read this about iq

[hodi]

https://www.archure.net/psychology/akrosintel.html

[invictious]

Well:

I believe everyone with average IQ is born equal (exclude mentally retardation sufferers).

What makes a person smart is how they use their brain. Smart people know how to use their brain, whereas people with slightly below average IQs don't know how to use their brain.

but when they do, they are just as smart as anyone

[prometheus]

" Astronomy, Astrology, and Music are all traditional high IQ activities."

"Only 1 in 250 people are 140 IQ or higher. That's very rare,"


Haha...

[hodi]

well i meant read the whole page
and then
hear his music.

[henrah]

"Only 1 in 250 people are 140 IQ or higher. That's very rare,"

Haha, that's real stupid saying 1 in 250 is rare, what a nonce

[jakev2.0]

Well, even if he is as smart as he claims, he has no talent as a composer. Or in web design.  Actually, he's a bit of a douche.

[debussy symbolism]

Greetings.

His arrogance quotient probably rivals his "intelligence" quotient for sure, with the notion of "intelligence" subject to interpretation. For one, his claim that the world is not suitable for intelligent people, or those with high IQs is simply spurious and if not downright arrogant, as I stated earlier. It is because of smart people that we bear the society as we know it now. That owes to the invention of methods of controling and directing electricity, architecture, and other technologies. Should his logic be true then we would still be cavemen, in not outright uncivilized cannibals. IQ tests do not measure knowledge yes, but knowledge is concomitant to intelligence in my opinion, as generally, the stupid peoples do not seek knowledge, but seek only material that would satisfy their need for liivng and slake their thirst for menial activities such as socializing and well....acting stupid-with "stupid" again be a reasonable target for interpetation.

Best.

[debussy symbolism]

Concerning his composition, if we could genuinly position them as his, as not rather seen in the case of his "rendition" of one Debussy's piece in the "Animal IQ" section, then I would safely claim that his suggested IQ had no good impact on them whatsoever.

Please excuse my rude and possibly arrogant sarcasm.

Best

[prometheus]

Haha, that's real stupid saying 1 in 250 is rare, what a nonce

He(she? probably not) meant to say '1 in 250 million'. You may have a brain one out of 250 million, but if you are to arrogant to check what you actually wrote down it won't help much.

I also think you guys are being a bit too harsh. He didn't actually say offensive or stupid things. Except for that mistake and the 'support' for astrology.

[asyncopated]

I also think you guys are being a bit too harsh. He didn't actually say offensive or stupid things. Except for that mistake and the 'support' for astrology.

You mean you as an intellegent being don't support astrology? *gawk*  Btw, thanks for covertining me to pastaferianism... my life is completely changed.  I now see the errorneous ways of my past.

[prometheus]

Since you are dyslexic, are you sure you aren't confusing astrology and astronomy? He didn't because he named them both.

Or were you joking? If so I didn't get it.

Maybe because I don't know what The Spaghetti Monsters says about astrology vs astronomy.

[asyncopated]

Since you are dyslexic, are you sure you aren't confusing astrology and astronomy? He didn't because he named them both.

Somehow I've failed to notice that being ironic don't come off well in text.  Besides, I think that this IQ thing is really a farce.  It's more of an ego trip for nerds who can't deal with the real world to feel good about themselves. 

Here are some things I could never understand about IQ.

1. How is IQ calibrated such that the curve is gaussian?  What's the standard deviation (people claim it's 15/16)?  Is it really a gaussian?

2. If you have an IQ of 150 and I have that of 100 does it mean that you are 1.5 times as smart as I am?

3. IQ was initially defined as the percentage of you mental age with respect to your actual age.   If i did calculate my mental age from my IQ, I would be 45 years old mentally, and I don't want to be 45 years old. I'd rather be 20 and that amount dumber which I am smart.

[pianolearner]

Somehow I've failed to notice that being ironic don't come off well in text.  Besides, I think that this IQ thing is really a farce.  It's more of an ego trip for nerds who can't deal with the real world to feel good about themselves. 

Here are some things I could never understand about IQ.

