I dont believe 12-13 inch penis and thick exist........

[paigexox]

Reminds me of the Celestial Teapot Analogy from Bertrum Russell; "to illustrate the idea that the philosophic burden of proof lies upon a person making scientifically unfalsifiable claims rather than shifting the burden of proof to others . . . Russell wrote that if he claimed that a teapot were orbiting the sun, it would be nonsense for him to expect others not to doubt him just because they could not prove him wrong."

Ripped straight from the wiki. :tongue:

 

[drabman]

Well, the proof you're looking for was plopped right on my chest by a guy from my gym when we were sexing it up. If you went to the same gym as I did, your proof would be walking around the locker room showing off..which he liked to do. As I said before, it went all the way to his knees. I saw it. I felt it. It was real.

Unless you measured it in the standard way (along the top, standing up) you can't say for sure how long it was. Anyway, all you're doing is providing the same hearsay evidence that others have done time and time and time again. Unfortunately none of this is ever backed up by evidence of a more rigorous and credible nature.

If you don't want to believe that you're just being silly.

I don't believe a claim you have made backed up with zero evidence. Others have made similar claims with zero evidence. There is zero evidence that such a thing is even possible. If that means I'm being silly, then silly me.

Going by your rationale, I should believe any assertion you choose to make. I suppose if you claimed to have been the one who shot Bin-Laden, or that you taught Lionel Messi everything he knows about football, I should believe that too?

If you can point me towards credible evidence that 12-inch penises exist then I'll believe you. Otherwise I won't.

 

[drabman]

(I am so sure that 12"penises exist) because freaks of nature do exist. maybe it's natural selection, maybe it's mutation, maybe it's from pollution, maybe it's from chemicals in the air, water, etc. i can't deny the possibility...

Notwithstanding the excellent comments of Irish about the logical traps some people are falling into, you have suddenly changed the goalposts.

The argument is not about the theoretical possibility that 12" penises could ever exist - I couldn't possibly comment on that, since I don't have enough data about the limits of biology etc to make an educated guess. Rather it is about whether or not they exist in reality.

You might be correct that some set of freak circumstances could arise that would result in a 12" penis (being bitten by a radioactive Bull elephant, radical surgery etc). However again, I can't comment with any degree of accuracy on the probability of such a thing arising (I suspect you cant either).

If that is your position then, once again, your argument is a non-sequitur. It does not follow that the existence of freaks of nature means that ANY freak of nature, is therefore equally likely to exist. Why stop with 12" penises? Why not say that hidden somewhere amongst the lost tribes of Papua New Guinea exist individuals with 24 inch penises, or 12 inch noses, or 10 foot long arms?

there's no solid proof that aliens exist either but we all speculate right? why can't we look at this with open minds?

As I say, speculating on the theoretical possibility of something existing is different than insisting, without any evidence, that it actually does exist in reality. I'll quite happily listen to someone with a sensible argument about the possibility of life on other planets; however if they claim to have recently had sex with a space-traveller from Alpha Centauri, I'm afraid I'll find it difficult to take them seriously.

(asking for proof of an assertion - in this case that 12" penises are real) sounds too selfish to me

Asking for proof of an assertion is selfish??? I have to say I find that an extremely odd statement indeed. The corollary of that is that we should just take what anyone says at face value, which would be absurd - not to mention dangerous.

and if (the existence of 12" penises) was proven real, would that make our lives better or just fill us with envy/jealousy? perhaps inquiring minds just want to know?

It wouldn't make the slightest difference to me - unless the entire female population declared they were only interested in men with huge 12" cocks. The only important thing to me is the truth - and to date there is absolutely no evidence that there is any truth in the claims that 12" penises exist.

 

[BIGBULL29]

Measured correctly, I've yet to see anything that I'd say was over "8-8.5" inches in length (8.5 is even pushing it). This range of length is extremely rare (Lex Steele close to 8 with the surgery?). If you really were between 8-8.5 inches in length, you'd be exceptionally long, and thus wouldn't probably have much in girth (very long, skinny penis).

