Found this interesting. Opinions?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20070523/sc_livescience/fingerlengthpredictssatperformance
Total Bullshit. My ring finger is quite noticeably longer than my index, I have above average test, and I got 540 math, 730 verbal.
[quote]unbending wrote:
Quite interesting.
What about this?
Gorundbreaking stuff: Home | The Scotsman
[/quote]
That must be why girls break up with me all the time.
My ring finger is longer than my index finger. (on both hands)
My math was higher than my verbal SAT’s.
I never had my testosterone measured, because I’m a woman.
There are exceptions to every rule.
http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/pto-20050614-000004.html
if the above link doesn’t work type in articles/pto-20050614-000004.html after www.psychologytoday.com/
[quote]Mousse wrote:
http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/pto-20050614-000004.html
if the above link doesn’t work type in articles/pto-20050614-000004.html after www.psychologytoday.com/
[/quote]
According to this, I’m predisposed to hyperactivity, autism and being a lesbian.
And all this time I thought having big hands was what made me a good bass player. Dayum!!
[quote]Yo Momma wrote:
My ring finger is longer than my index finger. (on both hands)
My math was higher than my verbal SAT’s.
I never had my testosterone measured, because I’m a woman.
There are exceptions to every rule.[/quote]
Read the article again. You follow the rule; you’re not an exception.
[quote]jwillow wrote:
There are exceptions to every rule.
Read the article again. You follow the rule; you’re not an exception.[/quote]
Damn, and I thought I was special! Contrary to what my colleagues say about me , I’m really not a functional illiterate :^)
I was referring to the popular conception (not referenced in the article) of gender differences in cognitive abilities. Historically, boys scored higher in math, while girls scored higher in verbal portions of the SAT. (Although recent evidence from the SAT scores shows that this gap is closing.)
ring finger is bigger than my pointer, but not by a lot- 530 math, 680 verbal.
So what happens if you have no fingers?
Or six of them?
Had to check this since I got my SAT scores today. Mine are about the same with my ring being a tiny bit longer than my index. And I got 660 math, 650 verbal. Weird how mine follows that pattern, but I think it is bullshit.
My ring finger is quite a bit longer than my index finger (.25") and I scored a 730 on the math portion of the SAT and a 720 on the verbal portion.
So, the article was correct, but barely.
Anyways, yeah genetic predispositions! 
Ring’s a little shorter than the index, 800 math, 760 verbal.
Damn Joe, nice scores! Got me beat.
Ring finger about 3/8" longer than index and my scores were dead even at 700.
My ring finger is slightly longer than my pointer and I got a 780 Math and 750 Verbal. Held true again.
[quote]entheogens wrote:
Found this interesting. Opinions?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20070523/sc_livescience/fingerlengthpredictssatperformance
[/quote]
Lots of studies are being done on fingers, why not taint. It has to be the unexplored area of loosely correlated body statistics.
An anthropologist friend of mine was telling me about a study that demonstrated strong correlation between these two finger lengths and homosexuality in males. Something like, almost unanimously across the board, homosexual males had roughly equal index and ring finger lengths.
I didn’t buy it, but I have since heard similar theories. This SAT score study falls in a similar category I’d say.
There’s an interesting correlation between people posting on this thread and high SAT scores. 