Quote from: Puertoricanwasp123 on February 18, 2015, 04:46:08 AMYour torso won't grow so bulking the upper body should be simple in theory for a LLer but for real people yes it's hard but not impossible to bulk like Hulk with the help of roids.
True.. upper body shd be the same. I also wanna be taller so I can eat more (more cells = higher metabolism)
Quote from: ItsMyLife on February 18, 2015, 06:05:42 AMTrue.. upper body shd be the same. I also wanna be taller so I can eat more (more cells = higher metabolism)
You stole my words, I have that same metabolism desire but we probably can have more calories but foods like peanut butter which is small but with plenty of calories.
Quote from: Puertoricanwasp123 on February 18, 2015, 06:10:46 AMYou stole my words, I have that same metabolism desire but we probably can have more calories but foods like peanut butter which is small but with plenty of calories.
Yup but the human body is a crazy thing. For eg, if you have 1 million fat cells and you suction out 0.1 million, you will find that (if you continue the same lifestyle and eating habits as before), the no of fat cells goes back to 1 million (when it shd be 0.9!). In other words, the human body tries to maintain status quo: the no. of fat cells. As much as possible, the body will go back to its own equilibrium
I don't know what will happen if we grow taller. but I do hope the body just accepts it instead of altering itself such that our metabolism remains the same as before. 
Quote from: ItsMyLife on February 18, 2015, 06:19:10 AMYup but the human body is a crazy thing. For eg, if you have 1 million fat cells and you suction out 0.1 million, you will find that (if you continue the same lifestyle and eating habits as before), the no of fat cells goes back to 1 million (when it shd be 0.9!). In other words, the human body tries to maintain status quo: the no. of fat cells. As much as possible, the body will go back to its own equilibrium
I don't know what will happen if we grow taller. but I do hope the body just accepts it instead of altering itself such that our metabolism remains the same as before.
The bones will be longer so they have to be fed somehow, the body must adapt and allow more calories, it has to if the evolution theory is true.
What you need to realise is, for short term females prefer more masculine men, hence they will have even taller than 95th percentile as ideal for short term. For long term, they like less feminine men, and when questioned on male attractiveness females ALWAYS think in terms of long term. I saw a statistic graph, the height that had the most kids was 6foot6. So it depends, if you want to be ideal boyfriend = 95th percentile, if you want to be the ideal short term player = 6foot6 (is USA, if average height is higher or lower in your country then add or subtract cm from 6foot6 same as average height difference)
Quote from: Shor7Guy on February 20, 2015, 03:43:40 AMWhat you need to realise is, for short term females prefer more masculine men, hence they will have even taller than 95th percentile as ideal for short term. For long term, they like less feminine men, and when questioned on male attractiveness females ALWAYS think in terms of long term. I saw a statistic graph, the height that had the most kids was 6foot6. So it depends, if you want to be ideal boyfriend = 95th percentile, if you want to be the ideal short term player = 6foot6 (is USA, if average height is higher or lower in your country then add or subtract cm from 6foot6 same as average height difference)
Short term players don't need to be as hot as a husband, if you hit on all the chicks you encounter you will score eventually unless you can't carry a macho image properly.
Quotefrom itsmylife
Yup but the human body is a crazy thing. For eg, if you have 1 million fat cells and you suction out 0.1 million, you will find that (if you continue the same lifestyle and eating habits as before), the no of fat cells goes back to 1 million (when it shd be 0.9!). In other words, the human body tries to maintain status quo: the no. of fat cells. As much as possible, the body will go back to its own equilibrium
I don't know what will happen if we grow taller. but I do hope the body just accepts it instead of altering itself such that our metabolism remains the same as before
prove this. I was taught different. im giving you the possible benefit of the doubt that medicine has been updated since I was educated.
Quotefrom Shor7Guy
What you need to realise is, for short term females prefer more masculine men, hence they will have even taller than 95th percentile as ideal for short term. For long term, they like less feminine men, and when questioned on male attractiveness females ALWAYS think in terms of long term. I saw a statistic graph, the height that had the most kids was 6foot6. So it depends, if you want to be ideal boyfriend = 95th percentile, if you want to be the ideal short term player = 6foot6 (is USA, if average height is higher or lower in your country then add or subtract cm from 6foot6 same as average height difference)
Quotefemales ALWAYS think in terms of long term
all your assertions are wrong. im not going to say why it would take to much effort.
do you want to know why.
hormones. when a male has a baby his testosterone lowers so that he can be a better father figure and not go around having sex with all the bitches, when a women has a baby her hormones alter so that she is attracted to a man with less testosterone. it has nothing to do with height or manliness, its all hormones. even a 6"5 man with a crap load of muscle will undergo this biological change. this is evolution at its finest to implement the family structure.
when women are on the pill it fks up this evolutionary development by altering preference to abnormally sexual selection desires.
Quotealso : for short term females prefer more masculine men,............. For long term, they like less feminine men
do you understand the definition to paradox.
Quoteheight that had the most kids was 6foot6
completely incorrect. it is 5"9'5 which has by far the number of kids.
Quote from: ForcedPuberty on February 20, 2015, 06:53:25 AMprove this. I was taught different. im giving you the possible benefit of the doubt that medicine has been updated since I was educated.
When I was finding information on this probably I am outdated too.
2011 study: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/01/weekinreview/01kolata.html?_r=0
But... I just found this
2012 ASPS: http://www.plasticsurgery.org/news/past-press-releases/2012-archives/fat-cells-don%E2%80%99t-return-to-treated-or-untreated-areas-after-liposuction-asps-study-finds.html
Quotefrom Hallijah
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
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.
You must be logged in to post a reply.