Biggest girth about close to 7.5-8 inches (Shorty Mac)

 

[category8]

Belief has nothing to do with it - evidence does. We're not talking religion here. It's all very well to say things like, ""For those who don't believe, no proof is possible", but this neatly circumvents the rather inconvenient problem that there appears to be NO proof whatsoever that 12-13" penises exist today.

...

I say again - the only issue here is evidence. Belief flows from that, not the other way around. There is empirical proof that 8 foot tall men exist, so I believe in them; there is none (that I know of) that men with 12-inch long penises exist, so I don't believe in them. It's as simple as that.

Although the quote I referenced ("For those who don't believe...") originally addressed religious faith, I'm using it in a somewhat different sense. I'm not implying that anyone should arbitrarily believe in the existence of 12" penises, just as they shouldn't arbitrarily in a teacup that revolves around the sun, to use Paige's reference of Bertrand Russell.

No, people can come to believe that 12" cocks are out there based on their understanding of human development and physiology, and the evidence they see of these cocks. As I said in my post that you're responding to, there is quite a bit of such evidence: any number of photographs and anecdotes that you and I and most everyone else reading this thread has seen at least some of.

Yes, this is evidence, and not proof. And most of it is bullshit, whether intentionally so or not (someone might overestimate a huge 10-incher they've seen in person as a 12-incher, for example). Of course, you have to use your best judgment to decide which evidence rings true, and which doesn't.

(Side note - You want to see legitimate measured pics or videos. That's fine, if you don't trust your own ability to estimate size from photos. I think I'm pretty good at estimating size myself, so while it would certainly be nice to see rulers in these pics, I don't need them to be able to judge a cock as 12", or close to it.)

The combination of my own personal understanding of human development/physiology and my judgment of the evidence I've seen leads me to belief.

Now, some of what I'm saying seems like a circular argument: "I believe that 12" penises exist because of the evidence I've seen of them; I accept this evidence because I believe that it's possible for 12" penises to exist." Well, the thing is that even in science, logic, and mathematics, belief/"faith" and "proof" go hand-in-hand, rather than one strictly preceding the other.

All logical and mathematical proofs, for example, start from axioms that are accepted as absolute truth. That is, we have "faith" in their truth, because they seem utterly reasonable and consistent with our experience.

In short, you have to start somewhere. If it seems plausible that 12-inchers are out there, and if their existence jibes with your experience and understanding of the world, then you can accept the evidence of them (with a healthy skepticism). This is the sense in which I use "belief" in the quote above.

It's all very well to say things like, ""For those who don't believe, no proof is possible", but this neatly circumvents the rather inconvenient problem that there appears to be NO proof whatsoever that 12-13" penises exist today.

No proof - maybe - but definitely ample evidence, like I said. And besides, to throw another classic quote at you, "Absence of proof is not proof of absence."

I'll address the anthropomorphic extreme measurements logical fallacy, as you put it, in a later post.

 

[drabman]

It seems that the only people who believes 12 plus penises exist is gay... it has to be a fantasy of theirs

I don't think that's completely fair - there are clearly people on this forum who are not gay, but who seem to have a need to believe in the existence of outlandishly large penises. I recall a forum member once virtually being run off the board for having the temerity to suggest that porn stars' measurements were ludicrously exaggerated. IIRC many of those flaming him seemed to be straight.

However the gist of what you say is true - i.e it seems the belief is an emotional/sexual one, rather than one based on fact or evidence. In the case of heterosexual men, tis could be a result of hero-worship by fans of particular porn stars, or those into small penis humiliation and so on.

 

[wis]

I think 12 inch cocks are rare, there are some but as I said very rare. I fucked one guy a long time ago that was a 12:er but to be honest, it is too long for some real hard ballsdeep fucking. Yeah, he did go all in but it hurts in the stomach like hell when he pounded so I had to tell hi not go all in.

