #

    Hi CSE,

    Just a suggestion, but there always seems to be considerable carry over of discussions from closed threads into open threads (and, yes, I’m as guilty as anyone on this). I wonder if it might be worth having a continuously open thread where previous discussions can continue without adding confusion to new threads. I would suggest each week you could delete the older posts so that the size doesn’t get out of hand.

    God bless.

  20. Randy Miller February 13, 2011 at 7:22 pm #

    Kent Hovind is such an original thinker …
    He questions the status quo, and he thinks outside the box.
    I applaud him for going to bat against the bullies who are cramming darwinistic religion down the throats of school children – and deceptively calling it “factual science”.
    **
    - The universe testifies that there is a creator.
    - The fool has said in his heart that there is no God.
    - The Word of God is sharper than a two-edged sword.
    **
    Thanks CSE!

  21. Randy Miller February 13, 2011 at 10:20 pm #

    The difference between a believer, and an unbeliever is an interesting thing.
    One of the reasons (IMO) is because “us believers” used to be “unbelievers”. Which gives “us” an advantage over the unbeliever in that we can understand their perspective while they cannot understand ours. The Holy Scriptures (the ancient wisdom of the ages) has much to say on this topic – referring to Christ as a “stumbling block” to the unbelievers, and the wisdom of Christ as being “foolishness” to the same.
    **
    Hear the Word of the Lord,
    John 3:16-21
    “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son. This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that their deeds will be exposed. But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what they have done has been done in the sight of God.”
    **
    Creationism = The truth and the Light.
    Evolutionism = Lies and darkness.
    **
    Before I was a believer I WANTED to believe in Evolution because that meant I could enjoy sinning, I could deny God, and I could “love the darkness”.
    I could be my “own god” …
    That was/is a dead end road.

  22. Alex M February 13, 2011 at 10:36 pm #

    I still have my wisdom teeth

    Therefore I’ll live to be 200.

    Amirite?

  23. Duane February 14, 2011 at 11:31 pm #

    @David McCrea February 11th at 6:15 pm

    “Andrew Ryan:

    I don’t pretend to speak for anyone at CSE, but regarding your two questions I tend to agree with your skepticism.

    As for the first part regarding lies in the textbooks, government schools use science books that 1) don’t teach life after death, 2) don’t teach there is a “God,” intelligent design(er), or special creation, 3) do everything in their power legally and otherwise to keep creation and God out of the government schools, and 4) based on the first three points it is strongly IMPLIED there is no life after death. Proof is in the pudding. Ask the average government school student if they believe in life after death and the majority response will be “No.” “

    Where do I begin? The Gov’t textbooks have no business teaching about life after death. This is not the same as implying there is no life after death. They don’t teach Special Creation or Intelligent Design in science class because it is Abrahamic mythology, not science. They also don’t teach ancient Greek mythology in science class, nor Norse, nor Hopi, nor ancient Asian, or any other ancient peoples’ myths. They also don’t teach that babies came from storks placing diamonds in a cabbage patch. It saddens me that an otherwise rational adult can still hold on to infantile beliefs in the face of all reason. The ancients had no idea how the world worked and made up gods to explain. Now, we might not know everything, but we know enough about the basics of how the natural world functions to where we no longer need fantasy figures as explanations.

  24. andrew Ryan February 15, 2011 at 7:20 am #

    David McRea: “Regarding lies in the textbooks… it is strongly IMPLIED there is no life after death.”

    David, thanks for your thoughts. What is IMPLIED comes down to opinion and interpretation. The FACT is that Kent clearly said that state books TOLD people there was no life after death. The reality is that science books do not refer to the matter either way. One could take that to imply that there IS life after death, or that there is not. But seeing as there is no way to scientifically test the hypothesis, the question remains an unscientific one, beyond the realms of science. If someone wanted to know if there was life after death, why would they go to a scientific text book to find out the answer, when it isn’t a scientific question?

    Therefore it makes perfect sense that science text books do not wade into the subject.

    “Ask the average government school student if they believe in life after death and the majority response will be “No.”

    Is that a guess or do you have any kind of cite for this claim?

    To sum up: Kent said that school text books tell students there’s no life after death. I’m asking for an example of a book that makes such a statement. As yet, no-one has offered one.

    As you say yourself – if in doubt, leave it out. I’m sure you wouldn’t accept a Muslim offering an unsubstantiated quote that Billy Graham advised people to convert to Islam, especially if the quote was dated a few years after Graham’s death!

  25. Geno Castagnoli February 15, 2011 at 10:39 am #

    Andrew wrote:
    To sum up: Kent said that school text books tell students there’s no life after death. I’m asking for an example of a book that makes such a statement. As yet, no-one has offered one.

    ####
    Geno points out:
    There is a very good reason for that. No textbook says it. Not one.

    Being charitable…. Kent Hovind made it up. There was no truth in the claim then and there is none now. That won’t stop the Hovindites, though.

  26. Gary Todd February 16, 2011 at 7:30 pm #

    This just in, from Meredith Cohn, The Baltimore Sun (via The Tennessean)

    “But many people don’t understand why we have those third molars to begin with or if there are alternatives to removal. We asked Dr. Robert E. Williams, a clinical associate professor at the University of Maryland Dental School.
    What is the purpose of wisdom teeth and why do so many people have to have them removed?
    Wisdom teeth (third molars) were necessary eons ago when humans had a coarser diet and larger jaws. With evolution, our jaws have gotten relatively smaller and, in many cases, there isn’t enough room for them to erupt fully or into a favorable position.”

    Well – there you have it, guys.

    Wait a minute – - – Didn’t Kent say this exact same thing in his videos ? I swear to God he did. I mean, just replace the monkey / millions with the Goliath / thousands and its nearly word for word.

    Strange also that some monkeys have 32 teeth and others have 36, and apparantly every one of the the 36′ers got exiled and floated over here, while the 32′ers remained over there. And then some time later, some 32′ers floated over here on the Mayflower, maybe because they heard that the 36′ers are considered to be the more inteligent of the bunch.

    Oh, as far as the “life after death” thing goes, there is a reference in Kents videos of a textbook saying something pretty close to that, but I’ll have to watch through them again to find it. I’m sure Kent was merely refering to the not-to-difficult implication one can get from what is taught. Sort of like the way evolutionists get bent out of shape if they hear someone say “design feature” or “randomness alone cannot do this”. They automatically assume they’re talking about God. You’ll say, “Well – what else can it be” ? You got it. Thats why Kent said it that way.

    So, we both seem to do the same things – right ?
    Geez, after 4 years of nit-picking I thought you would have figured that out by now, Geno.

  27. John Poe February 17, 2011 at 1:31 pm #

    [quote]
    Strange also that some monkeys have 32 teeth and others have 36, and apparantly every one of the the 36′ers got exiled and floated over here, while the 32′ers remained over there. And then some time later, some 32′ers floated over here on the Mayflower, maybe because they heard that the 36′ers are considered to be the more inteligent of the bunch.
    [/quote]

    Thank you, Gary. This is the most coherent and simple argument against evolution that I have read in quite some time.