Phallus Circumference; a tale of lies, uncovering the truth.

Joined
Feb 12, 2016
Messages
178
Reputation
0
How tight must one measure, it makes such a difference. We're never told, wrap loosely giveth, squeeze tight taketh. 

Measure at the middle, at the base, at the highest point ?

The apparatus defines the measurement, measure once with string, measure again with a napkin/cloth. The latter measurement will be higher, depth of the apparatus impacts the measurement.

Hard to measure, most doctors don't bother, a neglected aspect of phallic interest. Conclusion: Under studied.

Over inflated as much as length on the www ? Arguably.



3-sigma rule, the usage of Standard Deviations is fraudulent and leads to inflation.

I have my eyes on the 'USA, 80 Men' study, I'm convinced they guesstimated with width, I'm sure of it, their data is almost identical to the German studies which used this method, their highest size and indeed average size were also higher than every other other legitimate study, their standard deviation also, was uncommonly high. 

Their methods elude me, but I'm negging them for now.


 
Joined
Feb 12, 2016
Messages
178
Reputation
0
lms_rotten_zombie said:
Gala Gado Ressureccion said:
To believe a man when he states his circumference is to be a fool.

6 inch girth master race checking in. U mad?


*insert proof here*
Do you take me for a fool ? Such a rounded figure is always a give away. You wouldn't dare post proof, none of you ever do. You live a lie, ignorance is bliss.

This is the internet the average circumference is approx' 5.25-5.5, thus you're barely above average on the Wild-Wild-Web. Fraud some more.
 

lms_rotten_zombie

Lookism God
Oldcels
Joined
Dec 21, 2015
Messages
18,730
Reputation
1,707
Gala Gado Ressureccion said:
lms_rotten_zombie said:
6 inch girth master race checking in. U mad?


*insert proof here*
Do you take me for a fool ? Such a rounded figure is always a give away. You wouldn't dare post proof, none of you ever do. You live a lie, ignorance is bliss.

This is the internet the average circumference is approx' 5.25-5.5, thus you're barely above average on the Wild-Wild-Web. Fraud some more.
I meant 6.17345 but I had to round down.  :giggle: :giggle: :giggle: :giggle: :giggle:
 

BlueBalls

Chad
Joined
Sep 9, 2015
Messages
5,875
Reputation
4
An intellectual has entered the forum.

I don't have any tape so I am blissfully unaware of my (most likely) pathetic girth but my length is about 14-15 cm depending on wether or not I "bone-press".
 
Joined
Jan 19, 2016
Messages
719
Reputation
0
I measure so that there is no air gap, but the tape is not stretched and my dick is not squeezed much. Also I always specify MSEG (mid shaft erect girth).
 

OldRooster

King of Chads
Joined
Aug 25, 2015
Messages
10,845
Reputation
563
Gala Gado Ressureccion said:
How tight must one measure, it makes such a difference. We're never told, wrap loosely giveth, squeeze tight taketh. 

Measure at the middle, at the base, at the highest point ?

The apparatus defines the measurement, measure once with string, measure again with a napkin/cloth. The latter measurement will be higher, depth of the apparatus impacts the measurement.

Hard to measure, most doctors don't bother, a neglected aspect of phallic interest. Conclusion: Under studied.

Over inflated as much as length on the www ? Arguably.

3-sigma rule, the usage of Standard Deviations is fraudulent and leads to inflation.

I have my eyes on the 'USA, 80 Men' study, I'm convinced they guesstimated with width, I'm sure of it, their data is almost identical to the German studies which used this method, their highest size and indeed average size were also higher than every other other legitimate study, their standard deviation also, was uncommonly high. 

Their methods elude me, but I'm negging them for now.
It is fairly obvious to me you measure snug, with a flexible cloth measuring tape, but not squezzing.
Where you measure is a good point, I vary 0.6" based upon where measured.
i don't understand the problem you have with the use of standard Deviations, the preponderance of data fit a normal curve.
 
Joined
Feb 12, 2016
Messages
178
Reputation
0
OldRooster said:
It is fairly obvious to me you measure snug, with a flexible cloth measuring tape, but not squezzing.
Where you measure is a good point, I vary 0.6" based upon where measured.
i don't understand the problem you have with the use of standard Deviations, the preponderance of data fit a normal curve.
'Snug' can be interpreted differently. That minuscule bit of extra force which one would apply over another can rob a quarter of an inch easily.

Most studies measure 'mid shaft', one assumes this to be the exact middle, but penises come in all shapes and sizes. Some men are thickest at the bottom, others at the top (labeled as 'shroom heads'). Some Men may peak just above the mid point, when measured do the researchers take this into account, measure slightly higher along the shaft when it is so obvious they're thicker here ? They never reveal their methods.

As I mentioned in the opening post, what equipment you use will affect the outcome. Measure with string and you're xyz, measure again with a thicker material, say a napkin, and suddenly you've gained 0.25 inches. If anyone doesn't believe me, try it.

As you can see, measure laxly with dense equipment can genuinely add a half inch, then when you factor in rounding up, every ones favorite past time (5.3 becomes 5.5 and so on). You're adding a vast amount.

As aforementioned, studies often measure 'mid shaft', many online will measure at their thickest point, then when doing the above, is it any wonder everyone seems to claim to be 5, 5.5, 6 ?
 
Top