Ok, so all the ELA out there is a hoax and you can't differentiate areas depending on how often they were changed and processed? Okay Mr.Expert. lmao. Done with you. You got no clue at all.It will lose exaxtly the amount of fragments as the rest of the imagejust a fact.
The $10,000 10-inch challenge
- Thread starter drambone2001
- Start date
As i said show me a tool that can differiante how many times a area has been processed and i give u 10k. Its technically impossible.
Average Penis Length Is Shorter Than What We've Been Told
BPEL is the standard measure methology as stated in the article.
BPEL is the standard measure methology as stated in the article.
I dont even know why u mention ELA in every second post. It has been confirmed as a hoax many years ago and EVERY real expert know that.
"One of the experts, Hany Farid, said about error level analysis that "It incorrectly labels altered images as original and incorrectly labels original images as altered with the same likelihood". Krawetz responded by clarifying that "It is up to the user to interpret the results. Any errors in identification rest solely on the viewer""
They tested it with thousands of images and ELA was ALWAYS wrong. So mentioning that over and over again just demonstrates that u have no idea. As i already said many post ago u have no technical understanding at all and u proved it.
The only difference in methodology is bone-pressing v not. There can be several inches difference or none at all, depending upon body fat. Everyone knows this. It's been discussed to death in this thread. Everyone also knows that most studies use bone-pressed measurement.
This is not a study, it's a contest, and the nature of how candidates submit entries mandates a method that minimizes opportunities to cheat. Bone-pressing allows the opportunity to hide the end of the ruler, which can be cut down.
You had every opportunity, and 22 months, to review the rules before posting a photo of a sub-10" penis and then proceeding to argue, insult and complain.
An analysis tool is a "hoax"? Tools can be inefficient. They can have, or introduce, errors. But a hoax is an act carried out with motivation. Tools are incapable of having motivation.
If you would have posted the rest of the Wikipedia article you sourced for that quote, the quote is in a paragraph headed, "Controversy". There is no consensus that ELA is good or bad. No mention of "hoax" appears in it either. ELA is simply one of many analysis tools and methods. ALL are subjective. The very nature of digital imaging, manipulation of images, and subsequent analysis is such that there is no purely scientific, objective, and unassailable method of determining the veracity of a digital image.
Ye incubus , get off my big dick bro . This post was just more proof , that most guys are clueless to what p.e actually does , or is intended to do. The alleged science behind it , has nothing to do with the tissue . They are trying to stretch the corpus cavernosa , which is cartilage ,and can't be stretched into a new permanent elongated state.. Why this guy thinks his dick has physically changed as far as erection ability , decrease or increase , is probably has some vascular damage. ..And. No . I'm. Not a shadow pro , .I just made another pro because I couldn't find the other one . And probably shouldn't have stayed on the thread ,. I . Admittedly don't have the typing ability to better contribute.
Ok? But what does this have to do about thinking you were banned and posting it here in this thread?
Developers have a motivation when they build and sell something they know it doesnt work.
Stop being obtuse. It's a tool, or more accurately an analysis technique. "doesn't work" is at best disingenuous. ELA isn't a black box with a yes/no answer. You know damned well it's interpretive, as is ALL image analysis.
None of this will make that a photo of a 10" penis, so I'm moving on.
Read up on the newest science in Saarbrücken you fool. I guess it's such a hoax that even lawyers rely on it nowadays. Anyway, you're a waste of time and the dick ain't 10". So good riddance.
TinyPrincess
Mythical Member
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2008
- Posts
- 16,035
- Media
- 2
- Likes
- 31,814
- Points
- 368
- Location
- Copenhagen (Capital Region, Denmark)
- Sexuality
- 100% Straight, 0% Gay
- Gender
- Female
Makes two of us.
Meet - none, exceed - none, come close - one.
However, the guy who was close was a FB and had nothing to do with this thread or LPSG.
Closest I've seen properly measured at LPSG is 8". It was before the thread though - and before he turned to porn.
Not really, 10 properly measured inches would be sufficient. But somehow the "properly" part is a headache for most.
Nosuportneeded
Superior Member
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2014
- Posts
- 3,125
- Media
- 26
- Likes
- 5,264
- Points
- 158
- Location
- West Virginia, USA
- Sexuality
- 100% Straight, 0% Gay
- Gender
- Male
Surely you’ve seen longer than 8” ?
Even nbp, there are several here that are over 8”, I seem to recall, on the measured 8” thread. I guess if you mean no one is 9” and the closest is 8” (as in 8.x”), then I agree
I also think that the “zero showing” technicality vs nbp, might allow for some light pressing and a legit 9” measurement that would satisfy these parameters
creek47
Superior Member
If we put this much hard work to world peace it would be here! But alas this is an awesome thread!
That quote was an opinion.
And ELA doesn't "label", so even that quote is some bullshittery. And uttered by someone with a vested interest in downplaying other analysis tools.
Always follow the money.
