10 plus inch possible?

[ignatius4446z]

I'm not able to tell either.

The pepper pot only gains 1/4" with 3" of separation, which is approx how much at most I think there is in that pic

 

[hzs3fg]

I'm not able to tell either.

The pepper pot only gains 1/4" with 3" of separation, which is approx how much at most I think there is in that pic

How can you say only 3"? It could be 3 feet; the only guide you might have is the clearly different focus of the cock vs the tape. And, without knowing the lens' effective f-stop (and, thus, the depth of field), it is absolutely impossible to estimate the degree of separation.

Add a little bit of angularity to the camera's focal plane (in other words, tip the camera back slightly) and the phony measurement effect becomes even greater.

 

[qwerty1234567]

I'm not able to tell either.

The pepper pot only gains 1/4" with 3" of separation, which is approx how much at most I think there is in that pic

Wheres the picture?

 

[Ocine]

Yeah look at my 12 inch penis

http://i57.tinypic.com/2wlqyib.jpg



(pic not from me)

 

[LilQueenofSpades]

Yeah look at my 12 inch penis

http://i57.tinypic.com/2wlqyib.jpg



(pic not from me)

too funny!

 

[ignatius4446z]

Yeah look at my 12 inch penis

http://i57.tinypic.com/2wlqyib.jpg



(pic not from me)

Funny! Love that pic.

 

[1g5463]

Yeah look at my 12 inch penis

http://i57.tinypic.com/2wlqyib.jpg



(pic not from me)

From the side and not bone pressed

 

[ignatius4446z]

How can you say only 3"? It could be 3 feet; the only guide you might have is the clearly different focus of the cock vs the tape. And, without knowing the lens' effective f-stop (and, thus, the depth of field), it is absolutely impossible to estimate the degree of separation.

Add a little bit of angularity to the camera's focal plane (in other words, tip the camera back slightly) and the phony measurement effect becomes even greater.

Actually phone cameras tend to default to an focal length which gets everything in focus as far as possible, though it's possible to override them.

In the photo in question however, the auto focus (a different function than focal length) seems to have triggered on the area of the tape around the 10" mark and the head of the penis. In my experience phone cameras either focus on the centre of the frame (in which case the photo might be cropped at the top) or the most prominent object, in which case it's focused on the cock head and also focussed on the tape in the same area.

None of that proves anything one way or the other though.

Like I said several times. Not my photo. No claims made. Simply something to look at and consider

 

[ignatius4446z]

To clarify. Phone cameras don't have an actual focal length because the lens is fixed. They have software which interprets the images to simulate depth of field

 

[dirkjesje]

If possible means 'at least 1 with at least 10" ' than yes.
We can calculate the probability using different surveys.
The chances that none exists is lower than at least 1 exists.
If we do the same exercise for 1 foot long it's inverse.
So we don't need a medical proof measurement to conclude that it is possible.

For example we use the Cancun survey :
avg=5.877" std=0.825" - population=7,000,000,000 ( +/- 1,750,000,000 adult sexual potent males )
At 10" (std +4.9976) -> 1,750,000,000/3,443,805 = 508 males with at least 10"
At 10.825" the number is 1

So above 10.825" the chances of nill becomes higher than at least 1.
That doesn't mean impossible but unlikely.

 

[hzs3fg]

Funny! Love that pic.

And a perfect example as to why most measurement pics are suspect.

 

[ignatius4446z]

If possible means 'at least 1 with at least 10" ' than yes.
We can calculate the probability using different surveys.
The chances that none exists is lower than at least 1 exists.
If we do the same exercise for 1 foot long it's inverse.
So we don't need a medical proof measurement to conclude that it is possible.

For example we use the Cancun survey :
avg=5.877" std=0.825" - population=7,000,000,000 ( +/- 1,750,000,000 adult sexual potent males )
At 10" (std +4.9976) -> 1,750,000,000/3,443,805 = 508 males with at least 10"
At 10.825" the number is 1

So above 10.825" the chances of nill becomes higher than at least 1.
That doesn't mean impossible but unlikely.

508 worldwide. Now we have to get into what the likely distribution is per country. Despite its vast population, my money is on there not being many in China

 

[hzs3fg]

All statistics but still absolutely no proof beyond a bunch of phony pics.

 

[hzs3fg]

And, speaking of statistics, it seems that no one can even agree on the size of an "average" penis, so how can you possibly believe there is sufficient data to calculate the likelihood of any particular penis?

 

[qwerty1234567]

And, speaking of statistics, it seems that no one can even agree on the size of an "average" penis, so how can you possibly believe there is sufficient data to calculate the likelihood of any particular penis?

The average is 5.1. And dirk's post is completely theoretical. You can cite the problem of induction for all statistical claims, but thats how science works, and its works pretty fucking good.

 

[ignatius4446z]

And, speaking of statistics, it seems that no one can even agree on the size of an "average" penis, so how can you possibly believe there is sufficient data to calculate the likelihood of any particular penis?

Oh lord. Here we go again with the "verified pics" bleating.....

I wish I had a rolleyes emoticon on my phone.

Anyhow. I'm off to shower and then have sex with my beautiful girlfriend. If anyone wishes to claim her beauty is not verified or confirmed by a peer reviewed study, there's a non-photoshopped pic of her in my gallery and I can confirm that she's only 5'0" tall, though HSZ will doubtless dispute that claim until I post a photo of her next to a ruler. Come to think of it, if I did that he'd probably claim she's standing in front of it so she's actually 6'2" in real life.

 

[hzs3fg]

The average is 5.1. And dirk's post is completely theoretical. You can cite the problem of induction for all statistical claims, but thats how science works, and its works pretty fucking good.

There are studies which put the average at anywhere from 5'ish to nearly 6. Which study are YOU using?

 

[qwerty1234567]

There are studies which put the average at anywhere from 5'ish to nearly 6. Which study are YOU using?

The metastudy that was recently published which compiled previous results from previous studies excluding self-measurement.

 

[hzs3fg]

Oh lord. Here we go again with the "verified pics" bleating.....

I wish I had a rolleyes emoticon on my phone.

Anyhow. I'm off to shower and then have sex with my beautiful girlfriend. If anyone wishes to claim her beauty is not verified or confirmed by a peer reviewed study, there's a non-photoshopped pic of her in my gallery and I can confirm that she's only 5'0" tall, though HSZ will doubtless dispute that claim until I post a photo of her next to a ruler. Come to think of it, if I did that he'd probably claim she's standing in front of it so she's actually 6'2" in real life.

Lol. You're the guy who keeps posting pics.

 

[hzs3fg]

The metastudy that was recently published which compiled previous results from previous studies excluding self-measurement.

I guarantee you there are other meta-studies out there which arrived at different conclusions.