I was browsing old threads at Physics Forums, and I came across some information in this thread from 2008 that got my interest. The thread is titled "Child molester avoids prison because he is short." PF member stickythighs wrote the following: "Since the average American man is 5'10", there are about equal numbers of men in Florida 5'5" and shorter as there are men 6'3" and taller." In post #25 on the thread, PF Member Gokul43201 responded: "Not true. The distribution of heights is not Gaussian. It's almost Boltzmannian, and 5 inches is way bigger than the standard deviation - so a Gaussian approximation could be quite off when you go that far away from the mean. And it is..." The distribution of human heights is the classic example that statistics textbooks and other textbooks use to show a Gaussian Distribution. By the way, a Guassian distribution = a Normal Distribution. I admit that the distribution of human heights is not Gaussian at the tails. In reality, there are far more people at 5+ standard deviations both above and below the mean than a graph of a 100% Gaussian Distribution of human heights would show. In other words, a graph of a 100% Guassian Distribution of human heights would show less people at 5 SD from the mean than there would actually be in real life. However, in the example that stickythighs and gokul were discussing, the comparison was between male heights of 5'5" and 6'3". Human height distribution IS Gaussian when you are so close to the mean as 5'5" and 6'3". Therefore, why did Gokul deny that the human height distribution is Gaussian in the 5'5"-6'3" range? Here is a link to the thread that I am referencing: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/child-molester-avoids-prison-because-he-is-short.249825/page-2 Why did Gokul say that the distribution of human heights is almost Boltzmannian? Clearly it's not. Note to moderators: The topic of the thread that I am referencing is about a child molester avoiding prison because he is short. The main topic of the thread that I am referencing is NOT about whether or not the distribution of human height is Gaussian or not. The correct etiquette and protocol for a digression in another area is to create a new thread on the digression, not to hijack the previous thread. There is no thread that I am aware of specifically about whether or not the distribution of human heights is Gaussian. Therefore, I should not be breaking any rules by creating this thread. It's a new topic.