Thread: What's your IQ?

I've never had mine done "officially" with a reputable test. By on the stupid internet ones I've gotten anywhere from 130 to 165.

Originally posted by Damascus
mine is 136.

and does anyone know what the minimum IQ is for MENSA? i bet, like 150 or something

Depends on where you live. Check www.mensa.<your place>

And I have no idea what IQ I have, nor do I care.

on tickle.com i got 120

on iqtest.com i got 139

so i guess im somewhere around there...

I don't think the test at http://www.iqtest.com is accurate at all. Just took it and got 151 (without cheating in any way). And remember that "If American English is not your native language, your reported IQ score may be negatively affected."

Those internet IQ tests really are trash. They tell you nothing. They have zero research behind them.

In the world of IQ tests, the statement, "you get what you pay for" is very appropriate.

Exactly. These people simply put "hard" questions on the site, or those annoying "if you look at it and get it immediately, YOU'RE A GENIUS!" Usually something stupid like "There are 34 letters in this sentence." Real IQ tests have more reasoning based questions. Any moron with fingers can count letters...

I've never taken a *real* IQ test, but my iqtest.com result was 145

Just took my first test yesterday, i got a 70, but that's like a C right? so i guess im average...yessssssssssssssss

sorry falcor, that means you are offically retarded

I wonder what Peter's IQ is from 'The Family Guy'.

My IQ is 5,000,000.

Originally posted by Stalker
I don't think the test at http://www.iqtest.com is accurate at all. Just took it and got 151 (without cheating in any way). And remember that \"If American English is not your native language, your reported IQ score may be negatively affected.\"

That's exactly the beef I have with any IQ test - it's biased by particular factors like culture, language and education.
Intelligence is a funny thing, and neither knowledge, memory, wit or wisdom explains it on it's own.

If you found a genius from the middle of the Amazon, who has never been to school. He has zero knowledge of western thought or culture. An IQ test would render him a retard.

Just a thought.

PS: When I was about 17, my mensa IQ test was approximately 130 or somewhere around there... (Apparently. See previous comments)

my IQ is apparently 160, according to www.stupiddodgyiqtest.com. I really don't believe in those numbers at all, even when people do a "real" one. I mean, it's like...penis size. You could have 5", guy next door has 7", but all the girls want you anyway.

(Yay man-friendly example).

I took a "real" IQ test and I got 165. But I bet if Einstine took an IQ test he would get real low. He was bad at test and some say he was autistic.

Originally posted by Placebo+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Placebo)</div>

That's exactly the beef I have with any IQ test - it's biased by particular factors like culture, language and education.
Intelligence is a funny thing, and neither knowledge, memory, wit or wisdom explains it on it's own.[/b]

<!--QuoteBegin-Kaniaz
my IQ is apparently 160, according to www.stupiddodgyiqtest.com. I really don't believe in those numbers at all, even when people do a \"real\" one. I mean, it's like...penis size. You could have 5\", guy next door has 7\", but all the girls want you anyway.

There seem to be a lot of misconceptions about how IQ tests work. \"Real\" IQ tests, such as the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC) or Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS) are actually very accurate and relaible on a relative scale. As I previously stated, IQ is no longer a quotient (mental age divided by real age), it is a normal distribution curve. The average IQ of any test group is always 100. So if an IQ test included a large population, Stephen Hawking's IQ would be very high (200+), but if the test only included an elite group of geniuses, then his IQ would be closer to 100 (perhaps 115). And if the test were conducted with Stephen Hawking and a bunch of people who were smarter than him, his IQ could be measured as 85.

Now, this will prompt a lot of you to say \"Well then IQ doesn't really mean anything at all.\" But that's where the WISC and WAIS come in. They have years and millions of dollars of research behind them, and are continually updated to provide the most accurate of results. The test is also very general (less culture material), and it can be adapted to any language.

But the most important thing to remember about the IQ is that it's initial purpose was never to find out how smart you are, but to identify the need for special education (ie. to find out how dumb you are) and to identify psychological conditions.

My psych prof told us a very interesting story this year about one instance of an IQ test that was used to idenitfy a health problem in an individual at a clinic where he was working years ago. The patient was having trouble concentrating, doing simple mathematical calculations and performing a variety of other simple tasks. However, the different scans that the techs administered revealed no signs of abnormal brain activity. So, a few weeks later, they hired a professional to come in and give the patient a test of IQ. After about an hour of testing, she came out and told the doctors that the patient had a brain tumor about the size of a golf ball, and she even told them in what part of the brain to look for it. Sure enough, when the techs re-scanned the patient's brain, paying special attention to the specified area, they found a tumor that was about the size of a golf ball. Pretty incredible, all that simply by analyzing the pattern of responses that the patient gave during an IQ test.

Originally posted by sitboy
But I bet if Einstine took an IQ test he would get real low. He was bad at test and some say he was autistic.

This is another common miconception about Einstein, he actually did very well on tests and in school.

