At 6/15/16 12:01 AM, mysticvortex13 wrote:
nah, two of those photos are taken at the exact same angle as each other. the angle where you turn the roll of toilet paper on it's side if it still had paper on it, and can see the hole in the center of the flat white side rather than a rounded roll of paper.
the third, which if i recall correctly, was listed first, is indeed at a different angle.. but come on man. you cant change the apparent diameter of an object by that alone.
You have bad eyes. Or a bad depth perception. I'm not sure which.
not at all, because these objects are all the exact same mass as each other in frame. it's just the diameter that's different.
you can't have both the same mass and a different diameter simultaneously by just zooming in on an object.
you'd just get a bigger looking object all around if you did that. it follows then that the objects must actually be different sizes.
I don't think anyone else is seeing what you're "seeing" there. Those examples you posted of "extreme differences" in toilet paper tubes aren't really all that different. You're just easily fooled by camera angles.
not really. i didnt even take the test because i'm not of the opinion that the size of my penis matters.
If it doesn't matter, then why even argue it one way or the other? And yet here you are.
the girls here on newgrounds even pretty much outright said they'd laugh at us and say we werent worth their time if we did think that, or that at the very least, it's not as big a deal as guys like to think it is.
you can say what you like about "the internet is a bad place to find people" but at the end of the day, real life's none the better.
I do think anyone's best chances are in person, and I don't care how socially inept the individual is. I'm not saying it's impossible to find someone online, because people have done exactly that as well, but the results are dismal. As with anything, if in doubt try it yourself though. Let us know how it goes. I really doubt any of the girls on Newgrounds would be interested in dating you though. You have stalker tendencies and you don't bathe -- not exactly a good combination. You could instantly improve your charisma if you'd just take a bath once in a while.
at any rate, i'm just tired of you making boasts you have no way of proving. that's why i pick fights with you. not to mention it's damn good fun. gives me one hell of an adrenaline rush when i force myself to get angry at you.
Not everything is a boast, although in this case it is. Sure, I could prove it, but I'm not sending you dick pics buddy. So if you choose not to believe me, that's fine. I'm not sure why my claims of personal matters should have any relevance for you. You concentrate on you. I certainly don't care what someone else's stats are. You shouldn't either.
your ego is not justified as you believe it to be. every time i indisputably prove you wrong, you still deny it and yet you don't ever have proof of your own to validate your empty words.
Number of times mysticvortex13 has proven me wrong - Zero.
Number of people who have agreed with mysticvortex13 when he's on some insane tirade - One, mysticvortex13 himself.
I mean, there's some people who don't like me, but if you don't like me, just block me and that's that.
You have this insane need to "prove people wrong". I'd say it's an unhealthy obsession. You'd do better to just concentrate on yourself instead of other people. Instead of trying to take people down because you're jealous, focus on bettering yourself.
you're not really concerned about any potential ramifications of giving us your personally identifiable information.
And I prove that you're a creepy fucker. ;-) And I prove myself wise to withhold information others freely give. Sure, you can know some things *about* me, but you're not exactly going to be able to show up at my doorstep with that information.
My alternative would be to be a boring mofo and I'm not a boring mofo. You are a creepy mofo though. You in fact prove all of my points without intending to.
or perhaps you're just creeped out at the prospect of exhibitionism. no gay guys are going to be fapping to you if it makes you feel any better.
Contrary to your errant judgment, many gay guys find me to be quite attractive, as I've even received awkward compliments while in the restroom. People of both genders find me to be sexy. Maybe not you but then again you neither know precisely what I look like nor am I interested in your attraction. Fact of the matter is a large number of people would disagree with you.
what you've described yourself as translates to fugly anyway. twinks are attractive. not beardy baldies.
So basically you're either gay or bi and because my physical description doesn't happen to fit your sexual preferences, you can't fathom how that would fit anyone's sexual preferences. Faulty logic.
You prefer effeminate. Some prefer macho. Hell, I like macho girls for that matter. Muscle woman? Hell yeah! Why not. But I attract people of all types, although I'm not attracted to all types. But that doesn't mean others won't find some type attractive which I do not. That's the error in your judgment.
just show us the before and after roll of toilet paper you say you used, and i'll run it across anything else that could have caused that damage other than a penis by shoving random stuff in tubes of roughly the same size to see if it produces any comparable results.
Then you would just see an empty toilet paper tube that looked no different from an empty toilet paper tube because literally the thing wouldn't go in there at all. Idea fail.
i have various sizes of rolls of toilet paper in my house. this is basically how csi did things back before they formally existed and had better tools at their disposal to figure out what happened.
Then use your smallest one if you think it'll give you an "edge" on this test. Geeze. Nobody else went to this much trouble protesting some penis test, especially one they claimed they weren't interested in anyway. It's not a perfect test but it is approximate. You're putting way too much effort into this. It's not a difficult test. You don't have to study for it. You likely have what you need already.
no one actually took this ghetto old wive's tale of a test either.
It's an approximation, not an "old wive's tale". Do toilet paper rolls have certain common lengths or inner diameters? Yes? If so they will do for an approximate measurement. No more and no less. Unless you will now argue toilet paper rolls don't have lengths or diameter, rofl.
I mean if you want a more accurate measurement, use rulers and string. I think thee doth protest too much.
they just want to feel good about themselves so they're basically singing the anatomically-impossible-in-real-life mickey avalon's "my dick" in here.
Or they actually did it because it takes all of two minutes if you're on the toilet fapping one out anyway and happen to be near the end of a roll and decide to test it because why not, and you're going to discard that roll immediately after anyway.
I believe they actually did the test. It's not a difficult test, either intellectually nor resource-wise.
see how not one of them has done more than make claims that they got stuck?
Because those who failed the test likely declined to post their results. Self-selection test bias. Any self-selecting population will have it. Those who test favorably will self-select and majority of those who don't test favorably will choose not to comment on the matter.
nah people, your dicks are not as big as half the earth. otherwise i'd be able to see them punch holes through your pants from here all the way over here in the middle of nowhere known as arizona.
Lol, no one's saying their dicks are half the earth. Just stick your dick in a toilet tube already. Or don't. I don't really care.
