Skip to main content

pony business

"By studying people’s reactions to a range of artificially-generated faces, Oosterhof and Todorov were able to identify a set of features that seemed to engender trust. Working from those findings, they were able to create a continuum: faces with high inner eyebrows and pronounced cheekbones struck people as trustworthy, faces with low inner eyebrows and shallow cheekbones untrustworthy."


Very interesting research.

In 2005, Todorov's lab garnered international headlines with a study published in Science demonstrating that quick facial judgments can accurately predict real-world election results.
Taking what they have learned over time -- namely that, rightly or wrongly, people make instant judgments about faces that guide them in how they feel about that person -- the scientists decided to search for a way to quantify and define exactly what it is about each person's face that conveys a sense they can be trusted or feared.

...Based on this data, the scientists found that humans make split-second judgments on faces on two major measures -- whether the person should be approached or avoided and whether the person is weak or strong.
[We noted in the last post that damage to the amygdala causes people to lose their ability to make the split second judgment whether to approach or avoid a person:

Humans with marked lesions of the amygdala, loose the affective meaning of the perception of an outside information, like the sight of a well known person. The subject knows, exactly, who the person is, but is not capable to decide whether he likes or dislikes him (or her). Limbic System: The Center of Emotions
Also see the study by Oosterhof and Toderov: "Although participants did not engage in explicit evaluation of the faces, the amygdala response changed as a function of face trustworthiness."]

Back to the Science Daily article from 2008:
From there, using a commercial software program that generates composites of human faces (based on laser scans of real subjects), the scientists asked another group of test subjects to look at 300 faces and rate them for trustworthiness, dominance and threat. Common features of both trustworthiness and dominance emerged. A trustworthy face, at its most extreme, has a U-shaped mouth and eyes that form an almost surprised look.

Notice the eyebrows.
"more great news for Ron Paul fans" -- oh you bet...
"A trustworthy face, at its most extreme, has a U-shaped mouth and eyes that form an almost surprised look."

High inner eyebrows? CHECK.
Shallow indentation at the bridge of the nose? CHECK.
Pronounced cheekbones? CHECK.
Wide chin? CHECK.
U-shaped mouth? CHECK.
Eyes that form almost a surprised look? CHECK.

Over at Winter Patriot Community the discussion continues about Ron Paul in the comments. In one of our comments we note that Ron Paul does not elucidate his position on some very important details about the money supply, and who would issue the nation's money supply *AFTER* the Federal Reserve is ended, which Ron Paul supports (and so do we), should that come to pass. But what happens NEXT? This is the problem. What happens after the Fed? What replaces the Fed? WHO issues the money, and how, and by what mechanism?

How important is this detail? It makes all the difference in the world. It makes all the difference whether the banksters have another 100+ years to control our every transaction, and our children and grandchildren etc., starting from scratch; or whether we get a currency backed by the productivity of the people, and controlled by the people's fairly elected representatives (yeah that's another huge problem we know), as James has thoroughly and clearly explained in his post -- here it is again if you haven't read it yet.

It is impossible to overestimate how important this is, but Ron Paul has not made his position clear. There is a GAP in his position, and you can't just fill it in with whatever you *think* he *should* do, or *will* do, because you like him, because he has such a trustworthy face. Capice?
people who like rp will be inclined to fill in the blanks with a story they like. this is a very common way that people are manipulated. important information is omitted and people color in what *they* would do, what *they* want. only later do they find out they were wrong. and there is nothing more infuriating than when someone screws you and then says, hey i never told you i was going to buy you a fucking pony. and you realize they sure didn't say that. you just assumed you were getting a pony because he knew how much it meant to you, and there was so much sweet talk...

You can start to believe you are getting a pony when you get it in writing from the man that you are getting a pony, and you go to the stable and pick out the pony, and you see the fucking pony and give it a carrot, and you hold the pony's reins in your hand, and you have a couple hundred million angry friends with pitchforks who also want ponies, and who will pay extremely close attention to all this pony business.