So it works as a sort of index number system where the base index is the average IQ. correct?

Kind of, its simply a normal distribution curve. If you've ever taken a stats class you'll know what I'm talking about, if not, here:
http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~lane/hyperstat/no...stribution.html
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/NormalDistribution.html

Originally posted by bradybaker+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(bradybaker)</div>

Originally posted by Placebo@
That's exactly the beef I have with any IQ test - it's biased by particular factors like culture, language and education.
Intelligence is a funny thing, and neither knowledge, memory, wit or wisdom explains it on it's own.

<!--QuoteBegin-Kaniaz

my IQ is apparently 160, according to www.stupiddodgyiqtest.com. I really don't believe in those numbers at all, even when people do a \"real\" one. I mean, it's like...penis size. You could have 5\", guy next door has 7\", but all the girls want you anyway.

There seem to be a lot of misconceptions about how IQ tests work. \"Real\" IQ tests, such as the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC) or Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS) are actually very accurate and relaible on a relative scale. As I previously stated, IQ is no longer a quotient (mental age divided by real age), it is a normal distribution curve. The average IQ of any test group is always 100. So if an IQ test included a large population, Stephen Hawking's IQ would be very high (200+), but if the test only included an elite group of geniuses, then his IQ would be closer to 100 (perhaps 115). And if the test were conducted with Stephen Hawking and a bunch of people who were smarter than him, his IQ could be measured as 85.

Now, this will prompt a lot of you to say \"Well then IQ doesn't really mean anything at all.\" But that's where the WISC and WAIS come in. They have years and millions of dollars of research behind them, and are continually updated to provide the most accurate of results. The test is also very general (less culture material), and it can be adapted to any language.

But the most important thing to remember about the IQ is that it's initial purpose was never to find out how smart you are, but to identify the need for special education (ie. to find out how dumb you are) and to identify psychological conditions.

My psych prof told us a very interesting story this year about one instance of an IQ test that was used to idenitfy a health problem in an individual at a clinic where he was working years ago. The patient was having trouble concentrating, doing simple mathematical calculations and performing a variety of other simple tasks. However, the different scans that the techs administered revealed no signs of abnormal brain activity. So, a few weeks later, they hired a professional to come in and give the patient a test of IQ. After about an hour of testing, she came out and told the doctors that the patient had a brain tumor about the size of a golf ball, and she even told them what in part of the brain to look for it. Sure enough, when the techs re-scanned the patient's brain, paying special attention to the specified area, they found a tumor that was about the size of a golf ball. Pretty incredible, all that simply by analyzing the pattern of responses that the patient gave during an IQ test.

Originally posted by sitboy
But I bet if Einstine took an IQ test he would get real low. He was bad at test and some say he was autistic.

This is another common miconception about Einstein, he actually did very well on tests and in school.[/b]

All very well. But I've met people who claim to have high IQ results with a \"real\" test, and they're basically just stupid. Maybe they're really clever but just have trouble looking it? If so, I doubt all the people I met are all like that. And I've never met anybody who has an IQ of 100-115 (ie: not an genuis). I mean, everywhere I turn I see IQ numbers so high that somewhere along the line A) People are lying or B) The test is a bit dodgy somewhere. I'm more inclined to assume those people are not lying, and the test has some weak points (or is just easy, I guess), but...I guess you can't just go up and accuse somebody's intelligence like that, it's evidently a bit rude. Maybe the test is perfectly fine and they are just a bit delusional. *shrug*

I guess they're reliable things - or they would of been phased out ages ago - but after a person's seen their results, perhaps twiddled the numbers a bit or taken an different test in the hopes of getting higher, I take every claim with a grain of salt. (You know how tempting it is to just \"up that number by one, just in case...\")

Reminds me of an quote I saw today:

An housewife, accountant and lawyer were asked what two plus two equals.
The housewife said \"Four!\".
The account said \"It's either three or four, let me just run it through my spreadsheet again.\"
The lawyer dimmed the lights, pulled the blinds closed and made sure nobody was listening and then said \"What do you want it to be?\"[/b]

Originally posted by bradybaker
If you've ever taken a stats class you'll know what I'm talking about

oh god, we just did this a few month ago in my stats class.

i friggin hate them. but yes, i see what you mean.

Kaniaz, I know that that was implied towards me and all I have to say is fuck you. :finger: If you took the time to notice the "real" was in a quotation
lots of love Dylan.

haha @ lara

Yeah, Kaniaz... I know you're actually talking about me as well - being stupid , and having a high IQ....



Come on, get a grip. Unless there's something seriously personal going on - I can't see how you deduced that from what Kaniaz said

Originally posted by sitboy
Kaniaz, I know that that was implied towards me and all I have to say is fuck you. :finger: If you took the time to notice the \"real\" was in a quotation
lots of love Dylan.

I have no idea what the hell you are talking about. Please enlighten me and/or lay off the crack. Thanks.