Didn't want to spell it correctly as google tracks it and makes LL more and more popular each day, but found that the perfect height is slightly taller than average which is 5'10 for a british 18+, it's 5'11
but the coolest to be is 6'1
95% of girls fall between 5'0 and 5'11
94% of men fall between 5'4 and 6'3
So i guess the best height to be is above 75% with 85%-95% being the sweet spot, but women prefer 75% and 85% over 95%, as they repute it too tall, while men repute over 95% the best height.
This data also explains that since more than 60% of people are around 5'10, they'd round up to 6'0, making 6'0 being claimed by 80% of the whole population, which is why 6'0 has lost its meaning.
My conclusion is that the best height is 186cm and here are my reasons:
-its on the tall side for everyone
-you become 6'2 for fun/special occasions with a 1cm insole
-the average will never go beyond 6'0 in the future
-it looks amazing in suit
Having said that I'd need 8 cm to reach that, it's out of my reach so I'd settle for 6'0, as being 6'0(lowest) should make me happy to regain my athletic ability after LL, to make me normal proportions wise, I currently have 76cm arm length and I have very short tibias due to the fact I have bow legs and I played football from young age
Quote from: ReadRothbard on February 05, 2015, 06:29:14 AMI'm thinking 6'1 to 6'2. That's the 90-95th percentile.
more than that isn't that necessary, important is to break the 6'0 mark at night, anything more is welcomed but not essential
Quote from: ForcedPuberty on February 20, 2015, 07:25:12 AM
ok I don't even know where to start with this 1.
for starters the average is 63.5 inches with a standard deviation of 2.5 inches which brings the 2nd standard deviation to 68.5inches. 173.99cm for the 95 percentile and under. this makes the 95% percentile 5"8.5 not 5"11. im fairly sure my maths is correct. if im wrong please show me. but as it stands if this is correct then you have manipulated the data.
http://www.analytictech.com/mb313/sd.htm
second 85% of women are less than 66 inches, this is 5"5, the method of manipulation you are employing is to use a larger standard deviation size, for example if there was 1 women in the world who was 10 foot tall it would be accurate to say that 100 percent of all women who don't have disease are between 4"11 (for arguments sake) and 10 foot. while a true statement it is a manipulation to skew the statistics by including such a tini minority of women to drag up the averages for the bulk of the data. to focus on a valid conclusion you can not include the total poluation as height and preference is largly a probability orientated desire.
I can not criticize any of your other points because they are based on emotions with zero logic and just because you have a feeling. in short they are assertions based on no logic with no actual reason. your just making statements with no backing, trying to adhere to colloquial accepted non truths for your validation.
for example. everyone lies about their height so now it has lost all meaning and now all heights that don't agree with my assertion are invalid.
you cant just say things are invalid because you want them to be invalid.
do u think women use logic when attracted or emotions?
Quote from: ForcedPuberty on February 20, 2015, 07:25:12 AM
ok I don't even know where to start with this 1.
for starters the average is 63.5 inches with a standard deviation of 2.5 inches which brings the 2nd standard deviation to 68.5inches. 173.99cm for the 95 percentile and under. this makes the 95% percentile 5"8.5 not 5"11. im fairly sure my maths is correct. if im wrong please show me. but as it stands if this is correct then you have manipulated the data.
http://www.analytictech.com/mb313/sd.htm
second 85% of women are less than 66 inches, this is 5"5, the method of manipulation you are employing is to use a larger standard deviation size, for example if there was 1 women in the world who was 10 foot tall it would be accurate to say that 100 percent of all women who don't have disease are between 4"11 (for arguments sake) and 10 foot. while a true statement it is a manipulation to skew the statistics by including such a tini minority of women to drag up the averages for the bulk of the data. to focus on a valid conclusion you can not include the total poluation as height and preference is largly a probability orientated desire.
I can not criticize any of your other points because they are based on emotions with zero logic and just because you have a feeling. in short they are assertions based on no logic with no actual reason. your just making statements with no backing, trying to adhere to colloquial accepted non truths for your validation.
for example. everyone lies about their height so now it has lost all meaning and now all heights that don't agree with my assertion are invalid.
you cant just say things are invalid because you want them to be invalid.
do u think women use logic when attracted or emotions?
You must be logged in to post a reply.