Author Mrlonelyone Posted January 19, 2013 Author Share Posted January 19, 2013 That program gave me a 7.4 and my boyfriend a 5.1. Trust me, I know that more girls would find him attractive than guys who would find me attractive. He's definitely not a 5. I'd get a kick out of showing this to him though. Was the picture of him looking straight to the camera, not smiling, no hair in the face? Did you place the dots really carefully? Those things make a big difference to a computer. It depends on you to position the dots precisely. A little off this way or that and it won't work as well as it could. Link to post Share on other sites
Oxykitten Posted January 19, 2013 Share Posted January 19, 2013 Was the picture of him looking straight to the camera, not smiling, no hair in the face? Did you place the dots really carefully? Those things make a big difference to a computer. It depends on you to position the dots precisely. A little off this way or that and it won't work as well as it could. It is junk science. What did you expect? Good for a laugh but nothing more. Link to post Share on other sites
Author Mrlonelyone Posted January 19, 2013 Author Share Posted January 19, 2013 Actually a score between 5.59 and 8.2 would be the average range. (Technically the mean score should be about 6.8 +/- 1.3. Assuming elephant man's score of 4.29 demarcates the lower 2% of attractiveness and a score of 9.5 represents the top 2% of attractiveness.) So a woman who scores a 7 is really not that far from a man who scores a 5.1 statistically speaking. Your measurements are within the margin of error. So if someone is an 8.5 they could go as low as a 7.2 or as high as a 9.8. If a man is a 6.1 he could go as high as a 7.4 or as low as a 4.8. To see what I mean look at a bell curve. http://www.anseo.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/bell_curve.gif In terms of looks a couple does not need to be an exact perfect match. In a sense this way of looking at it one's looks "League" is a very wide group of people. If one is average looking it means about 64% of all people are in your league. Average looking people therefore have the best dating prospects of all. While, counter intuitively, the top 2% of lookers on either end are in the same position when it comes to finding a good match. The best lookers will have lots of people that will want to bed them, but most won't think they can keep them and so won't even try it. The worst lookers won't have so many people wanting to bed them...and few if any people will be a match for them looks wise. Either way the best and worst looking can be equally unhappy and unlucky in love. If this math is right. Link to post Share on other sites
Author Mrlonelyone Posted January 19, 2013 Author Share Posted January 19, 2013 It is junk science. What did you expect? Good for a laugh but nothing more. All of the cited, peer reviewed, published sources which found that symmetry and the proportions used by that website are indicators of attractiveness is not junk science. It ain't particle astrophysics...but it ain't junk either. Link to post Share on other sites
SilentVoice Posted January 19, 2013 Share Posted January 19, 2013 This will help in getting actual dates, how? "Hey pretty lady, you know I rate a 8.9. Which with the bell curve I am 10 baybee" Link to post Share on other sites
Oxykitten Posted January 19, 2013 Share Posted January 19, 2013 All of the cited, peer reviewed, published sources which found that symmetry and the proportions used by that website are indicators of attractiveness is not junk science. It ain't particle astrophysics...but it ain't junk either. The human mind doesn't use complex mathematical relations like a computer program. That's where the junk comes in on top of beauty and attractiveness being determined by a whole host of other factors unmentioned but found to be relevant in other studies. You are acting like it is the unified theory of everything but it isn't. Link to post Share on other sites
Author Mrlonelyone Posted January 19, 2013 Author Share Posted January 19, 2013 This will help in getting actual dates, how? "Hey pretty lady, you know I rate a 8.9. Which with the bell curve I am 10 baybee" Not quite (and not quite what I said the math would show either). There are people on this board who have chronic problems dating. A big part of the problem may be that they are reaching outside their range in some way. The most likely way would be looks. In life no one is ever impolite enough to say to someone, hey bro your average looking find an average looking chick. It would be rude and an insult. So, this website can be honest and impersonal. It can give someone an idea to within about one point, give or take, of where they stand. The 8.9 might be able to get a 10 and keep them. While a 5.9 won't be able to get a 10 but they can get a 7.2 and keep them. So instead of wasting time trying to get a 8 or 9 or 10 they can try for good attainable sixes and sevens (or even a 4.6). There's much more to picking a partner than looks. However, looks are what gets your foot in the door. Before a person knows anything they know your face and overall look. They discriminate one way or the other based on it. Link to post Share on other sites
Author Mrlonelyone Posted January 19, 2013 Author Share Posted January 19, 2013 (edited) The human mind doesn't use complex mathematical relations like a computer program. That's where the junk comes in on top of beauty and attractiveness being determined by a whole host of other factors unmentioned but found to be relevant in other studies. You are acting like it is the unified theory of everything but it isn't. Au Contraier. The human brain is nothing but a complex biological computer. It's programming shaped by countless eons of evolution from the first Chordates to have a ganglion in their head end to us. Every land living animal, and most sea creatures has evolved for bilateral symmetry. That is fact. It is something that we have a strong preference for. The golden ratio appears in nature in so many ways from the spiral of a snails shell to the spiral of a galaxy to the relation between your nose and mouth and eyes. That is a fact. Those things don't happen by accident. Edited January 19, 2013 by Mrlonelyone Link to post Share on other sites
