Body Mass Index. There are several ways of calculating it, the more complex the equation, the more accurate. It basically measures the relationship between your total body volume (i. e. how much the water goes up when you get in a bathtub) and total body mass (i. e. how much the scales say you weigh.) Since muscle is considerably more dense than fat, this measurement can tell accurately what your body fat percentage is. If two people weigh the same on the scales, but one is very muscular and fit, and the other is very fat, the fat one will displace much more water in the tub.mr_c1974 said:BTW, what's BMI?
SomeGuyOverThere said:I have no scientific proof, but I can usually tell another man's penis length instinctively. Not with like a 3 decimal point accuracy or anything, but within a range of 1".
All it takes is getting to know them a little bit, or even (in the case of actors) getting to know what type of roles they play on screen.
The even weirder part is that I seem to instinctively make freinds with men around the same size as me, and not get on well with guys who arent. This is even before I hear the stats, (from a friend of mine who allways manages to weasle out of guys how big their wang is. She even got it out of me!) so it isnt a concious choice.
Considering my cock is on the large side, thats a pretty interesting statistical unlikelyhood. If my cock was "normal" sized, it wouldnt be very supriseing.
I'm not saying I can prove this, obviously I can't easily, but it just is one of those things that seems to be.
sexycobra said:I didn't write the study that I was quoting (and I'm not Italian either), so I don't feel like I need to defend it. However, I think there is some confusion as to what is the meaning of a statistical correlation.
I took this simple explanation from the Web :
Correlation is a statistical technique which can show whether and how strongly pairs of variables are related. For example, height and weight are related - taller people tend to be heavier than shorter people. The relationship isn't perfect. People of the same height vary in weight, and you can easily think of two people you know where the shorter one is heavier than the taller one. Nonetheless, the average weight of people 5'5'' is less than the average weight of people 5'6'', and their average weight is less than that of people 5'7'', etc. Correlation can tell you just how much of the variation in peoples' weights is related to their heights.
So, finding a correlation between BMI and penis size only means that, statistically, on average, guys with lower BMI will have longer dicks. It doesn't say that all skinny guys are hung, nor that all guys with a higher BMI have small dicks. Same with taller guys having bigger dicks on average: the correlation only points to a general statistical tendency, it does not say that all tall guys have big dicks and all short guys have smaller dicks. I think everyone knows that this is not true, anyway.
As for the age thing, you are right, all people in this study were young men aged 18 or so. But that doesn't affect the validity of the study: even if people's BMI increases with age, the correlation would still hold.
FBAnder said:I did not see a confidence interval...WORTHLES!!!!!!!
dlcs said:Okay. I'm about to betray the Sisterhood, but only because I can't stand the kvetching anymore.
We don't have nipples. They are actually highly sensitive proximity sweepers that send shock waves through our bodies whenever we are within 25 feet of a penis larger than 6.5 inches. That's how we know.
In fact, I'm due for an appointment with Claire to get mine recalibrated.
There.
Off to clean something.
well, they have been on the fritz since I met my current guy...sexycobra said:Oh, that's how you do it... You must pity the poor saps who spent years trying to find statistical relationships when you've got a built-in detector like this.
Btw, is the intensity of the waves proportional to the size of the penis? It must be hard to keep walking straight when you're sensing a mega-huge one.