Author Topic: how long is your pecker? inb4 bird (Read 23148 times)

Dionysusan · June 28, 2015, 02:55:19 AM

/thread

7.2 here

I must have a really long ~~richard~~ pecker, because Trinick and friends are shocked at 7.2

Quote from: $trinick on June 29, 2015, 03:57:27 PM

Alright, finally I'm not busy so I can address your claims.

This data set is constructed from three research studies. The first, Wessels & McAninch, studied 80 men. Their sample size is small though. The second, Schneider T et al, studied 143 men of various adult ages. The final study, J Chen et al. measured another 55 patients. The average of these all is called the "hungfun" average, which rests at an average erect length of 5.75 inches.

Based on this data set of almost 300 people's richards measured by doctors (aka no over-reporting for self measurement) the 7 inch mark should be the 93rd percentile. So seven in a hundred people have richards that are seven inches or larger. I don't have statistics on the active use of the forums but I would estimate there are about 1000 daily active users. Which would mean there are 70 people per day that visit this forum who have a 7 inch or larger snake, out of the remaining 993. So it seems unlikely that the first page would be filled with people who are in this 7%.

However, there is a way this can happen. It's a statistical issue called sampling bias. This right here, assuming everyone is telling the truth, is why we can't have nice things or quality statistics. Studies that are conducted via voluntary admission are almost always bunk, because only people who want to answer the question will answer. What this means here is that only people who walked in to the thread with big richards wanted to reply, because they wanted to assert their big richards over everyone else. People with smaller richards didn't want to reply because they wanted to avoid being shamed for their smaller richards. This then flipped in the exact opposite direction once people started copping flak for 'lying,' it appeared more socially acceptable to have a smaller richard so people (mind you, who are still above average) were comfortable posting their richard sizes, and people with (ostensibly) larger richards started saying stuff like "I'd say, but you guys wouldn't believe me."

So, do I think it's impossible that the first page filled with the 70 people who do in fact have that large of a richard? No, I think when you consider sampling bias it's a total real possibility. However, there is certainly a real phenomenon out there that definitely makes our data bunk. People overmeasure their own richards. But even when you do include self-measure, as in the Herbenick et al. study, you still come out with an average 5.6 inches. This study segregates results by race, so let's just check on white people. 5.58 inches, we'll generously round that to 5.6. Damn, so average.