Oxykitten Posted January 19, 2013 Share Posted January 19, 2013 Au Contraier. The human brain is nothing but a complex biological computer. It's programming shaped by countless eons of evolution from the first Chordates to have a ganglion in their head end to us. Every land living animal, and most sea creatures has evolved for bilateral symmetry. That is fact. It is something that we have a strong preference for. The golden ratio appears in nature in so many ways from the spiral of a snails shell to the spiral of a galaxy to the relation between your nose and mouth and eyes. That is a fact. Those things don't happen by accident. Symmetry is one thing but the human mind naturally processing the golden mean is something quite different. Fractals occur in nature too. Next are you going to assert the human mind comprehends them instinctively? Years ago a woman created a complex multi-term equation for locating a bee hive based on a variety of factors including bee behavior. Problem is a bee's mind doesn't have the raw computing power to crunch such an equation. The science might be able to find faces people will find attractive or even create an attractive face but that is possibly only a subset of attractive faces and an attractive face isn't the be all and end all of beauty or attraction. It still doesn't prove the human mind is going through such a complex number crunching algorithm to prove level of beauty to the individual. Link to post Share on other sites
Author Mrlonelyone Posted January 19, 2013 Author Share Posted January 19, 2013 (edited) Symmetry is one thing but the human mind naturally processing the golden mean is something quite different. Fractals occur in nature too. Next are you going to assert the human mind comprehends them instinctively? Years ago a woman created a complex multi-term equation for locating a bee hive based on a variety of factors including bee behavior. Problem is a bee's mind doesn't have the raw computing power to crunch such an equation. The science might be able to find faces people will find attractive or even create an attractive face but that is possibly only a subset of attractive faces and an attractive face isn't the be all and end all of beauty or attraction. It still doesn't prove the human mind is going through such a complex number crunching algorithm to prove level of beauty to the individual. That is only because brains are not the same kind of computer as the average microchip. The brains of living things are closer to what's called a neural network. Artificial neural networks have been developed. They don't break everything into zero's and ones they learn what works and dosen't work just like a biological brain. Then rewire themselves in a way that reflects what they learn. The programming of things like symmetry, golden mean, and genetic fitness are all inborn into every living animal. If they aren't then most of evolution theory is dead wrong. The fact is people have built machines which replicate some of these very basic functions. http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/May05/selfrep.ws.html Edited January 19, 2013 by Mrlonelyone Link to post Share on other sites
Oxykitten Posted January 19, 2013 Share Posted January 19, 2013 That is only because brains are not the same kind of computer as the average microchip. The brains of living things are closer to what's called a neural network. Artificial neural networks have been developed. They don't break everything into zero's and ones they learn what works and dosen't work just like a biological brain. Then rewire themselves in a way that reflects what they learn. The programming of things like symmetry, golden mean, and genetic fitness are all inborn into every living animal. If they aren't then most of evolution theory is dead wrong. The fact is people have built machines which replicate some of these very basic functions. Cornell News: self-replicating robots What you are not getting is the science and math is only a near approximation of the biological mechanisms actually in control of these behaviors which we still don't understand. Until one can "build" a perfectly flawed organism like a human or a bee that exists in nature in every way we are only guessing no matter how educated it may seem. Link to post Share on other sites
Author Mrlonelyone Posted January 19, 2013 Author Share Posted January 19, 2013 So, Newtons laws of motion are only an approximation as well. Yet they work. The basic observations of bilateral symmetry in most animals, and the golden ratio in the proportions of most animals (not just humans) is about as firm as that. No one's saying someone should use this tool then just die if they get a 4 or think too much of them self if they get a 9. Some people either don't know how good they actually look...or reach way beyond what's attainable for them. Link to post Share on other sites
Oxykitten Posted January 19, 2013 Share Posted January 19, 2013 So, Newtons laws of motion are only an approximation as well. Yet they work. It has been since determined Newton's laws were exactly the kind of near approximations I was talking about that were wrong. They have since been corrected but a correction only brings one slightly closer to the truth. This is why no one uses laws but calls them theories instead. Link to post Share on other sites
SJC2008 Posted January 19, 2013 Share Posted January 19, 2013 Symmetry is soooo overrated. I did tom cruise and he got a 7.49. OP you're not a bad looking guy but according to the calculator you're better looking than tom cruise but you are not, all due respect. I'm certainly not better looking than tom cruise! I got a 6.7 and a 7.3 with two different pics. I know my symmetry is bad. Link to post Share on other sites
