world map 'phallus' size

[krAzy :)]

'PHALLUS' size worldwide

 

ITALY ---> 15,74 cm (6,2 inches)

 

poor india and china

 

SRY if some thing its a 'f***ed' up topic

but i found it interesting and funny to know

[Larabeast]

Lol US = 5.2 I feel sorry for some people .

[darkfang77]

Sorry but that site is full of BS.

Some evidence:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/6161691.stm

 

But then again, can this study truly say they've measured every single **** in India/China, even in the website I pasted they only measured 1000 blokes.

 

No consistency and no proof of statistics whatsoever. And I do maths..

[krAzy :)]

Sorry but that site is full of BS.

Some evidence:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/6161691.stm

 

But then again, can this study truly say they've measured every single **** in India/China, even in the website I pasted they only measured 1000 blokes.

 

No consistency and no proof of statistics whatsoever. And I do maths..

 

thats stupid

 

ofc this number is just approximately

and that is EXACTLY what a statistic is all about

 

And i do economy

[WaaSabi]

Argentina = 14.88 rolf

[Wifestein]

LOL!

[darkfang77]

thats stupid

 

ofc this number is just approximately

and that is EXACTLY what a statistic is all about

 

And i do economy

 

Yeah, but theres no proof its a random selection, A: Is it self-reported or measured in clinical studies? If self-reported, then you can throw the whole thing out the window. If not, the discrepancy between size is too hard to believe.

 

Also, where did the stats come from? You could just as easily say that the stats came from doctors who were specifically interested in single men/impotent men/weird men/short men, etc.

[4C1D]

For correct measuring it has to be an random selction, because then you have for example men/impotent men/weird men/short etc,

and depending on what distribution (maybe Gaussian) is existing here, the measured mean of 1000 samples can fit very well to the true mean value

[darkfang77]

For correct measuring it has to be an random selction, because then you have for example men/impotent men/weird men/short etc,

and depending on what distribution (maybe Gaussian) is existing here, the measured mean of 1000 samples can fit very well to the true mean value

 

OK, are we seeing different things here? it doesn't even say mean on the site, just says average, which I believe can mean either mean, mode or median. You sound as if you've done some maths, since knob size is a continuous value, therefore, all three are possible.

 

Unless:

do the majority of the men (i.e, most common value) have exactly the same number? Highly unlikely (rejected)

 

don't ask where I know this, but I know that median and mean values for willies are substantially different (by >1 inch, forgot source), therefore, if the creators wanted to be skewed, they could easily do so by selectively choosing mean over median for their favourite country.

 

We can also see unexplainable differences between close countries, take two S.American countries, populations both likely to be of the same gene pool (since S.A was separated and wasn't discovered again until the spanish, I think), therefore, if my interpretation is correct, what this map is implying is that guys with bigger penises are to migrating ecuador, venezuala, and bolivia. Rubbish

 

If you reject this interpretation, then you could argue that it could be a fluke, then tell me how we go from 17.93 (congo) to 15.33 (C.A.R), both relatively close countries? You could also argue that races aren't representative of anything, in which case the whole map is not valid.

 

I don't know anything about the data, is it +/-ively skewed, can be it shown through a probability density function (I doubt it can)?

 

The study probably isn't a random selection, if it were, they wouldn't get the data, seriously, would you allow yourself to be measured by some person who wanted to? Chances are that it was aggregated from a load of sources and thrown together in a mean calculating algorithm or whatever.

 

I'm not sure what you mean by measured mean of 1000 samples, but take China for instance, with 600-ish million males, is 1000 a fair measurement? Also, what was the proportion of ages? And how did this correlate to other studies? Did you get 500 children and 500 teens for one country, and get 1000 full grown males for the next? Would you proportionally match ages with population (skewed result) or ages randomly (not reliable nor close to true mean)?

 

Either way, mathematically and realistically speaking, this is a load of tripe, you might as well measure the length of your turd and say that works, because I would believe you (not personally you, but anyone). for reading

 

PS: Maths + Further maths FTW!

Edited March 24, 2011 by darkfang77

[*A.G*]

Gay

[rolf]

OK, are we seeing different things here? it doesn't even say mean on the site, just says average, which I believe can mean either mean, mode or median. You sound as if you've done some maths, since knob size is a continuous value, therefore, all three are possible.

Someone has to compensate

 

In the map symbology it states average. Which is the mean, not the mode or median.

 

therefore, if the creators wanted to be skewed, they could easily do so by selectively choosing mean over median for their favourite country.

There are lies, damned lies and statistics. But doing this is even for a statistician wrong.

 

We can also see unexplainable differences between close countries, take two S.American countries, populations both likely to be of the same gene pool (since S.A was separated and wasn't discovered again until the spanish, I think), therefore, if my interpretation is correct, what this map is implying is that guys with bigger penises are to migrating ecuador, venezuala, and bolivia. Rubbish

I disagree. Even if Boliva has a large unit, the neighbours have borders >1000miles from them away. It can be the case that the thing is smaller on the other side of the country.

 

 

If you reject this interpretation, then you could argue that it could be a fluke, then tell me how we go from 17.93 (congo) to 15.33 (C.A.R), both relatively close countries? You could also argue that races aren't representative of anything, in which case the whole map is not valid.

In Africa you have a larger split in Tribes, you don't switch from one tribe to another. I think that size is somewhat genetic, but you can do the math now right?

