Tags
childhood IQ vs adult IQ, IQ, Marilyn Vos Savant, stability coefficients, The Mega Test, The Stanford Binet, Wechsler intelligence scales
Commenter pumpkinhead has some questions which I posted below in red (with my answers in black).
1) What is the correlation of a childhood IQ test(say WISC) to an adult IQ(say WAIS)? 12 vs 18+ years old lets say…?
Below are all the studies I’ve found on the long-term stability of Wechsler IQ. The median correlation is 0.84.
| Approximate age at initial testing | Age at retesting | Correlation | Study | sample size |
| 2 | 9 | 0.56 | Humphreys (1989) | ? |
| 2 | 15 | 0.78 | Humphreys (1989) | ? |
| 9 | 15 | 0.47 | Humphreys (1989) | ? |
| 9.5 | 23.5 | 0.89 | Mortensen et al (2003) | 26 |
| 29.7 | 41.6 | 0.73 | Kangas & Bradway (1971) | 48 |
| 50 | 60 | 0.94 | Mortensen & Kleven (1993) | 141 |
| 60 | 70 | 0.91 | Mortensen & Kleven (1993) | 141 |
| 50 | 70 | 0.90 | Mortensen & Kleven (1993) | 141 |
2) Is the 95% CI usually around 20 points at the average, gets narrower as the IQ increases and then gets wider again once we get to genius levels?
Confidence Intervals used in IQ testing assume a bivariate normal distribution and thus are the same at all IQ levels though the gap between one’s measured IQ and whatever variable it’s being used to estimate (i.e. “true” IQ) increases the further one’s measured IQ is from the mean. But the 95% confidence interval is always 1.96 multiplied by the standard error of the estimate.
3) Are IQ tests for <12 year olds less accurate, get more accurate for 12-17 yo and even more so for adults(18+)?
Even in early childhood the Wechsler IQ tests are incredibly reliable and load extremely high on g (the general factor of all cognitive abilities). But IQ correlates much less with DNA at younger ages so that might be telling us it’s much less accurate in childhood after all.
4) On a more anecdotal level Marylyn Vos Savant is reputed to have scored a 228 at 10(albeit with shoddy extrapolations) and then again in adulthood scored a 186 on the Mega test. That is a 42 point difference, what is the probability that someone could have such a gap with the WISC and WAIS?
The probability would increase the further you get from the mean. So assuming a 0.84 correlation between childhood and adult IQ, someone who was 128 IQ points above the mean (IQ 100) at age 10 (IQ 228), would be expected to be 0.84(128) = 108 points above the mean in adulthood (IQ 208) and we could say with 95% certainty that their adult IQ would be from 192 to 224.
Why did the prediction miss in Marilyn’s case? For starters The 1937 Stanford Binet she took at age 10 has a mean of 101.8 and a standard deviation (SD) of 16.4 while the Mega Test has a mean of 100 and an SD of 16. If both her scores were converted to the Wechsler scale (which uses a mean of 100 and an SD of 15), she would have scored 215 in childhood and 181 in adulthood. Then consider that the Stanford Binet was 19 years old when she took it, and old norms inflate test scores by as much as 3 points per decade (in the short-term) and her childhood score was really more like 209.
Then consider she took two different tests (the Stanford Binet at age 10 and the Mega in adulthood). Even at the same age, different IQ tests typically only correlate 0.8, so the 0.84 correlation between childhood IQ and adult IQ might be more like 0.84(0.8) = 0.67 when different tests are used at each age.
The expected adult IQ of someone who scores 109 points above the mean at age 10 (IQ 209) is 109(0.67) above the mean which equals IQ 173 (95% confidence interval of 151 to 195) so her childhood IQ actually underpredicted her adult IQ which is surprising since her childhood IQ was based on dubious extrapolation of the mental age scale.
Pumpkin Person 
Puppy what are your thoughts on trans people?
