Proof is in the pudding, I think...

Who prefers these exact ratios exactly? The original test showing 76% conducted in 18060 might illustrate a subjective sampling.

Indeed, the article does go on to state this:
The result shows that 76% of all choices are the three rectangles having ratio of 1.75, 1.62, and 1.50, which are really close to the value of pie (approximately 1.618). Is there enough evidence to show the result? Maybe not, many psychologist have repeated similar experiments ever since, the results are rather conflicting, and inaccurate.


The first site cite in the OP references the beauty of Jessica Simpson.
A few years ago, they might have cited Jennifer Lopez. Remember her? Won the Times' 'most beautiful female of the...' year? decade? century I don't recall...

Point being is there's a definite slant there.
Can you demonstrate this same proportion favoritisim across all ethnicities and their respective faces?

If so, then I would follow up with an intriguing question based on that.

Modern HSS has been around for a *minimum* of 100,000 years. We've had genetic bottlenecks that allegedly dropped us to populations of between 4,000 and 40,000 individuals.

Given a base of 50 for the length of a generation, 100,000 / 50 = 5,000 generations.

So why are there still people like me, and I am certainly not alone, who find neither JLo Nor Jessica Simpson to be beautiful??

For that matter, can you explain why those two are popular in completely different ethnicities??

I'm not saying the ratio isn't pleasing to the eye. I'm objecting to the lack of quantifiable, uncontrovertible proof and pointing out circumstantial evidence that would appear to refute it.

From your own articles, it's a theory that's not been proven very well.




Although I do loooove the euphemism 'BIOLOGY' rofl