But the truth is, I didn't measure him though but after being in a relationship for almost 2 years with a guy that had a 11inch cock (yes I did measure it) and him going balls deep without hurting me inside i guesstimate him to be 12inches.

But like many says, its mainly a fantasy for gay men I can agree on that. If you'd like to meet hung guys like that the best way is to check out ads or get invited to a cockfest. There are a lot of 10-11 incher, more than you know. They just don't hang out here I guess.

As a gay bottom myself I'm always looking for a bigger cock but I don't think I'd like to be in a relationship with one cuz it's not that practical in the long run. Personally, I think the ideal size is 9.5/6.5 inches.

edit;

from my experience, I think it's harder to find a white guy with a 10-12 inch than it is with blacks. Most white guys with big cocks seem to be in the 9-9.5 area while blacks are generally 10+.

 

[drabman]

..people can come to believe that 12" cocks are out there based on their understanding of human development and physiology, and the evidence they see of these cocks.

Which only explains why people believe that 12" penises exist. It doesn't provide any evidence that they actually do.

As I said in my post that you're responding to, there is quite a bit of such evidence: ...And most of it is bullshit, whether intentionally so or not ...

ALL that I have seen or heard is bullshit - or at least flawed in some way.

(Side note - You want to see legitimate measured pics or videos. That's fine, if you don't trust your own ability to estimate size from photos. I think I'm pretty good at estimating size myself, so while it would certainly be nice to see rulers in these pics, I don't need them to be able to judge a cock as 12", or close to it.)

I don't believe ANYONE can accurately deduce size from the sort of pictures that are routinely produced as so-called evidence, even where they are not actually doctored. There is only a 2-3" difference between a 12" penis and the ultra-rare outliers that some scientific surveys have discovered, after all.

The combination of my own personal understanding of human development/physiology and my judgment of the evidence I've seen leads me to belief.

Unless you can elaborate on what that understanding actually is (for example you have an extensive knowledge of genetics and have studied anthropomorphic tables and penis size studies n some detail) it's impossible to judge whether your belief is reasonable or not.

Now, some of what I'm saying seems like a circular argument: "I believe that 12" penises exist because of the evidence I've seen of them; I accept this evidence because I believe that it's possible for 12" penises to exist." Well, the thing is that even in science, logic, and mathematics, belief/"faith" and "proof" go hand-in-hand, rather than one strictly preceding the other.

In my three years of studying science (Chemistry) I never heard the phrase "faith" uttered once, so I respectfully disagree. No scientist worthy of the name will ever try to make the evidence fit the theory, rather than the other way around, as you seem to be suggesting they should - they are only concerned with the truth.

All logical and mathematical proofs, for example, start from axioms that are accepted as absolute truth. That is, we have "faith" in their truth, because they seem utterly reasonable and consistent with our experience.

Axiomatic evidence is not the same thing as anecdotal evidence. Neither is it personal.

In short, you have to start somewhere...

This is misunderstanding the nature of axiomatic evidence. By your reasoning, any assumption we make about an observable event that we interpret as consistent with our own personal experience counts as axiomatic evidence, which is patently false.

If it seems plausible that 12-inchers are out there, and if their existence jibes with your experience and understanding of the world, then you can accept the evidence of them (with a healthy skepticism). This is the sense in which I use "belief" in the quote above.

But your premise (that the existence of 12" penises is plausible) is not supported by any credible evidence, so the context in which you use the word "belief" is more that of "faith" than anything else. An individual's personal experience is immaterial to me unless it is supported by evidence.

No proof - maybe - but definitely ample evidence, like I said.

I beg to differ. Or rather I should say that the evidence may be ample, but none of it is credible. Quality is more important than quantity. One legitimate, properly-measured photograph is worth a thousand dubious object-comparison shots and a billion anecdotes.