1. How is IQ calibrated such that the curve is gaussian?  What's the standard deviation (people claim it's 15/16)?  Is it really a gaussian?

2. If you have an IQ of 150 and I have that of 100 does it mean that you are 1.5 times as smart as I am?

3. IQ was initially defined as the percentage of you mental age with respect to your actual age.   If i did calculate my mental age from my IQ, I would be 45 years old mentally, and I don't want to be 45 years old. I'd rather be 20 and that amount dumber which I am smart.

I agree with this: "I.Q. is ones ABILITY to Reason and Solve. I.Q. is NOT a test of KNOWLEDGE."

2. If you have an IQ of 150 and I have that of 100 does it mean that you are 1.5 times as smart as I am?

No, it doesn't. Look at the bell curve. IQ scores are based on % of population that scored the same in an IQ test.

Descriptive Classifications of Intelligence Quotients
 
IQ Description % of Population
130+ Very superior 2.2%
120-129 Superior 6.7%
110-119 High average 16.1%
90-109 Average 50%
80-89 Low average 16.1%
70-79 Borderline 6.7%
Below 70 Extremely low 2.2%


If you have an IQ of 100 it means your IQ is average and you have the same IQ as 50% of the population. If you have an IQ of 150 it means that about 1 in 100 people are as "intelligent" as you. If the test consisted of 100 questions it could mean that 50% of the population answered 30 questions correctly to score an IQ of 100 and only 1% answered 35 questions correctly to score an IQ of 150. They didn't answer 1.5 times the number of questions and they may have got some answers wrong that you got right. I don't think the relationship is linear. ie/double IQ does not mean double intelligence because an IQ of 75 is generally regarded as retarded and an IQ of 150+ is genius. By your reasoning it would make a genius only twice as smart as a mentally retarded person.

[asyncopated]

I agree with this: "I.Q. is ones ABILITY to Reason and Solve. I.Q. is NOT a test of KNOWLEDGE."

No, it doesn't. Look at the bell curve. IQ scores are based on % of population that scored the same in an IQ test.

Descriptive Classifications of Intelligence Quotients
 
IQ Description % of Population
130+ Very superior 2.2%
120-129 Superior 6.7%
110-119 High average 16.1%
90-109 Average 50%
80-89 Low average 16.1%
70-79 Borderline 6.7%
Below 70 Extremely low 2.2%


If you have an IQ of 100 it means your IQ is average and you have the same IQ as 50% of the population. If you have an IQ of 150 it means that about 1 in 100 people are as "intelligent" as you. If the test consisted of 100 questions it could mean that 50% of the population answered 30 questions correctly to score an IQ of 100 and only 1% answered 35 questions correctly to score an IQ of 150. They didn't answer 1.5 times the number of questions and they may have got some answers wrong that you got right. I don't think the relationship is linear. ie/double IQ does not mean double intelligence because an IQ of 75 is generally regarded as retarded and an IQ of 150+ is genius. By your reasoning it would make a genius only twice as smart as a mentally retarded person.

Thanks for the explanation . 

I found this quite funny.  If you subscribe to eugenics, according to wikipedia,

y=x+h^2( 1/2(m+f)-x)
where y is the predicted IQ of a child,
x is the mean IQ of the population to which the parents belong to
h^2 is the heritability of IQ and
m and f are the IQs of the parents.

On a more serious note i think that IQ scores do have interesting social and perhaps even biological implications, but like i say, in the hands of the masses, should not be treated with any more weight than sexual prowess scores from playboy.

[musik_man]

Famous Geniuses (data: Encyclopedia Britannica, 1990's, some data has been omitted in more recent editions, but still holds true).

Napoleon 145 IQ

Ben Franklin 165 IQ

Martin Luther 170 IQ

Isaac Newton 190 IQ (top banana)

Albert Einstein  (no data found, another top banana?)

So how exactly does one calculate the IQ's of people like Newton and Luther?

Junk science is fun

[prometheus]

Those numbers are 'educated guesses', or maybe not so 'educated'.

https://members.shaw.ca/delajara/Cox300.html