 

 

The study probably isn't a random selection, if it were, they wouldn't get the data, seriously, would you allow yourself to be measured by some person who wanted to? Chances are that it was aggregated from a load of sources and thrown together in a mean calculating algorithm or whatever.

Agree. Although it can be usefull if you have 2" one, you can lower the statistics and feel better. On the other hand, if you a 12", you could raise it and still see you're awesome

 

I'm not sure what you mean by measured mean of 1000 samples, but take China for instance, with 600-ish million males, is 1000 a fair measurement? Also, what was the proportion of ages? And how did this correlate to other studies? Did you get 500 children and 500 teens for one country, and get 1000 full grown males for the next? Would you proportionally match ages with population (skewed result) or ages randomly (not reliable nor close to true mean)?

You're familiar with the, for example, 95% confidence interval?

 

Besides, after a certain age you're boy doesn't grow anymore. Secondly, most people don't let the doctors feel up the littles of their littles for statistics.

 

Either way, mathematically and realistically speaking, this is a load of tripe, you might as well measure the length of your turd and say that works, because I would believe you (not personally you, but anyone). for reading

I have 12"

 

PS: Maths + Further maths FTW!

True. But statistics are unfortunately boring overall.

[RoosterCogburn]

Damn, im letting America down with my tiny penis.

[darkfang77]

Someone has to compensate

 

In the map symbology it states average. Which is the mean, not the mode or median.

 

 

There are lies, damned lies and statistics. But doing this is even for a statistician wrong.

 

 

I disagree. Even if Boliva has a large unit, the neighbours have borders >1000miles from them away. It can be the case that the thing is smaller on the other side of the country.

 

 

 

In Africa you have a larger split in Tribes, you don't switch from one tribe to another. I think that size is somewhat genetic, but you can do the math now right?

 

 

 

Agree. Although it can be usefull if you have 2" one, you can lower the statistics and feel better. On the other hand, if you a 12", you could raise it and still see you're awesome

 

 

You're familiar with the, for example, 95% confidence interval?

 

Besides, after a certain age you're boy doesn't grow anymore. Secondly, most people don't let the doctors feel up the littles of their littles for statistics.

 

 

I have 12"

 

 

True. But statistics are unfortunately boring overall.

 

1.) No, average is just a word for something in the middle, mode, mean and median are all averages, that's what pisses me off when people don't tell us which average they're using.

 

2.) We don't know they're statisticians, all we know that they're just a bunch of coders who made this website, no mark of authenticity, where have they labelled sources? The whole thing is basically numbers superimposed on Google Maps

 

3.) Don't understand what you're saying, please explain.

 

4.) Fortunately I'm interested in psychology, have you heard of koro? Totally irrelevant.

Anyway, what you're saying is that the tribes are breeding with their own purely to preserve these traits, if this was the case, they would have too many repeated alleles (i.e, inbred) and would have been extinct (as a tribe) ages ago, the gene pool either has to be large enough to accommodate numerous matchings or else a injection of new genetic variation to maintain diversity at the genetic level. Tribes separating genetic diversity is irrelevant. The countries referenced have populations substantially larger than that of your average tribe. So what you're saying is all the gifted tribes happen to join into one area, and then became a country? BS.

 

5.) No comment, my 3rd leg is perfectly fine...

 

6.) No, not familiar, actually, the body stops growing after 17-ish (psychology again), but still what's the proportion of >17 y/os to those <17 y/os? Are we counting hormonal diseases? Genetic problems? Even between 1 and 17, there is a massive disparity.

 

7.) My turd's got eyes!! thankfully I covered it with toilet paper...

Although once my bum wouldn't stop crying...

 

Summary: I can argue this forever and ever, the point is that the whole thing is amateurish, my perception is that this could perpetuate negative stereotypes (oh, yeah, you're chinese/indian, 4 inch nob). No evidence whatsoever, which is worrying me as people will believe this crap.. Oh wait, everyone is!

 

Numbers on a maps guys, just numbers on a map.

Edited March 24, 2011 by darkfang77

[rolf]

1: I might be mistaken, but I usually translate these kinds of words to Dutch. Average is gemiddelde, and gemiddelde is the sum over all divided by the number of elements. Which is the mean.

 

3: Statistics can be used to lie. A lot. That doesn't mean that everything can be used within statistics. You can create "the average of everyone with an over-average manhood", or "the average of the best 1% of measurepoints we have", and still have a legit statistic. But combining two definitions within one result (in this case: the map) is not allowed.

 

4: Semi-agree indeed. But one small remark, we still find some tribes within the Amazone. I know that happened a couple of years ago. No-one knew about them, so probably the are inbred and still live on their own.

 

6: Really learn what 95% confidence interval is. It is actually exactly what it says. Given a set of numbers, if you derive the average, can state that for 95% it is correct between average-something and average+something. This depends really on the number of numbers you have, and a bit if there are a lot of measuring errors (e.g., if you have a **** of 70", you probably have measured the length of a person named **** instead of his little boy).

 

However, they will probably not have measured the <17 because there's to much variation.

 

 

 

Numbers on a maps guys, just numbers on a map.

Agree.

[iAmweAsel]

holy lord ... its like a lamborghini you own but you have no driving-license.

 

i bet the most ppl here are still virgins xD hmm lets all post pics maybe haha i dont believe this shit.

 

i am with Rooster letting down Germany with my tiny penis! or they ment e-penises? idk ^^