Are you going to answer this or not?
no native speaker would call peepee’s synonyms synonyms even though they might see them in lists of synonyms.
most gypsies know about this: [redacted link to wikipedia math article which I assume he thinks proves he can solve item 8]
therefore [redacted by pp, may 29, 2020]
so far the Hall of Fame is:
Bruno 7 (should have been 8)
Mug of Pee 4 (might upgrade to 5 if he proves he can solve the ice-cream item)
Austin Slater 4
Fuck it. I’m gonna give 3 and 4 a shot
3) [correct answer redacted by pp, may 30, 2020]
4) [wrong answer redacted by pp, may 30, 2020]
Wait no….
4) [wrong answer redacted by pp, may 30, 2020]
Final answer is “[correct answer redacted by pp, may 30, 2020]
Sorry pp
Revising the hall of fame:
Bruno 7
Austin Slater 6
Mug of Pee 4
everyone with an IQ over 40 can “solve” number 8.
If you put your mind to it you could solve all items except 1 and 6
Theres a lot of material to throw at biden aside from the assault stuff. What is his son doing in China raising money for a PE fund there? Or the other son on the board of a utility in Ukraine. Really dodgy stuff.
Thank you Pumpkin.
Hey Bruno. I enjoy following tour replies on Quora.
Would you like to share what you think on other very high IQ tests that give you permission to spend as much time on them as you want? Personally, I don’t much trust them for obvious reasons, but also because some people use a method, which is: solve the ones you can solve easily, wait a few months, then try to solve the harder ones. One person scored 190 (the ceiling of that particular test) using this method while they usually scored 150-160 on such tests.
But I do think giving some time for a test is good because many things come into play when the time you have is a few hours (sleep quality of previous night, diet of that and the previous day, mood etc).
Virility is the meaning of evolutionary biology. How much sperm a man can produce and quality of that sperm.
Some aspects of being blue pilled are good. Thus it is an evil not to share knowledge you are capable of experiencing.
Intelligence is quantified by this in many aspects.
I don’t believe anyone has ever had a real IQ score of 195+. And I don’t believe any of the 180+ results from Mega. I believe most of those guys are in the 160-175 range.
PP
Thanks for taking the time to answer my questions.
Billy
Well an IQ rounded up to 195 is technically feasible given a population of 7.5 billion.
https://www.iqcomparisonsite.com/iqtable.aspx
Some like to argue that it is possible to get extreme outliers(200+) that defy the bell curve and technically that is also possible.
Others like to argue that human intelligence is capped at 160 and an IQ higher than that is simply not possible, as if nature imbued us with a cognitive limiter and while I am willing to admit that this too may be possible, I think it is unlikely at 160, perhaps once we get over 200 we can talk about a possible cognitive limiter but not at 160, there is simply too much room for improvement.
It all depends on your perspective on IQ tests, if you interpret IQ tests simply in terms of rarity then with a sophisticated enough IQ test it may well be possible to differentiate even to the minute level any difference in intelligence between people and simply rank order them from smartest to dumbest and since the world has 7.5 billion people an IQ of 195 is not only feasible but also as certain as it is that the sun will rise tomorrow.
However if you look at IQ tests as a hard figure like displacement is to a car engine then I can see the merits of the argument that Intelligence beyond a certain point becomes harder and harder to achieve and after a certain point next to impossible. After all reaction time can only get so fast and anything lower than, say 8 ms, goes against the laws of physics. So brain signals and our thoughts can only move so quickly, however that is but one of probably 10+ main(and likely 100 fold more minor) variables that are responsible for intelligence and i highly doubt that anyone on the planet is anywhere near getting 10/10 on every single parameter. So IMO there is room for improvement, how much you say, A LOT if you ask me. So if there is room for improvement then a 175+ IQ is very very likely. I think there might actually be a 200+ IQ person walking around right now and as a species I think we are at the very earliest stages of optimizing our cognitive performance.
Not sure about the math(we should ask PP about this) but technically speaking if we tried to norm an IQ test against the world population and not just the US then a surprising number of people will score well above 200 possibly even 250(15 points per SD).
The oft-stated ceiling of 195 or 200 assume a perfectly normal distribution, but I think that IQ is distributed with a somewhat positive skew.
