Yea I read the paper. It appears they measured how much each person's face deviated from a standard model, and according to their numbers, given the margins of error of, it looks statistically impossible to draw any conclusions at all.
It would seem that you are not as intelligent as the authors of the paper because they were able to draw conclusions that were backed by statistically signficant results.
If the people who choose co-operate more did in fact have more lop-sided faces, maybe it just means that people with lob-sided faces are dumber, and not that beautiful people are less co-operative because it is some evolutionary artifact. Isn't that just as reasonable of a conclusion?
So you complain about the conclusions of the study, and then add your own conjecture on top of the conclusions that you are complaining about. A little consistency would be nice.
Another reasonable conclusion to draw would be that when people play a game (say shooting at a bunch of digital policeman and running over pedestrians on a video game for instance), its not a window into their soul, and a useful tool for making up bogus scientific conclusions
It is a window into how people cooperate with other living and breathing people. That's the whole point. Also, you have yet to show that the conclusions are bogus.
™ Version 4.2