And even then, you still can't believe you're getting the pony until your hero delivers the actual pony, and before a tragic, unforeseeable, regrettable fire burns the barn down the night before.

All you Ron Paul supporters, you need to check into this pony business right away. We can't say it any nicer. You've got to get the details down in writing, exactly how things will work *AFTER* the Fed, and it has to be an answer that cuts the bankers out once and for all. And it has to be public. Because if you don't do that, and something happens to Ron Paul, you have NOTHING. Nothing to wave around, nothing to enforce, nothing to justify, nothing to fight for, nothing to play Rule of Law with the people who invented the game. You have walked right into the trap, and you have taken everyone with you.

Just look at the whinging over the Palestinians getting into UNESCO -- a good example of how having some legitimacy, of being able to ENFORCE ACCOUNTABILITY, even just a little bit, makes their ears bleed.

And if Ron Paul doesn't give you this, you need to understand what that means. And don't say it's because he's afraid of getting whacked by the banksters, because we all already know that they will kill any leader who tries to do this thing that needs to be done. That is precisely WHY it needs to be explained clearly to the public, and put in writing, and committed to. Because if they dare to whack a leader who has gone public with the CORRECT SOLUTION, then they they are exposed for the murderous criminals we already know they are, but at least they would be exposed in front of everyone.

So, good luck with all that. Anyway, cheer up, we know how it feels. We thought we were getting a pony a few times in our life. We really, really believed it.



aferrismoon said…
Only glanced at this post so far but the the left-hand face on the first image + the idea of 'who would u trust' made me think of the 'looney Loughner photo.

Gabby has a trustworthy face - she so smiley , me votey-votey with emotions.

A. Peasant said…
votey-votey with emotions? haha, i like that ferris. cheers.
aferrismoon said…
I assumed you knew that physical voting age is 18 while emotional voting age is 8.

Do-Wrong-Ron may also be a good foil for those who say the US is run by Israel-AIPAC.

The whole 'black' president thing -

'But do you really think he'll withdraw the troops from Iraq and Afghanistan?'

' First black president'

' Excuse me, did you understand the question?'

1st black president' x 100 , hands over ears , eyes tightly closed, stamp feet.

Jody Paulson said…
Remember Ollie North and his tent-shaped eyebrows? I was just a kid when he testified in front of congress, and I remembered thinking, "Gee, he looks like such an earnest guy ... I can't believe he did anything wrong ..."

I'm a little older and wiser, now. And I tell you what, if Cynthia McKinney can back the 9-11 truth movement, so can Ron Paul. I don't think elections are going to help much until there's a real revolution taking money out of politics, personally.
A13 said…
Hi Pez, very interesting about the Trust factor with the facial recognition..and the pony that is RP..He's not "dead" so he must be a usefull tool to tptb..or a faction of them.
Speaking of ponies..maybe he's just another warhorse like those before him..hope and change? NOT.
Cheers A13
A. Peasant said…
you all get it. i think a lot of people are sucked in emotionally by rp. this emotional response is over-riding reason. he says a lot of good things, but he neglects to say what he thinks about the most important thing, and that is not acceptable. that is a recipe for disaster.
A13 said…
Hi Pez, as a side..I will say that RP reminds me of the guy who was the Martian from My Favourite Martian TV series in the 60's...

Cheers A
Anonymous said…
haha, hate you AP for destroying what I thought were well-reasoned points for loving RP. Now I understand it's just been those eyebrows all along.

A. Peasant said…
truly swits! avert your eyes. i read along the line that something like 100 exposures to a face cements in the emotional response.

so i've been waiting for you to come back and tell me you hate me now. :D
Timster said…
Very well written! But does this mean I DON'T get a pony? DAMN AND BLAST!
Anonymous said…
An artist friend tells me that the key thing is the mouth.