Yes I agree, I have increased my knowledge and understanding of IQ related topics quite a bit by following this blog and that is one of the things i have had to re-evaluate my position on. It’s likely that the actual IQ distribution doesn’t quite fit the symmetrical and idealic sounding bell curve though it probably adheres to its principles somewhat. This may be due to society stratifying itself according to class. As such humans develop class barriers which to some degree isolates the upper classes thus giving a significant section of the population a higher springboard from which to reach the higher intellectual echelons. Which is why I also had to reconsider the likelihood of a 200+ IQ. It’s certainly possible using the world population as the norm but even with a relatively small percentage of the overall world population like the US, numbers like 195 or higher are not out of the question. However all this is hypothetical which is why IMO the study of IQ still has a long way to go.
agreed
The mega test psychometrics data are quite convincing but I myself find the test quite easy, so I am conflicted about it.
And i doubt that’s it’s possible to find many people above the 1 in a million level …
If USA or China (UE can’t because of language problems) could have a centralized psychometrics institution with among one of its objective being able to discriminate at the highest level , it would be possible.
Currently, only the IMO select a this 172 math IQ level. The two of three people with a perfect score have 10% chances of getting a Field medal. The 50 with gold medal have 0,5% and 1% for those with a PhD in math. And PhD in math have 0.01% .
“The mega test psychometrics data are quite convincing but I myself find the test quite easy, so I am conflicted about it.
And i doubt that’s it’s possible to find many people above the 1 in a million level …”
I never took the full test but i have had a look at the questions and after trying one or two i realized that i could probably do really well if lets say i worked on it for a week or so(I believe the suggested time frame was a month). That is when i realized that though it may be fun and possibly good enough for detecting genius perhaps it wasn’t accurate enough for differentiating extreme genius from high genius or high genius from regular genius. Of course I’m not too shabby myself but knowing that I’m in the 150s i got the feeling that i could score well above that on the Mega test if i wanted.
So much like yourself i too am somewhat conflicted about it. I think people with a fairly good education, particularly in math and the sciences, would feel quite comfortable taking the test and coupled with a high intelligence may have an unfair advantage over others. Of course one could say the same about literary types and the verbal section but it honestly felt to me like an interesting assignment in an engineering or physics course, something even a university student with an entry level intellect would not be particularly averse to or daunted by.
Maybe one day they will come up with a true high IQ test, so far I’m underwhelmed by what is out there.
I have a math degree, it helps to the geometry part. And if you can run a recursive program, you get rid of fastidious computations.
For the verbal part, I find it extremely easy and I started to give all the answers in this blog, same for numerical problems, but Pumpkin told me it would be unfair to ruin the test makers work, and I agree (I didn’t realize he was very poor and making a bit of money with it, and that the test was also a piece of work that could stand the time, if not revealed), so I promised never to give the answers.
I have an engineering degree and am quite good at Math but dare i say exceptional in Physics, so yes the geometry stuff was a breeze. I excel at visual, logic and math and while verbal is my weakest area I’m not too far behind in that either(just doesn’t excite me as much). By my estimations I could probably score 170+ on the Mega test but my result on a professionally administered IQ test is 159 which is why I think the Mega test is fun possibly good at roughly estimating genius IQ but not necessarily the end all be all of high IQ tests people were hoping it would be. That or my IQ may even be higher than 159, which is something i had considered but feel that my chances of testing that hypothesis are diminishing with age.
As for Ron Hoeflin, I never knew about his circumstances, I now feel bad for voicing my opinion about his test….but having said that I feel much the same way about IQ tests in general, I believe in them and accept that they are unquestionably valid in many valuable ways, I just wish they were more accurate. But maybe its not the test but us humans that can be inconsistent in our performance. IMO the real strength and value of IQ tests is in population wide statistics and what can be gleaned from them rather than on an individual basis.
Yes I agree.
IMO IMO is the real mega test (if you have a high school math level). The Putnam competition is far more advanced in knowledge but less g loaded.
My biggest weaknesses are parts that are not measured by any high level IQ test : I can’t draw, I wouldn’t be able to memorize an image, I am very slow to build a person identity knowledge (for example, on this site, I would be one of the worst to recognize commenters and even to form a clear distinction among everyone and I don’t think it’s a lack of interest) etc etc . For example someone challenged me on a comment I made and then agreed with me after I explained it but I can’t say if it’s you, Jimmy or Loaded . It’s annoying.
