Question:
How could anyone believe that Wisdom Teeth are intelligently designed?
anonymous
2008-01-02 09:20:47 UTC
They're completely useless and mine hurt.
Seventeen answers:
General Leon Pleasant
2008-01-02 17:15:24 UTC
I have the same opinion on testicles.
Hera Sent Me
2008-01-02 09:25:45 UTC
Not useless at all. They're just based on humans beings being likely to lose teeth before the wisdom teeth come in, which isn't true for humans with regular access to dental care.
jafar sheikh
2008-01-02 09:29:30 UTC
Wisdom teeth come at an age when the person is normally mature.... That is why they are called Wisdom Teeth.....



Unfortunately quite a lot of people who loose all their teeth (including wisdom teeth) ..... Still don't gain any wisdom.....
BelieverinGod
2008-01-02 09:32:38 UTC
LOL sorry to hear yours hurt you but the question is cute. they were named that simply because sometimes around the time the teeth come in.. most humans seem to be able to connect the dots..thus "wisdom" teeth.



Try drinking some ice water ..or use your tongue and hold an icecube next to them if you can.
anonymous
2008-01-02 09:27:56 UTC
How could anyone look at the death rates during childbirth prior to modern medicine and not realize that the human female birth canal is too small to accommodate the human infant's head?



Could this most unintelligent "design" be the result of the human brain evolving to be larger than the so-called omnipotent creator ever expected it would become?
anonymous
2008-01-02 11:00:03 UTC
First time I ever went under anesthesia (check spelling) was when I got all four of mine removed...



I remember afterwards I thought to myself...



"Wow! I was counting down from 10...and the next thing I know I'm waking up in the waiting room...no time had passed...good thing they brought me back...or I never would have known I even existed...that must be what death would be like...ever since then...the idea of an afterlife is even more absurd to me, and my Biochemist brother said that's what anesthesia IS...it essentially "kills" your consciousness by depriving it of just enough oxygen to knock you out without killing your body...



A little deep for this question, I know...but it brought back memories of the "lack of them..."
ɹɐǝɟsuɐs Blessed Cheese Maker
2008-01-02 09:24:51 UTC
I agree.



I had mine pulled, and wish I was born a million years in the future, as they will probably not be around by then.



Of course if our brains keep growing, our canine teeth will probably be the useless ones by then.
anonymous
2008-01-02 09:25:00 UTC
there is more wisdom in the teeth than in intelligent design, that's for sure
anonymous
2008-01-02 09:24:50 UTC
i'm sorry, perhaps oxycoton was intelligently designed to offset the intelligently designed worthless wisdom teeth...
spidertiger440
2008-01-02 09:29:30 UTC
If you lost other teeth you would need these.

I say it is a matter of evolution not design.
anonymous
2016-05-29 14:53:13 UTC
Vestigial structures are to be EXPECTED if life forms were designed, especially if the designer/s took an "Object Oriented" approach. Let me explain. In Software Development, "Object-Oriented Programming" (OOP) refers to a specific methodology of programming made possible by languages like Java and C++. When using this methodology, one write Object "Classes" which contain "properties" (basically variables to store data) and "methods" (blocks of code to perform actual tasks). You can have multiple instances of any class. Also, a Class can "Inherit" properties and methods from another class. For instance, lets say I was writing an application that simulated the biological functions of all the fish, mammals, and reptiles one finds at the Tennessee Aquarium in Chattanooga (to which you should TOTALLY go if you have never been ... AWESOME!!!!) Well, I'd have to be an idiot to write the code for each animal separately. Instead, I would start by writing a Class called "Vertebrate". Vertebrate would have properties like "vertebrae_count", "vertebrae_size[]" (it would be an array, so the size of each could be controlled separately), "tail_lenth", "limb_length[]", etc. Additionally, it would contain "methods" such as "limbGrowth", "digestion", "eggProduction", etc. Then I would write classes entitled "Bird", "Mammal", "Reptile", and "Fish". (I know the original specs did not ask for a "Bird" class, but TRUST ME, the users will EVENTUALLY come back and ask for it, so you should plan ahead.) Each of these new classes will "extend" the "Vertebrate" class, thereby inheriting all of it's properties and methods. Now, you will note that all these classes automatically pick up all of the properties and methods that the basic Vertebrate class used to grow tails. So, when I write the "Primate" class, it will "extend" the "Mammal" class (or possibly some other class which in turn extended "Mammal") thereby inheriting "tail_length" and "tailGrowth". In turn the Class "Ape" will inherit from "Primate", also getting the methods and properties to grow tails. And, obviously, "Human" will inherit from "Ape". Under normal circumstances, the "tail_length" property in the "Human" class will be set very low by the "Constructor" method (every class has one). But in nature, mutations and other factors can cause "glitches" that would not happen in an electronic environment, so occasionally the "tail_length" property gets set a little high in a human, and as the Theory of Intelligent Object Oriented Design would suggest, the person gets a tail. The same principle explains why snakes and whales have vestigial hind legs. This also explain the fusion of two chromosomes from "Ape" into Chromosome 2 in humans, and offers an interesting insight into the specific method being used to develop our "software". When we compile code written in Java or C++, modern compilers do something called "optimization", where in they find the way to compile the code into either byte code or machine language (depending on the language) which will allow the code to run most efficiently. This seems to going on in the development of the code to create life as well. When the Human class was compiled, SOMETHING about an overridden method or something in the Constructor class caused the compiler to do something different with those two chromosomes. So, vestigial organs are no obstacle whatsoever to an Intelligent Design model. Lots of code I have written has "inherited" methods it will never use. I'm not going to write everything from scratch. The same goes for who/whatever wrote our DNA.
anonymous
2008-01-02 09:27:33 UTC
I never got any. Seriously. Make of that what you will. I'm either more highly evolved, or a complete idiot. My money's on the idiot.
anonymous
2008-01-02 09:25:45 UTC
God wants dentists to make a lot of money.
anonymous
2008-01-02 09:25:05 UTC
so use the wisdom and go to the dentist...

we have degenerated you know since Eve
Mike B
2008-01-02 09:25:22 UTC
What does not kill us makes us stronger. ; ) Not very compassionate of me, I hope that you feel better soon.
drape_sylvan
2008-01-02 10:20:34 UTC
gnaw on someone. it's the only thing that helped me.
SpiderDijonRevisted
2008-01-02 09:24:51 UTC
yea that and that appendix. totally useless.


This content was originally posted on Y! Answers, a Q&A website that shut down in 2021.
Loading...