Back in 2016, commenter Recuring cited the following quote:
We of the Study of Mathematically Precocious Youth (SMPY) at Johns Hopkins have discovered, chiefly by testing able 12-year-olds, that when the examinee’s SAT-M score vastly exceeds his or her SAT-V score the youth is almost certain to score high on a difficult test of nonverbal reasoning ability such as the Advanced Form of the Raven Progressive Matrices, often higher than a high-M high-V examinee does. To test this out, on 6 May 1985 I administered to Terry the RPM-Advanced, an untimed test. He completed its 36 8-option items in about 45 minutes. Whereas the average British university student scores 21, Terry scored 32. He did not miss any of the last, most difficult, 4 items. Also, when told which 4 items he had not answered correctly, he was quickly able to find the correct response to each. Few of SMPY’s ablest protégés, members of its “700-800 on SAT-M Before Age 13″ group, could do as well.
http://www.davidsongifted.org/Search-Database/entry/A10116
I found the norms for this test (hat-tip to commenter Rahul for telling me they’re online) so I was finally able to complete part 3 of this series (three years after part 2).
For UK 10-year-olds, the 5th percentile (IQ 75) is a raw score of 1, while the 95th percentile (IQ 125) is a raw score of 15. If we assume raw scores are roughly normally distributed, we can crudely estimate that a 14 point gap in raw score equates to a 50 point IQ gap, and thus Terry’s score of 32, which is 24 points above the median raw score of 8, would thus be 86 points above the median IQ of 100, or IQ 186 (UK norms).
Some might argue that we should deduct a few points for the Flynn effect since the UK norms were six years old, however my sense is that the Flynn effect has been wildly exaggerated. For example, on the WAIS-III Matrix Reasoning subtest, average raw scores are identical for all ages from 18 to 34 and on the Advanced Progressive Matrices U.S. white norms (since it was normed in lily-white Iowa), there’s no change in raw scores from age 20 to 30:
Pumpkin Person 
Why are the norms identical for 18-34 year olds in that test, but not Raven? This is the same trend in American norms too. The norms in the RPM are not identical.
They’re close enough. You can’t expect perfect agreement because sampling error.
My bad, 18-34 WAIS III norms are very close to 18-34 norms on the RPM, however, 16-17 year old in Matrix reasoning subtest are very close to the norms for 18-34 year olds, but not very close in the RPM (I might be wrong, I’m going by memory). Maybe WAIS matrix reasoning doesn’t have much of a focus on spatial acuity?
why wouldn’t everyone get near 100% on an untimed RPM?
test scores as chillens are meaningless unless terry tao is still a child.
what were his australian uni entrance/school leaving exam scores? did he take any? he obtained his first degree at age 16 from flinders.
AND he has a VERY SMALL head! just like bill gates!
i’m pretty sure the data on chinese cranial circumference is either pure bullshit or it’s all from studies of northern chinese, manchus, and mongolians.
head size is correlated 0.4 with IQ. I think it is correlated with working memory and multi-tasking after that.
It’s brain size that correlates 0.4 (at the most) with IQ, but head size is only a crude proxy for brain size.
Sorry, I meant brain size
To clarify, note i said IQ not intelligence. WM and mutiltasking ability are also significant aspects of intelligence.
the distinction between being a good person and being a smart person is merely verbal…like all distinctions made by psychology professors because low IQs.
an evil person is also a retard.
so one sees with terry tao (autist) and with [redacted by pp, feb 18, 2019](psychopath) how a disability can be an ability under the right circumstances, in the right society, and with the right measure of “success”.
for example: an autist may learn to fake empathy just as a psychopath may learn to fake sympathy…
but it’s fake. and this is obvious…at least to people like me.
the distinction between being a good person and being a smart person is merely verbal…like all distinctions made by psychology professors because low IQs.
This statement shows low social IQ. There’s a huge difference between smart & good. Ever heard of an evil genius? I agree that on average smart people have better character but the concepts are distinct. Even the earliest philosophers likely divided the mind into intellect (that which thinks, knows & understands) & emotion (that which feels, wills, desires & wants)
High IQ psychologists operationalized the distinction by defining abilities as voluntary behaviours that can be graded on a standard of proficiency. By contrast goodness is involuntary. You either feel bad when you see a starving puppy or you don’t & this can be measured physiologically.
Intelligence is just the part of the brain that computes the most efficient way to reach your goal. Emotion (good vs evil) determines the goals themselves.
Intelligence is mostly involuntary too…
It’s probably possible to make an involuntary test of intelligence, but it’s not possible to make a voluntary test of goodness because psychpaths are very good at faking the latter.
“It’s probably possible to make an involuntary test of intelligence”
Ahah! You agree with me!! Also evil doesn’t exist nig.
I just use evil as short-form for “psychopathic”, since psychopaths are what most people would consider evil.