Those stuff matters in real world. But they don’t matter for getting good curriculum or a good career (God bless !).
https://www.imo-official.org/problems.aspx
YES!! IMO is an excellent way of gauging math, logical even visual IQ but obviously not verbal IQ to the degree that is required.
As for your weaknesses, that is quite interesting, I’m of the belief that there is nothing you can’t develop with enough motivation and time. I think people with a high IQ have the added benefit of being able to shape and orient their minds any way they like including making up for some weaknesses in ways far in excess any normal person could. So don’t let this thing define you, surely if you apply yourself a little you can find a pretty good solution.
Personally I’m actually quite good at drawing, it was the first talent i exhibited as a kid but unfortunately i never developed that ability beyond 12 years old. I am quite visual and naturally i have a photographic memory(or as I would put it a photo real memory, in addition to retaining a lot of trivial factual information). I used to be able to solve complex math problems and play chess entirely in my head. I still can of course but not as I used to, back then it was magical. I might even say that my visual ability was my strongest point which is why despite being quite good at math physics for me was on a different level entirely. As you know physics is essentially math applied to the physical world so I would love to think about physics concepts and ideas with nothing but an opportune moment where my attention was not required of me and my thoughts to myself.
I don’t think i have any issues socially either(except maybe being terrible at remembering names, faces i never forget, names are another story). In fact I’m very good at building a very thorough and immersive picture of someone else’s world(mind). Almost to a scary level, as if I’m inside the other person’s head but obviously not really(lol), but it definitely feels that way.
So at this point I feel that i desperately need to find a weakness since i have built such a perfect image of myself but alas I am far from perfect. I have thoroughly immersed myself in DNA testing and have gone on to check up on some 500 alleles relating to intelligence, personality, illness and much much more. Well i found something that might explain my personality a little. You see i tend to get fatigued by people after a certain amount of time to the degree that I might go for up to a month without even feeling the need to have any interaction with other people. I hold no negative emotions, i simply lose interest and would rather spend time doing my own thing, research, exercise reading and whatnot. I can of course interact with people during this period(after all it’s very hard to actually fully cut yourself off from society) but it feels forced and i generally gain little enjoyment from it except for when I guilt myself into immersing myself in the interaction.Then again the rest of the time i can be quite socially active and the life of the party even. I seek out people and thoroughly enjoy my time with them.
The older I get the harder it becomes for me to suppress my natural instincts and force myself to interact during these periods(amounting to about 2 months out of the year). So for a long time I couldn’t figure out whether i was an introvert or an extrovert until I delved deeply into psychology various personality types and DNA related to those characteristics. I found out that out of some 12 genes related to autism I had 3. Of course this does not mean that I have autism, after all I am about as socially functional/successful as I am verbally competent(pretty high)…and of course in all likelihood one would have to have a good majority of those genes before they would have the full blown condition. No autism in my family or extended family so what gives? Well the way in which i interpreted this was aided by recent research linking autism to high IQ, or rather high IQ individuals having autistic children at a higher rate than average. It may well be that high IQ draws people to abstraction far more than the average person. This of course not only takes up a huge chunk of people’s time but also their cognitive real estate. This may mean that people often feel the need to exercise that part of their brain that is involved in abstraction often at the expense of their social life and social cognition which may be confused with autistic behavior/traits but in reality it’s people’s brain hungry for abstract thinking.
of course it may not help that I often find people far too invested in foolishness, malice, duplicity, jealousy, egoism and more which after a while mentally burns me out and disheartens me a little. So there you go, other than writing exceedingly long responses on blogs, not switching off my cerebral side often enough(though to be fair this IS a blog about IQ, i leave my fun side for the real world 🙂 ) and from time to time being averse to socializing I think I’m somewhat normal for an intellectually inclined individual.
Billy
As for those Mega test takers, if you ask me they constitute a small fraction of the people that have the potential to score that high. They’re simply the people that are interested in IQ testing and scoring high on them. There are so many more people in academia(or all walks of life for that matter) that aren’t interested in IQ tests but may well be walking around with an IQ equal or greater than those Mega test takers. Having said that i find it hard to believe that anyone that is really really smart, doesn’t know it and isn’t at the very least somewhat curious as to how smart they really are and therefore have taken a test at some point. There is a really high probability that anyone that gifted would have been picked up on and tested at some point in their life by the education system, university, work place or through their own initiative.
