Huh? Are you taking medication? I find it difficult to come here and post because there is no stimulation. What is this 24/7 posting stuff?
I think you have confused me with someone else.
Are
you taking medication, Happeh?
You call it Happeh's Theory, but I do not think you even understand what a scientific theory is.
Below is a generalized sequence of steps taken to establish a scientific theory:
1. Choose and define the natural phenomenon that you want to figure out and explain.
2. Collect information (data) about this phenomena by going where the phenomena occur and making observations. Or, try to replicate this phenomena by means of a test (experiment) under controlled conditions (usually in a laboratory) that eliminates interference's from environmental conditions.
3. After collecting a lot of data, look for patterns in the data. Attempt to explain these patterns by making a provisional explanation, called a hypothesis.
4. Test the hypothesis by collecting more data to see if the hypothesis continues to show the assumed pattern. If the data does not support the hypothesis, it must be changed, or rejected in favor of a better one. In collecting data, one must NOT ignore data that contradicts the hypothesis in favor of only supportive data.
5. If a refined hypothesis survives all attacks on it and is the best existing explanation for a particular phenomenon, it is then elevated to the status of a theory.
6. A theory is subject to modification and even rejection if there is overwhelming evidence that disproves it and/or supports another, better theory. Therefore, a theory is not an eternal or perpetual truth.
Is this the process through which you refined Happeh's Theory? No, it is not. You have looked at some photographs of people, drawn lines on them and made unfounded assumptions about them, based on those photographs. You have not yet done enough real research to even justify calling it Happeh's Hypothesis. At the very least, you would have to interview these people who are the subjects of your photographs, attempt to determine how often they masturbate and correlate this information with their posture, (or eyesight or physical fitness) which you would need more than a single photograph to determine. Then you could propose a hypothesis about frequency of masturbation and posture. Then you would need to collect more data to see whether or not your hypothesis is confirmed. Then, if it is the best explanation for the data you have collected, you would be justified in calling it a theory.
You were asked for evidence and you did not mention ever having done that.
Did you ever do that?