Why do you consider percentiles (like ANSUR) to be real and objective?

[william2605]

I mean, we’re talking about percentiles for skull size, frame, etc., but just based on the numbers you already assume that the 99th percentile is huge. They measured relatively few people, and you don’t even know if they were underdeveloped, etc.


@ICL @chang cypionate

 

[Arbuscular]

If you see someone and they are attractive, they are attractive
Otherwise, they are ugly.

 

[user83793]

chico skull

 

[iamnotaracist]

You rarely see the 99 Percentile nigga, and it's clearly the more attractive ones

 

[william2605]

If you see someone and they are attractive, they are attractive
Otherwise, they are ugly.

No correlation with the op

 

[william2605]

You rarely see the 99 Percentile nigga, and it's clearly the more attractive ones

In terms of size i mean

 

[iamnotaracist]

chico skull

Brutal Skull Mogg

 

[Arbuscular]

No correlation with the op

It is a real and objective way to rate looks

 

[ICL]

You rarely see the 99 Percentile nigga, and it's clearly the more attractive ones

99th percentile means top 1%

To find that guy you need to see over 100 people

This is not rare

 

[Arbuscular]

It is a real and objective way to rate looks

But anything will be inerently accurate to some extent, unless they get like 7m people to participate on the survey and shit

 

[Arbuscular]

99th percentile means top 1%

To find that guy you need to see over 100 people

This is not rare

if you see 1000 people your perception of 1% will change tho.

edit:
nvm my reading comprehension is dogshit cuz i didn't sleep

going to sleep brbn

 

[ICL]

But anything will be inerently accurate to some extent, unless they get like 7m people to participate on the survey and shit

He is talking about head size, not lux

 

[william2605]

It is a real and objective way to rate looks

I mean in terms of size skull , frame ecc

 

[iamnotaracist]

99th percentile means top 1%

To find that guy you need to see over 100 people

This is not rare

Since the world population is 8 Billion, you will actually be seeing 1 out of 8,000

 

[ICL]

if you see 1000 people your perception of 1% will change tho.

You'll see a bunch of sub5s and ltn's before you see the top1% most of the time, unless the first person you see was top1%

nvm my reading comprehension is dogshit cuz i didn't sleep

I guess

 

[Arbuscular]

I mean in terms of size skull , frame ecc

depends on sample size

I think like smth with 5k+ people would be pretty accurate, but again, it wouldn't be accurate cuz u'd need equal distribution from different countries and stuff

idk, shits hard

 

[chang cypionate]

I mean, we’re talking about percentiles for skull size, frame, etc., but just based on the numbers you already assume that the 99th percentile is huge. They measured relatively few people, and you don’t even know if they were underdeveloped, etc.


@ICL @chang cypionate

I'm ngl I have no idea what ANSUR is. Is it an American thing?

 

[ICL]

Since the world population is 8 Billion, you will actually be seeing 1 out of 8,000

you'd still be seeing 1/100, top1% is literally top1% of people, that could be sub5 but if everyone's subhuman that's still top1%

 

[ICL]

I'm ngl I have no idea what ANSUR is. Is it an American thing?

The ANSUR (Anthropometric Survey) database—used by the U.S. Military for uniform and equipment design—does not measure skull sizes directly, but rather head and face dimensions of thousands of adult U.S. Army personnel.

 

[ICL]

I mean, we’re talking about percentiles for skull size, frame, etc., but just based on the numbers you already assume that the 99th percentile is huge. They measured relatively few people, and you don’t even know if they were underdeveloped, etc.


@ICL @chang cypionate

If a survey has a low populace that was surveyed, then that survey is unreliable, simple. You need to get a bigger sample size and address for other factors (rct's, etc)

 

[iamnotaracist]

you'd still be seeing 1/100, top1% is literally top1% of people, that could be sub5 but if everyone's subhuman that's still top1%

 

[william2605]

If a survey has a low populace that was surveyed, then that survey is unreliable, simple. You need to get a bigger sample size and address for other factors (rct's, etc)

Then 99 th in skull size isnt huge

 

[ICL]

Then 99 th in skull size isnt huge

We can't know for sure since we don't have data for these to reliably make claims. If we use unreliable data to say that 99th percentile skull isn't huge, then, the opposite can also be said, 99th percentile skull IS huge

 

[ICL]

View attachment 5115533

??

"1% of 80 million"

are you measuring the top 0.01% or what

 

[william2605]

We can't know for sure since we don't have data for these to reliably make claims. If we use unreliable data to say that 99th percentile skull isn't huge, then, the opposite can also be said, 99th percentile skull IS huge

4k of Marines from 176 cm to 200 cm height ,please take a look and can you tell me

 

[ICL]

4k of Marines from 176 cm to 200 cm height ,please take a look and can you tell me

1k-1.5k is usually enough for a good analysis so I assume 4k is reliable

 

[william2605]

1k-1.5k is usually enough for a good analysis so I assume 4k is reliable

Idk bro its impossible sayng 99 th is very big just because is the biggest of the 1,5 k

 

[ICL]

Idk bro its impossible sayng 99 th is very big just because is the biggest of the 1,5 k

195cm is top1% tho

 

[BeanCelll]

It's not, you should make your own one day.

 

[SoundnVision]

Chicoooooo skullllllll

 

[william2605]

195cm is top1% tho

Thats height not skull size

 

[william2605]

Bump

 

[william2605]

bump

 

[william2605]

Bump

 

[william2605]

Bump

 

[william2605]

Bump