As for the Mega test, it was criticized by psychologists and other test designers who claim it is not really capable of testing at those ranges with any reliable accuracy. My two cents, since the test had no time limit it is feasible that someone of moderately high intelligence could find the solutions with enough time and motivation. So while the really high scorers are geniuses no doubt, whether their IQ is 186 or 166 is not all that clear to me while I find it hard to believe that the smartest people on the planet would really spend that much of their time trying to score really high on IQ tests instead of figuring out the next great leap forward for humanity.
I certainly do see the limitations of current tests(even the professional ones). It’s high time someone came up with a serious reliable and accurate test for those 160+ and even 180+ individuals(which do exist btw).
People who are intelligent are more likely to take IQ tests because they’re part of every institution from the SAT to job placement to whatever. It’s like an athlete questioning his 40 yard dash time. Those involved in athletics will be way way more likely to test their sprint times just like an intelligent person would his IQ.
[redacted by pp, may 26, 2020]
Yes that is pretty much what I was alluding to above. Some people want to pretend that only IQ enthusiasts are interested in taking IQ tests and that the true geniuses are hidden out there in society quietly coming up with the next breakthrough or perhaps working as a humble mechanic or whatnot. Though i don’t exclude that as a remote possibility chances are over 90% of geniuses out there were tested at some point in their life in some form or another. Maybe they aren’t eager on taking on the next Mega test like some “IQ competitors” are but surely they have been tested. Its also true that high IQ people enjoy all sorts of challenges very likely IQ test type challenges too, so will naturally get drawn to them not unlike an athlete is drawn to testing their 40(as you so aptly pointed out).
One thing I will point out as an observation(though possibly anecdotal) is that IMO those people that go on to take multiple IQ tests in their life and become what i would call “IQ competitors”, get drawn to them perhaps because they never managed to live up to their full potential and did not accomplish as much as would be expected of them given their genius level intelligence so this turns into a form of recognition and validation of them. Of course i’m not saying this is a rule for every highly intelligent IQ enthusiast, of course not but I would argue it fits the bill for some(Rick Rosner comes to mind). You would be hard pressed to find a highly accomplished academic researcher or theorist who would spend much time on IQ tests beyond perhaps having been tested at some point at a younger age or having decided one day to finally put a number on it.
No there such thing “genius levels ” on IQ scale.
“Gifted” =/= genius
All geniuses are gifted
Majority of gifted ones are not geniuses
Creativity is a different mental approach to “logical’ reasoning. Creativity is just like mental agility. Some people have this, other not and It’s seems independent on IQ tests.
The most important study to find a causation between higher IQ and genius failled to do so.
Yes, higher IQ works as a support when high creativity is on but we still dont have enough and precise information about this interaction.
The most important about intelligence is rationality.
Score higher in IQ tests don’t prevent you to select or filter preferable truths or distort them to advance personal agendas., even believe in bullshit tales.
“No there such thing “genius levels ” on IQ scale.
“Gifted” =/= genius”
Of course there is! Note that i said “genius level intelligence” and not “genius IQ”. The distinction is that there is no such thing as a genius IQ, or point above which someone becomes a genius but rather there is a point above which we are more likely to find geniuses. In other words with increasing IQ the greater the chance someone is a genius.
Essentially a set of extraordinary accomplishments and abilities that are not a result of pot luck pretty much amounts to genius. The thing is high IQ is strongly correlated to genius which is why a lot of people use the two synonymously. Personally I don’t think it is possible for someone to be a genius with an IQ below 135. Perhaps such a person has some remarkable accomplishments but in all likelihood will lack some high end abilities that I often lump in with genius. Some people generously lend the term genius to some “one hit wonders” with IQs between 100 – 130 but I think that for someone to be called a genius they must have the full monty, high intellect/abilities plus accomplishments. For all I know that person might have gotten lucky or got there off the backs of others or stole their research or simply busted their ass mercilessly until they eventually got something to speak of. Similarly it is possible for someone to have an IQ at 180 with no accomplishments to speak of and I would still not call them a genius. They might have genius level IQ(ie the levels that most geniuses occupy) but a genius they are not.