And besides, to throw another classic quote at you, "Absence of proof is not proof of absence."

Well quite, but neither is it proof of existence, which is the logical conclusion of that argument when applied to this debate. That is merely drawing a conclusion from ignorance - a classical logical fallacy.

 

[D_JuanAFock]

All logical and mathematical proofs, for example, start from axioms that are accepted as absolute truth. That is, we have "faith" in their truth, because they seem utterly reasonable and consistent with our experience.

They start from axioms based on observations. They see something and say it is always true, then they try to make it not true... it is merely a basis so that you have something tangible to work towards. In this scenario we might see something and say it is true, then try to make it true.

Also, "belief" is a horrible thing to do in anything scientific.
Scientific method - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

PS: People are generally not good with measuring size by sight. Most people are at least a half inch off for mine, and depending on the angle I can make people be even further off (smaller or larger). If most people are at least a half inch off with me, then the size interpretation only gets worse as you get larger because there is a greater size of potential error.

 

[AlphaMale]

...
No proof - maybe - but definitely ample evidence, like I said. And besides, to throw another classic quote at you, "Absence of proof is not proof of absence."...

There is no proof and there is also not any evidence to support that there may be proof.

Absence of proof is not proof of absence... and it's also not proof of proof either.

 

[paigexox]

They start from axioms based on observations. They see something and say it is always true, then they try to make it not true... it is merely a basis so that you have something tangible to work towards. In this scenario we might see something and say it is true, then try to make it true.

I think you're reaching for the word metatheory. :wink:

 

[midlifebear]

I'm shocked at how many posters don't believe in unicorns covered in glitter. Simply shocked!

 

[D_JuanAFock]

I think you're reaching for the word metatheory. :wink:

Or I could actually explain what is going on instead of use a single word that is used to describe the practice since he seemingly has no idea what hes talking about.

I mean, using a single word like that is like when you look something up in a dictionary and it tells you to see another word. They both mean the same thing, why couldnt it just explain it to you there?

 

[BIGBULL29]

There may be one 10-inch penis out there (1 or 2, or even 4 out of 4 billion or so):biggrin1:. If so, they'd be so freakish-looking that it wouldn't even look like a human penis. I wouldn't want one -- I can tell you that!

 

[uncut_1234]

i still seepeople talking about jonah falco...

has anyone E V E R seen a picture of this guys dick hard?
EVER in the history of the internet, has there ever been ONE picture or even better, and not so easy to fake, a movie!?
you figure a guy who based hiswhole life around the size of his penis could at least produce a picture of it.. ?

 

[B_Lightkeeper]

If any 10"-12" cocked studs would like to show me, I'll verify they're real. (And workable.)

 

[Irish]

I'm shocked at how many posters don't believe in unicorns covered in glitter. Simply shocked!

It's not that shocking; glitter does not naturally occur in a unicorn's natural habitat.

Edit: Naturally.

 

[marriedasian]

gosh, i love his forum!

 

[drabman]

i still seepeople talking about jonah falco...

has anyone E V E R seen a picture of this guys dick hard?

Nope. (He refuses to produce one - On the oh-so-credible basis that he has "nothing to prove to anyone" IIRC.)

EVER in the history of the internet, has there ever been ONE picture or even better, and not so easy to fake, a movie!?

Nope.

you figure a guy who based hiswhole life around the size of his penis could at least produce a picture of it.. ?

For God's sake man - don't bring logic into it!

 

[Adrian69702006]

drabman, I think that's probably a little harsh. You can't disprove Jonah's size any more than I can. In the absence of being able to prove anything to the contrary, I think the fair policy is to give the benefit of the doubt. He's certainly got the biggest 'known' penis in the world. Whether one day someone will emerge from obscurity who can beat his record, remains to be seen. However so far as I'm concerned, he holds the record for the time being.