I agree with your desire for a biological intelligence test, but only one that’s validated by psychology. The purpose of science is to explain observations, and intelligence is observed at the behavioral and psychological level.
https://pumpkinperson.com/2017/01/16/is-it-already-possible-to-take-a-biological-iq-test/
https://pumpkinperson.com/2018/07/13/neurological-variables-correlate-0-63-with-iq/
Man…. Crazy reading my old comments.
“since psychopaths are what most people would consider evil.”
That’s how I’d probably define “evil”.
“but only one that’s validated by psychology.”
I guess that’s where we differ. I believe psychology is only relevant if validated by neuroscientific principles. We clearly agree that science requires accurate explanation and subsequently prediction, but we disagree concerning the hierarchy of how we base and branch from these concepts. Psychology is rife the prescriptive analysis. Which is faulty for numerous reasons.
My views began changing a few months after the first linked article.
”for example: an autist may learn to fake empathy just as a psychopath may learn to fake sympathy…
but it’s fake. and this is obvious…at least to people like me.”
https://media1.tenor.com/images/0332b491d62a2c7e13d680c64538a322/tenor.gif?itemid=4485025
the smart and good people have two disadvantages.
1. they are unwilling to fool and to exploit the dumb people. and…
2. they are much less motivated by money and power…
[redacted by pp, feb 18, 2019]
IQ & psychopathy both likely correlate positively with money/status/power while correlating negatively with each other. This probably explains why no U.S. President in over 100 years has had an IQ above 150.
Some people say that Carter was absurdly smart. Probably just schmaltz and nostalgia. There’re similar rumors about Kennedy, and he scored in the high 110s.
Regardless, he doesn’t hold a candle to Nixon, who had a 143.
Carter was likely the least psychopathic so he may have needed an extra high IQ to compensate. Donahue described Clinton as the most verbally skilled man to ever occupy the white house. He was rumoured to have a photographic memory and supposedly could do the NY Times crossword puzzle with lightning speed, though maybe that was propaganda.
Nixon thought Hillary was very VERY smart and was also very interested in Jensen’s work.
spencer has edumacated me on the use “jewry” vs “jews”.
for peculiarities of english grammar there actually are situations where “jewry” is better than “jews”.
if you said, “there are multiple levels of jews, jews aren’t monolithic.”
the first use of “jews” might be replaced by “jewry”.
One thing I noticed about Jensen is he always used the word “persons” in sentences where almost everyone else would say “people”. I don’t recall him ever using the word “people”.
it’s likely the jargon of his field where and when he was edumacated.
like when i’ve read my doctors’ notes i’m described frequently as “charming gentleman”.
it’s probably code for “his mental state is fine.”
Wiki : « Tao was the youngest participant to date in the International Mathematical Olympiad, first competing at the age of ten; in 1986, 1987, and 1988, he won a bronze, silver, and gold medal. He remains the youngest winner of each of the three medals in the Olympiad’s history, winning the gold medal shortly after his thirteenth birthday. »
As I said, math Olympiad is the best IQ test for math. Because it’s very low loaded in knowledge (no calculus, no analysis, only high school basic math) but problems are presented in the most complex way. So it’s pure g among students interested in math. Not a mathematical knowledge competition.
That’s why it’s prediction power is extraordinary. I guess there is 10k PhD in math each year for one Medal Fields. Students at best math programs have at most 1 chance in 200 to get it. But gold medal (50 pple, 1 in 12) have 1 chance in 100. And 3 or 4 perfect scorers around 1 in 10.
Nb : he had a very pushy juvenile education. So I would think that his adult IQ would be 1 sd under his child IQ. Around 172 (1 in a million) looks pretty good …
Terry Tao’s greatest achievement was proving how Donald Trump is unfit to be president.
And thereby opening peoples eyes to the possibility, neigh, NECESSITY of Hilary 2020.
QED
you need to up your game pill. that joke was too obvious.
This reminds me that Lagan, ostensibly the smartest man in the world, is a Trump supporter (but really his IQ is probably around 185 and not 195+ as its claimed).
This Jew man was apparently tested, officially, to be 180 at 9, 190 at 25, and currently 185.
I have a weird conspirational theory that [ashekelnazi] jews are not that smart they advertise [not even close] because they use it to manipulate naive/stupid goym [from left to right], because they perceive smart goym have intelligence as an ideal, just like kindness, while jews have a very food-chain mentality, what’s matter is adaptation.
Just because they has been well sucessfull in their plots don’t mean they are right…
Pumpkin, on the arithmetic subtest, would practice effects be gone if you got a three digit number dividing a one digit number, if you only practiced dividing two digit numbers by a one digit number?
I’m starting to wonder, how much attention to detail one needs for RPM vs WAIS IV matrix reasoning. Is there a higher emphasis on detail on the RPM than on the WAIS, since the scores from 16-24 are identical on the WAIS IV, but not on the RPM.
Pumpkin, is iqtest.dk similar to ravens matrices in items?