(You can communicate with babies and horses by moving your mouth.)

- Aangirfan
A. Peasant said…
damn straight timster. no pony! i know right?!?

hi aan, i'm sure the mouth is very important also. we view the face holistically so people who have multiple charming features have a leg up, so to speak. rp definitely has that sort of face, and he also has a high pitched voice for a man. i think there are a lot of emotional buttons getting pushed and people are not conscious of it.
james said…
Aangirfan's comment reminds me of something i heard long ago and it has stuck in my mind ever since. and it is "God made our face but we make our mouth".

Great post btw, APea. Your latest ones have been peak efforts :)
A. Peasant said…
i have never heard that one, and i have a memory for sayings. very good.

thank you James. back atchoo. the post on rp and the economic thinking is simply brilliant.
Penny said…
generally I am loathe to comment on other nation's elections...

though I do think Ron Paul is still just another banker boy

the face thing however is interesting..

because if you really think about it, the face that "appeals" most broadly is the face a very child like face.

Wide eyed innocence and surprise.

The face of baby dolls.

At least that's the way I see it !

visually speaking
A. Peasant said…
hi pen, yes agreed. i mean it depends on the "position." think of that NFL player special ops guy that was killed by friendly fire (sorry his name is completely blanking on me). perfectly masculine face. perfect for that type of hero.

also in the pics i selected, notice the head tilt. also important for threatening / non-threatening.
Anonymous said…

I hate that Alex Jones is involved in this...but it MAKES SENSE.
A. Peasant said…
yes, agreed. it's an excellent video despite his inclusion. do you know who is that other guy?
Anonymous said…
I believe the dark bearded guy is a man named Alan Watt, whom I also like. Of course, for every 10 people who like him, there's a guy who cries "Gate-keeper!" (of which there's little doubt of Alex Jones' role as such.)

The white bearded guy is G. Edward Griffin, author of "The Creature From Jekyll Island", a biography of sorts of the Federal Reserve. Griffin did an interesting interview in the 80's with a guy named Yuri Bezmenov, who was supposedly a Soviet defector, about demoralization techniques in America - here's one link of many.

Watt tends to get thrown in with the Tsarion/Icke crowd, and Griffin with the ultra-conservatives. Should be noted that Griffin also wrote a book on Vitamin b-17, for what it's worth.

I loved the part where they talk about sports, and how it went from being something children were interested in, to something that adults built their lives around.

A. Peasant said…
thanks for the additional info swits. i also found it very interesting about the sports angle. who knew? they just lifted a page out of Rome and the coliseum.
Anonymous said…
Source: CNet

STANFORD, Calif.--President Obama is planning to hand the U.S. Commerce Department authority over a forthcoming cybersecurity effort to create an Internet ID for Americans, a White House official said here today.

It's "the absolute perfect spot in the U.S. government" to centralize efforts toward creating an "identity ecosystem" for the Internet, White House Cybersecurity Coordinator Howard Schmidt said.

That news, first reported by CNET, effectively pushes the department to the forefront of the issue, beating out other potential candidates, including the National Security Agency and the Department of Homeland Security. The move also is likely to please privacy and civil-liberties groups that have raised concerns in the past over the dual roles of police and intelligence agencies.

The announcement came at an event today at the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research, where U.S. Commerce Secretary Gary Locke and Schmidt spoke.

The Obama administration is currently drafting what it's calling the National Strategy for Trusted Identities in Cyberspace, which Locke said will be released by the president in the next few months. (An early version was publicly released last summer.)
Anonymous said…
I'm working on getting back to you AP...

but came across this and thought you'd appreciate.

You and James have a point. A very good, important one. I'm dwelling on it still. :-/

A. Peasant said…
excellent video swits. i'm adding it to the most recent post.

i'm glad you are thinking over the RP stuff.
A. Peasant said…
meh, i had to link to it. embedding disabled.