This in as much as academia, business, or entertainment is concerned. Sometimes you will hear a commentator say that a certain footballer(soccer) is a genius or some other sports person is a genius and while i never liked that type of use of the word what they are saying in essence is that that person is a genius in their sport and more often than not that sport only. That is a loose and metaphorical use of the term that a lot of people give a pass to despite not being linguistically accurate in as much as most people understand and use the word genius.
“Score higher in IQ tests don’t prevent you to select or filter preferable truths or distort them to advance personal agendas., even believe in bullshit tales.”
Though that may be true(after all we are all human, even geniuses and as such susceptible to error) I think there is a clear negative correlation of IQ and error(bias, “believe in bullshit tales” as you put it etc). Of course even really smart people can seriously fuck up and go down the wrong road but they tend to do it less often.
1. Correlation is not causation
Majority of high IQ people are not genius and It’s not by lack of good environment if majority of them are capable to manage a “good” life and ifgreat majority of them don’t live in the poorest places. For genius, the intrinsic motivation is its major drive.
Yes, everyone know that It’s logical higher theIQ higher the likelihood to be a genius potential or achieved. But creativity is not derived from higher cognitive skills, It’s a separate domain.
Genius intelligence levels is not the same as IQ levels if intelligence is not just what IQ capture. So categorically speaking no there IQ genius levels. To exist it must be a causation, higher Ithe Q, that means something about the mind or brain, higher the creativity. But not. We just can’t say this.
Because you’re Iqist, you can’t accept that genius can be reached without IQ above 130. Specially artistic//literary and philosophical sectors. Even about scientific. Genius is fundamentally creativity and intelligence. A higher creative potential is more likely to produce some minor geniuses than a higher intelligence. A higher intelligence is a support for higher creativity and in extraordinary combination: genius, and not otherwise.
Your personal feelings about genius and IQ is just this.
It’s like a cult to feel good with yourself but not based on facts.
Genius is the highest levels of creative talent accomplishment an individual can reach. Some words can have more than one meaning and It’s not be used as a metaphor or misused. Or in this case, understand genius “realm” as hierarchical with some type of minor achieved non intellectual genius, for example, sport ones.
Convergent talent is the lowest level of genius and often people confuse them or treat them as non hierarchical.
LOL
100% IQist
IQism is a bullshit tales too, do you knew??
Cesare Lombroso said some interesting things about real geniuses:
– they tend to be extremely biased
– they tend to be dumb a very dumb to domain-knowledges they are not specialized..
Sound logical a very energic and creative mind produce great insights as well bullshyts
I read somewhere that highly intelligent people on avg are so confident about their intelligences that they tend to be more or so biased or lack of intelectual humility thus honesty. And with the agravating problem: they have intelligence enough to manipulate facts.
Most of obscurantist cults emerged since reichwing wave are dominated by highly intelligent people.
I read some of your comments and i tell you that you are not genius because you scored higher in IQ tests and have personal accomplishments. Sorry. You have a megalomaniacal self perception. Common psychological trait here.
Covidian or whatever you name is this time…
I never claimed that I was a genius and while some people might be impressed by some of my accomplishments and my high score in my view I am very very far from being considered a genius. I think you and I set the bar for genius at different levels. At the end of the day its just a word, it means one thing to me and another thing to you. I personally want to preserve the reverence and acclaim that word tends to conjure up in people’s minds and so I choose to view it in this way. After all its the only word we have to describe highly accomplished, highly intelligent people so lets be careful how we use it. A lot of scientists academics and professionals actually agree with me so make what you will of that(though a lot do not require accomplishment but merely the promise of accomplishment, i take it one step further).
As for what you might consider bragging on my part, it was an exchange between myself and another like minded individual about our aptitude background and some of our weaknesses. It was not directed at you nor was it intended to be read by you. So why are you chiming in on someone else’s conversation in such a rude way no less, did i burst your genius-self-evaluation bubble?
“Your personal feelings about genius and IQ is just this.
It’s like a cult to feel good with yourself but not based on facts.”
Says the person who is probably the least factual on this comment section and could readily be given the nickname “captain feels”. You’re so driven by your emotions you wouldn’t know what to do with a fact even if it hit you in the head.
As for me supposedly having a megalomaniacal self perception I find it quite curious that I define genius such that I would be excluded from being described as one but you define genius such that you CAN be considered one(by some high flying mental gymnastics, no doubt), yet somehow I am the megalomaniac?
1. t’s just my name…
Just a word …. “but i don’t see sport genius as genius”
Ok.
Appeal for “everyone have an opinion”
I’m more right than you because i have no fanaticism about IQ but I’m not like RR. IQ measure important facets of inteligence. Creativity and rationality are not one them. Period. Move on…
It’s not relevant if most scientists agree with you here on this debate. About what??
2. I can’t understand what you mean here. It’s not allowed read another comments??
Conversation between autists. It’s mean 90% of comments in this blog
3. Our little boy is triggered
Awwnnn
You was a loser when i go out and still a loser when i come back.
Boringly pedantic comments as always.
Genius is more frivolous than be rational or wise. What’s matter most.
Now you are the humblest humbleton boy in this blog. Oh goy..
Here we go again…I forgot that you are a certifiable nutter!
Told myself i would stay away from you yet somehow you found a way to get me to respond.
Take care crazy person, please don’t respond to me or chime in on my conversations again.
Thanks
What do you think about this , pp?
I don’t agree with him. There are people with brains that are over +6 SD in size. Why can’t there be brains that are over +6 SD in intelligence? The amount of phenotypic variation in our species is enormous.
7 feet for male is 1 in 3000 in Herzegovina and less than 1 in 1 500 000 in the USA
For non pathological cases, there seems to be a limit around 8 feet . But that’s around 5,6 sd or 1 in 100 000 000 ….
Liberals in America are so smart they’ve been running America since the end of the Revolutionary War. Except Donald Trump who is the one of the rare conservatives like Kennedy.
Anyone with my level of racial awareness would get this.
Fight fire with fire the liberal Democratic Party is doing and I find to be genius and tactical. Brilliant liberal politics is as beautiful as scientific advancement as one feeds into the other.
Believe me on that.
[redacted by pp, may 26, 2020]
No matter how factually checked your arguments are, IQism is a cult for people with low self esteem feels better because their scores on IQ tests, feels like a genius without any concrete evidence beyond psychometrics.
“I’m a failled genius”
One of the main characteristics of geniuses is the capacity to perservere no matter how bad is their circumstances to develop their ideas. They simply don’t care where they are because their obsession with their ideas. Just a very bad environment to affect significantly genius instincts to curiosity, logic and creative playfulness.
IQism is also useful to amplify megalomaniacal self perception even of people who are at some reasonable degree “succesful”.
Genius is the perfect sinergy between sensibility and perseverance
often
opposite
IQ is the laziest way to reach genius level without achieving it
Childhood IQ correlation with DNA (whatever it means. Lacks better way to describe it) seems variable. There are some cases of people who just start to talk with 8 years old and rapidly achieve higher potential intelligence during their adolescence. There are gifted people who mature slowly because they have more brain to build then just around 25-30 years they reached their cognitive plateau.
On Genomelink, I had a low childhood IQ but a severely high adult intelligence. I have a very low risk of dementia at least from all the possible genes/snps I looked up. I also eat a lot of fish and other brain stimulating foods giving me a significant cognitive advantage over most.
Strong believer that Testosterone and dopamine make a huge cognitive difference two things I am severely deficient in! Probably deficient in hgh too. Plus cortisol reduces the minds ability significantly something I have an excess amount of.
In this way Pill and I have a similar advantage and disadvantage over others mentally.
Yes Cortisol is a brain killer, lots of quality sleep, and mindfulness of ones psychology goes a very long way. Once those things are sorted then dopamine will come rushing in and then starts the very important task of properly regulating dopamine. As it is the reward drug of choice for the brain it is important for managing, pursuing and achieving goals. If it is out of whack life can become precipitously worse for someone. As such it is not so much a matter of how much dopamine you have but rather the timing of it’s release. Too much unregulated dopamine can be just as bad as too little.