Author Mrlonelyone Posted January 19, 2013 Author Share Posted January 19, 2013 Symmetry is soooo overrated. I did tom cruise and he got a 7.49. OP you're not a bad looking guy but according to the calculator you're better looking than tom cruise but you are not, all due respect. I'm certainly not better looking than tom cruise! I got a 6.7 and a 7.3 with two different pics. I know my symmetry is bad. What picture of tom cruise did you use? Was he facing forward not smiling? Was it a high res picture? How carefully did you place the dots. Whenever a score is that off I would think you need to try again. Link to post Share on other sites
SJC2008 Posted January 19, 2013 Share Posted January 19, 2013 What picture of tom cruise did you use? Was he facing forward not smiling? Was it a high res picture? How carefully did you place the dots. Whenever a score is that off I would think you need to try again. He pretty much perfcetly strait toward the camera, he was smiling. Look at him CLOSE! His nose is crooked and the center of it does not line up with the center of his two front teeth, it's off to the right. The point is that symmetry isn't everything. If I get symmetry surgery and get to a 7.49 like crusie he's still gonna be way better looking than me. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
charlietheginger Posted January 19, 2013 Share Posted January 19, 2013 He pretty much perfcetly strait toward the camera, he was smiling. Look at him CLOSE! His nose is crooked and the center of it does not line up with the center of his two front teeth, it's off to the right. The point is that symmetry isn't everything. If I get symmetry surgery and get to a 7.49 like crusie he's still gonna be way better looking than me. Alot of women dont like tom cruises mouth or nose. Women like his eyes and eyebrows and cheekbones. Toms also had a nose job. Google tom from the 80s See what i mean. Link to post Share on other sites
charlietheginger Posted January 19, 2013 Share Posted January 19, 2013 i can say there is a distinct difference between attractive and ugly. When you see a symmetric face its attractive it might not be what your attracted to but if you see a face one eye is higher then the other or a ear sticks out deformed looking its clear something is wrong with that person. Link to post Share on other sites
Charlie Harper Posted January 19, 2013 Share Posted January 19, 2013 Now we are using a program to let us know how attractive we are.... utter BS. Just another excuse for insecure and shallow people to be shy, to justify their lack or will and self f image. Do exercise, be clean, enroll in dance classes, do sports, join interest groups, forget OLD and stupid shallow stuff. If I would encounter let say Bar Refaeli on the street, I am SURE Id be caable of approaching her and have a decent conversation and make her laugh...maybe she would not accept a date or something but I know I can do it I have no doubts. Yesterday I had lunch with a Client she is more less my age, we had a great time we laughed a lot and she even told me was feeling dizzy from too much laughing (she is very funny too), text message 3 hours later... she had a great time and looks forward to see me again. Be yourself, learn your strengths and be confident, THERE ARE NO LEAGUES. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
Power Girl Posted January 19, 2013 Share Posted January 19, 2013 Now we are using a program to let us know how attractive we are.... utter BS. Just another excuse for insecure and shallow people to be shy, to justify their lack or will and self f image. Do exercise, be clean, enroll in dance classes, do sports, join interest groups, forget OLD and stupid shallow stuff. If I would encounter let say Bar Refaeli on the street, I am SURE Id be caable of approaching her and have a decent conversation and make her laugh...maybe she would not accept a date or something but I know I can do it I have no doubts. Yesterday I had lunch with a Client she is more less my age, we had a great time we laughed a lot and she even told me was feeling dizzy from too much laughing (she is very funny too), text message 3 hours later... she had a great time and looks forward to see me again. Be yourself, learn your strengths and be confident, THERE ARE NO LEAGUES. Confidence don't mean a damn thing if you don't have looks or status of some kind. When women say personality and confidence matters they are ONLY talking about handsome guys. Link to post Share on other sites
Oxykitten Posted January 19, 2013 Share Posted January 19, 2013 Confidence don't mean a damn thing if you don't have looks or status of some kind. When women say personality and confidence matters they are ONLY talking about handsome guys. Confidence allows you to take chances. Without taking chances my ugly family wouldn't produce my ugly self. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
Author Mrlonelyone Posted January 19, 2013 Author Share Posted January 19, 2013 Confidence allows you to take chances. Without taking chances my ugly family wouldn't produce my ugly self. Are you conceding that people of similar attractiveness make the most stable couples? Link to post Share on other sites
Oxykitten Posted January 19, 2013 Share Posted January 19, 2013 Are you conceding that people of similar attractiveness make the most stable couples? If they did my family didn't exemplify it. Link to post Share on other sites
Author Mrlonelyone Posted January 19, 2013 Author Share Posted January 19, 2013 If they did my family didn't exemplify it. Really how so? If you don't mind my asking? Link to post Share on other sites
The Redeemer Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 I was just wondering. What physical traits? What characteristics? I'm about 6"1', 160 pounds. Somewhat toned, but I'm going to the gym more often. I've never had a girlfriend or significant other. I'd rather not post my picture. Based on this info, what league do you think I'd be in? Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts