German FKK Clubs - Lounge and chat area

[QUOTE=MoneySign;2619530]How about YY? Still closed? It's closed for good? What about Babylon, Magnum, and PHG? No good?[/QUOTE]Unfortunately, I m afraid I won t enjoy anymore beautiful high level with good foods and beautiful rooms with shower YY NL where I had so great times with wow girls, fireworks between November 2017 and March 2018, seeing weekly labrador, but staff didn't want I caressed. But I'm afraid this is past, like for LR and wait and see for GT future. Bab Elsdorf is open, Magnum with some GT girls also, PHG also which can worth on Friday or Saturday evening for some Baltics coming to dance like they did before at Vanila ex Vertigo. FKK land is still alive, in Austria, Switzerland even Globe and Amesia fell, Germany and 6 sens NL. Even Spain. Not so bad playfield.

[QUOTE=Pistons;2619495]Probably related to high fructose corn syrup as well as glyphosate poisoning.[/QUOTE]Thanks to MacDo, Cola and they even make our children being fat now. Their obesity kill more than covid.

[QUOTE=Mursenary;2619364]I think the mid 1960's was the decade that America repealed many exclusion acts related immigration and nation of origin. That was the decade Pacific islanders and southeast Asians came in mass. Similar repeals were granted to poor African nations and subsequently middle eastern countries.[/QUOTE]Repeal of exclusionary immigration acts in mid-1960's did not result in non-White immigrants coming en masse. I would say a trickle between 1965-1980. And the 1980 census shows that, 92 percent of the USA population was either White or Black. The en masse migration has occurred over the last 30 years, what some refer to as chain migration.

[QUOTE=Mursenary;2619364]I want to point out the distinction of the classification of white Americans. Of the 5 foot 10 white-black American average, Southern Europeans are included, Middle Easterners are included, and perhaps East Indians are included. Would there not still be an expected skewed immigrant influence on the height gap considering that immigration to NL still lags behind Americans?[/QUOTE]RE: Groups that may possibly counted as White bringing down the White-American average: Arab-Americans are less than half a percent (2018). Indian-Americans are a little over 1 percent (2010). Italian-Americans are at 5 percent (2017). Even if they are lumped in Whites, they should not be numeric enough to bring down the average by 2-3 inches:

[URL]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_Americans[/URL]

[URL]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Americans[/URL]

[URL]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Americans[/URL]

[QUOTE=Mursenary;2619364]I alluded briefly, but nation of origin matters and white in America is a much larger mix than Northern Euro / Dutch.[/QUOTE]Ireland is 93 percent White (84 percent Irish and about 9 percent other White), yet per 1960 births they were 2 cm shorter than Americans and 7 cm shorter than the Dutch. Irish ancestry is either the second or third most common in the USA.

[QUOTE=McAdonis;2619657]Repeal of exclusionary immigration acts in mid-1960's did not result in non-White immigrants coming en masse. I would say a trickle between 1965-1980. And the 1980 census shows that, 92 percent of the USA population was either White or Black. The en masse migration has occurred over the last 30 years, what some refer to as chain migration.

RE: Groups that may possibly counted as White bringing down the White-American average: Arab-Americans are less than half a percent (2018). Indian-Americans are a little over 1 percent (2010). Italian-Americans are at 5 percent (2017). Even if they are lumped in Whites, they should not be numeric enough to bring down the average by 2-3 inches:

Ireland is 93 percent White (84 percent Irish and about 9 percent other White), yet per 1960 births they were 2 cm shorter than Americans and 7 cm shorter than the Dutch. Irish ancestry is either the second or third most common in the USA.[/QUOTE]Having a hard time keeping track of the main point to push this discussion forward so some reiteration of your point would be helpful. Mine is that these height numbers should be taken with a grain of salt if discussing environmental or dietary influences. Migration patterns on average paints a more clear picture in my eyes.

First, I am not really connecting your data points to what I think is your main argument. I actually see American heights in comparison to the rest of western countries being relatively on par with most of those countries in recent decades, especially since immigration has increased in most western countries to catch up to American rates (but only recently). Even against the Dutch, the average 50 year old Dutch man is 4.9 cm taller than the average 50 yo American. But the average 30 year old Dutchman is now only 3.7 cm taller than the American. Correlate that with the fact that during this same time period, the Dutch finally saw more immigrants unlike in previous decades which I suspect finally tempered their height explosions. I'll talk more on this later.

This article with a useful infographic breaks down the immigration waves of America and dominant immigrant group (Martin, 2014). We could use your height by birth year graph as a point of comparison:

[URL]https://www.prb.org/resources/trends-in-migration-to-the-u-s/[/URL]

[URL]https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/average-height-of-men-for-selected-countries?country=NLD~USA[/URL]

America's first migration wave was the Anglo-Saxon group. The proto-colonial-American can be used as a baseline for the genepool.

The second immigration wave was when American immigration was dominated by Southern and Eastern Europeans. But also Irish which my infographic does not explicitly label. American heights by birth year declined pretty steadily from 1830 to 1890 birth years which I would assume to be roughly correlated by average heights from 1850 to 1910 (+20 years). The Irish started coming in the 1820's but in mass during the Great Potato famine of the 1840's and 1850's. Coincidentally, that was also the beginning of declining American height by birth year. Italians actually started coming in the 1880's and through the early 1900's. Average American heights by birth year coincidentally showed a steeper dip correlating with that ethnic group. (Refer to your height-age graph against American immigration graph to verify).

The third American immigration wave (from around 1915 to 1965) occurred when immigration quotas were placed and subsequently was a time when American immigration was a bit low and dominated by Western Europeans. Coincidentally, that was the same period, using your graph of heights by birth years provided, that the heights of men born in those years began to rise and were almost lockstep between the Netherlands and America. Adjusting for whatever lag of birth year to present height, American and Dutch heights seem to move synchronously when the immigrant wave was dominated by people of similar genetics and people from differing gene pools were restricted from entering the United States. (Again correlate with graphs).

As for the fourth wave (post 1965), most western nations seemed to have leveled their height growth during this correlating time period. Add UK, France, Sweden, Norway, Germany, etc to your height plot and you will see similar height growth patterns. Germany saw a little bump with people born between 1970's and 1980's and that might have something to do with reunification, just a guess as it is an outlier.

Now as for the Dutch height explosions, examine the Dutch migration history (Zorlu and Hartog, 2001). The Dutch saw their greatest height boom in those born between the 1930's and 1960's. Correspondingly, during the same time, WWII occurred (no migration). After WWII, NL saw a long period of net migration out, superseding immigration. At the same time (after WWII), birth surplus in NL was uncharacteristically high. Add the fact that this was a poor economic post war era, one could easily conclude that there is a strong correlation between high reproduction rates of the native Dutch gene pool and the resulting height boom of people born during this time. When immigration resumed after, Dutch heights leveled, much like the rest of the western world.

[URL]https://papers.tinbergen.nl/01042.pdf[/URL]

Reiterating my point: Migration patterns is the biggest factor of these height change patterns.

[QUOTE=Mursenary;2619703]Having a hard time keeping track of the main point to push this discussion forward so some reiteration of your point would be helpful. Mine is that these height numbers should be taken with a grain of salt if discussing environmental or dietary influences[/QUOTE]Latinos-Asians are not numeric enough to bring down the average much. Despite being 7-10 cm shorter, my guess is that they only bring down the average 1-2 cm. And in the mid-1970's when the NL-to-USA height gap first reached 5 cm, their ability to bring down the average would have been even less.

[QUOTE=Mursenary;2619703]Even against the Dutch, the average 50 year old Dutch man is 4.9 cm taller than the average 50 yo American. But the average 30 year old Dutchman is now only 3.7 cm taller than the American. Correlate that with the fact that during this same time period, the Dutch finally saw more immigrants unlike in previous decades which I suspect finally tempered their height explosions..[/QUOTE]USA closed the gap by 1.2 cm at roughly the same time the Latino population went from 6 to 18 percent and the Asian population went from 2 to 6 percent. Given the explosive growth of Latinos and Asians, we would have expected the opposite to happen. In other words, the height gap to grow from 4. 9 cm to 5. 9 cm. Dutch have seen non-White immigration over the last few decades, but I would be surprised if it is anywhere near the levels of the USA over the last 30 years. I do not believe "Great Replacement Theory" is anywhere near a concern in NL as it is in the USA. Moreover many of NL's immigrants are from EU or Middle East, or colonies, Black Surinamese for instance, so one would expect that NL would have been more easily been able to hold on or increase their 4. 9 cm height gap.

[QUOTE=Mursenary;2619703][URL]https://www.prb.org/resources/trends-in-migration-to-the-u-s/[/URL]
[/QUOTE]This infographic backs up the figures I found. Despite immigration quotas being lifted, most of the Hispanic and Asian immigration happened much later than mid-1960's. And the period when the NL-to-USA height gap first reached 5 cm was a time when USA was almost entirely White / Black. The South European gene, I am not sure how prevalent it is outside of the Northeast. The fact that pizza was relatively exotic food item until the mid-1950's underscores how little contact most Americans had with Italian-Americans. And while there were a few decades when Italians came in large waves, many stayed only for a short period. Wiki on Italian-Americans: "An estimated 49 per cent of Italians who migrated to the Americas between 1905 (when return migration statistics began) and 1920 did not remain in the United States. These so-called "birds of passage", intended to stay in the United States for only a limited time, followed by a return to Italy with enough in savings to re-establish themselves there".

[QUOTE] America's first migration wave was the Anglo-Saxon group. The proto-colonial-American can be used as a baseline for the genepool.[/QUOTE]Based on 1830 births, USA was 5. 4 cm than brethren back in the UK. Only one decade since then has the UK been taller than USA. Perhaps the Anglo gene is to blame for not being able to achieve the Dutch heights? [URL]https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/average-height-of-men-for-selected-countries?country=USA~GBR~IRL[/URL].

[QUOTE]Reiterating my point: Migration patterns is the biggest factor of these height change patterns.[/QUOTE]It depends how many arrive, how large the native population is to begin with, and how long the migrant population stays. Average family size will matter too, but probably will not manifest until a few generations in the country. Unless there is a significant pull-factor, most nations would place a quota on how many foreigners arrive.

[QUOTE=McAdonis;2619991]Latinos-Asians are not numeric enough to bring down the average much. Despite being 7-10 cm shorter, my guess is that they only bring down the average 1-2 cm. And in the mid-1970's when the NL-to-USA height gap first reached 5 cm, their ability to bring down the average would have been even less.

USA closed the gap by 1.2 cm at roughly the same time the Latino population went from 6 to 18 percent and the Asian population went from 2 to 6 percent. Given the explosive growth of Latinos and Asians, we would have expected the opposite to happen. In other words, the height gap to grow from 4. 9 cm to 5. 9 cm. Dutch have seen non-White immigration over the last few decades, but I would be surprised if it is anywhere near the levels of the USA over the last 30 years. I do not believe "Great Replacement Theory" is anywhere near a concern in NL as it is in the USA. Moreover many of NL's immigrants are from EU or Middle East, or colonies, Black Surinamese for instance, so one would expect that NL would have been more easily been able to hold on or increase their 4. 9 cm height gap..[/QUOTE]-Height gap by birth year peaked in 1960 so I think actual height gap peak would manifest closer to 1980's. During the recent US migration wave, Western Euros saw even more immigration proportionally. In the case of the Dutch, 5-10 x more. That's significant.

-Yes Asian-Latino immigration took off a bit after the 1965 repeals. It was heavier in the 80's, and 90's. Then that would be referenced on your birth year graph as men born around 1960, the peak gap in birth year. What happened to the gap in men born in between 1960 and 1970? It narrowed. So these men born in the 1960's would have been the same immigrants who came in the 1980's and 1990's, Asian-Latino surge years.

-Equally important is what happened in NL. Reference previous post regarding lack of immigration into NL in the decades prior to the 1960's. The height gap peaked in men born before 1960, actual manifestation of average height gap probably around 1980. After 1960 was when immigration surplus returned to NL. In short, Dutch Baby Boomers without immigration heavily correlates with the height gap jump.

Let's discuss peak potential considering gene pool:

- NL has been an emigrate nation for the centuries up until second half of the 20th. More homogenous Dutch gene pool until after the 1970's. Therefore baseline of Dutch height shouldn't be considered established until around that time. Americans however saw continuous immigration through the 19th century. Perhaps in 1920 when "undesirable" immigration was reduced should be what we take as the American baseline.

In 2017 17 million people identified as Italian American, 5.5-6%. That's about the same as non Hispanic Asian Americans. Add the 15+% Hispanic, 6% Asian, all the various middle easterners and eastern Europeans and you have at least 1/3 non Anglo and non black Americans. Add that black Americans are about an inch shorter than the average Caucasian American, add all those other non Dutch-Nordic-areas and it would be expected that average American heights would be less than the average Dutch or surrounding nations.

I would love to see the average height of American born Dutch-Americans. I bet it's within half a centimeter of native Dutch.

I remember on 90's when Barcelona dream team with Jordan Bulls, Magic Johnson Lakers, Charles Barkley Suns, Larry Bird Celtics, there was a NBA team leader who was I think less than 160.

[QUOTE=Sirioja;2620194]I remember on 90's when Barcelona dream team with Jordan Bulls, Magic Johnson Lakers, Charles Barkley Suns, Larry Bird Celtics, there was a NBA team leader who was I think less than 160.[/QUOTE]Given I remember all those names from when I was very young (NBA today sucks in comparison), I am quite sure the guy you are thinking of was active in the 80's and not in the 90's. And I'm guessing his name was Kareem Abdul-Jabbar. Since I played with him in some old silly basketball video game back in the days when he had 2 x the speed of all the other players. Completely silly overpowered.

Damn, I guess I must have mixed him up with another guy. Just googled him, and Abdul-Jabbar is a giant in size.

[QUOTE=Mursenary;2620080]In 2017 17 million people identified as Italian American, 5.5-6%. That's about the same as non Hispanic Asian Americans. Add the 15+% Hispanic, 6% Asian, all the various middle easterners and eastern Europeans and you have at least 1/3 non Anglo and non black Americans. Add that black Americans are about an inch shorter than the average Caucasian American, add all those other non Dutch-Nordic-areas and it would be expected that average American heights would be less than the average Dutch or surrounding nations.[/QUOTE]Using 2017 figures, the number of Hispanics and Asians becomes slightly more significant. Again if we say that 180 cm is the average height of White / Black American. I will even round up the combined Latino and Asian Americans to be 35 percent. In order for 35 percent of the population to bring down the population average a full 5 cm down to say 175 cm:

(180*65)+ 35 x = 175*100.

The 35 percent would need to average about 165 cm. I believe the average for Latino and Asian Americans males is about 169 cm. But as I said the 5 cm gap first appeared based on 1960 births, so possibly mid-1980's population as you acknowledge. I would guess that the combined Latino and Asian populations in the mid-1980's was almost certainly under 15 percent at that time.

As late as 1990, USA's immigrant population was a little under 8 percent. Coincidentally, NL's immigrant population in 1990 was also a little less than 8 percent.

[URL]https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/NLD/netherlands/immigration-statistics[/URL]

[URL]https://www.migrationpolicy.org/programs/data-hub/charts/immigrant-population-over-time[/URL]

[QUOTE=Mursenary;2620080]I would love to see the average height of American born Dutch-Americans. I bet it's within half a centimeter of native Dutch.[/QUOTE]I would guess that there are not many Americans of pure Dutch ancestry. There are however South-Africans of almost pure or at least predominantly Dutch ancestry. If you compare White-Afrikaners to White Americans, I would guess that there is significantly more Dutch ancestry in the former. The average height of a White South African male is 176 cm, which is several cm shorter than the White American who probably has very little Dutch ancestry, but more German, Anglo, or Irish ancestry: [URL]https://www.medicalbrief.co.za/black-south-african-men-have-been-inching-up-over-the-past-30-years/[/URL].

[QUOTE=Sirioja;2620194]I remember on 90's when Barcelona dream team with Jordan Bulls, Magic Johnson Lakers, Charles Barkley Suns, Larry Bird Celtics, there was a NBA team leader who was I think less than 160.[/QUOTE]Not a single Dream Teamer was even less than 180 cm.

[QUOTE=Pistons;2620378]Damn, I guess I must have mixed him up with another guy. Just googled him, and Abdul-Jabbar is a giant in size.[/QUOTE]Muggsy Bogues was 5'3" inches and played in the NBA.

[QUOTE=Mursenary;2620418]Not a single Dream Teamer was even less than 180 cm.[/QUOTE]I wrote while dream team, not in dream team. Bogues Charlotte 160 and famous Jordan didn't like him. 15 NBA players with not more than 175. Internet talk, even less than real field.

[QUOTE=Mursenary;2620418]Not a single Dream Teamer was even less than 180 cm.[/QUOTE]You're omitting the Shire all stars team, with the Baggins guys, Merry, Pippin and Sam.

They're idolized by vertically challenged delusional people.

[QUOTE=BobNSuzy;2620442]Muggsy Bogues was 5'3" inches and played in the NBA.[/QUOTE]Clearly just making it in the NBA was an achievement for somebody his size, but he wasn't a "team leader". Career high season was 11 points per game. He was popular because of his size.