>Our teeth tell a story, too.  We are not obligate carnivores, either.
>We've got lots of flat molars, something that you won't find in a dog
>or a cat or a ferret's mouth.  They are there to crunch vegetables and
>fruit.  We've got four little pointy canine teeth to help us with meat,
>but those flat molars speak volumes.
 
Yes, but not quite that way for optimal matching of morphology and
function.
 
Actually, our own molars are best designed for gramnivory (eating
grains/grass seeds) and we have other aspects of the Theropithecus
Complex which is closely associated with a long history of seed eating
(which is very time consuming): well padded bottoms for long sitting,
frontal sexual attractants (Ever notice how unusual our breasts are
among primates?), precision grip, etc.
 
Primate canines are pretty useless for meat eating.  Yeah, they can help
slice for the initial bites -- though not as well as some other teeth do.
Unlike members of Carnivora the primate canine is not usually used for
killing purposes.  (Meat slicing is actually done by specialized
premolars and molars in Carnivora, not by the canines.) Primates tend to
use the canines for sexual displays, defense, and so on, but in some
primates, including us, the canine has become largely incisorform (shaped
like an incisor) and used for slicing and scooping (vegetable and fruit
eating).
 
The canine tooth is a very ancestral tooth often used in defense, attack,
and social dominance struggles which is conical and has a long root
usually.  It's presence does not say that meat eating happens.  I think
that people (often) confuse that because they think of canines as in dogs
and then canines as in teeth.
 
Forgive me if that is said poorly; I have a monster headache right now.
 
Oh, and ferrets are descended from the dogs branch.  See my other post.
[Posted in FML issue 4708]