Yes too much dopamine may be a factor in ADHD if im not mistaken. However dopamine is even more crucial for creativity than anything else.
I would consider myself to be far more creative to the population than I am intelligent but that just may be my bias towards myself since intelligence can have negative aspects in people’s perceptions of you while creativity is a universally well liked thing.
Right, but i would go one further and assert that badly regulated dopamine leads to ADHD. That is too much dopamine at the wrong time and way and too little at other times, in other words it is related to issues with proper dopamine regulation rather than excess or insufficient dopamine. Simply put, issues with timing, dosage and possibly location too(in the brain that is). All this is nothing a strongly adhered to regiment can’t fix assuming you can convince the person it is to their benefit to try and focus. At the end of the day it is a matter of calibrating the reward mechanisms in the brain.
That is true most people find high IQ daunting and feel more comfortable with creativity since for one, IMO almost everyone has some exposure to creativity in at least one area(not to be confused with an out and out creative individual who has creativity oozing out of their ears) as opposed to high IQ which is almost imperceptible to most people….and secondly high IQ is more obsessed with the “right” answer(something that intimidates a lot of people) whereas creativity doesn’t care about the right answer nearly as much as it cares about the novel answer.
So creative people tend not to be bothered about being wrong which tends to put people at ease as they have a less chance of coming off as stupid. That is not to diminish creativity, I personally thoroughly enjoy the creative process but feel that without the corresponding IQ to balance it out too much creativity can be chaotic. A good example of highly creative types that have low IQ are actors/entertainers, if you listed to what a lot of them have to say about anything other than acting you will start wondering how these people manage to stay alive.
i mean america has this PERVERSE thing where poor people oppose unions because government employees are paid MORE because they have unions.
govt employees used to be paid LESS.
govt employees were paid less because other benefits…like job security.
so now in the USA being a cop or a school teacher is a “good job”…when it’s in a big mafia city like NYC or boston.
supply | demand
skilled labor | unskilled laber
Unskilled labor – High supply – low demand -| Wal-Mart and Burger King
White conservatives JUST hate blacks
)))))horribly((((((
rr reminds me of ron jeremy. but much less self-aware and much dumber and much smaller.
https://i0.wp.com/fmshooter.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Kombo-Merkel-Salvini.jpg?resize=896%2C504
dammit.
i meant to post this.
Basing IQ of a bell curve s not objective enough. There will always be a cap of high and low. 1 person will be 1 in a billion as 200. And an IQ of 1 for the IQ (1) person.
The more objective approach is to see how a person network functions.
representation and manipulation, (simulation)
The ability to simulate in the mind is an objective measure.
RR is a misunderstood genius.
LOL Perhaps, in another dimension, where nothing truly exists except maybe for a few contrarians!
Imagine thinking I write what I write just to be a contrarian.
In any case, one’s beliefs are irrelevant to their arguments.
Well, you are going against scientific consensus and the best accepted reasoning on the topic. You want to use another word instead of contrarian, be my guest. If you think this observation of mine(which I’ve made several times already with many of your positions) is instead a belief, then this serves as further proof that you struggle to differentiate wishful thinking from reality. Where do I start, contra IQ, contra male/female differences(brain, body beyond testosterone, athletic ability etc) contra racial IQ differences, contra HBD, etc etc I see a pattern there, do you?
PS I hate to use the term “scientific consensus”, it really bothers me because more often than any scientist worth their salt would be comfortable admitting, the “scientific consensus” turns out to be wrong. But in this instance we are talking about something that has been studied for over 100 years and intuitively understood by most people with their head screwed on right that don’t have an axe to grind. So IQ research has reached a consensus(with regard to its validity) in as much as there is consensus that for all intents and purposes Newtonian Physics works well enough for most instances up till undergrad level engineering.
rr,
when did you come out to your mother?
The point is that I don’t write what I write TO BE A CONTRARIAN.
Maybe you can provide a sound argument for the construct validity of IQ?
The point is that I don’t write what I write BECAUSE I HAVE RIDICULOUS HAIR.
Maybe you can provide a sound argument for the construct validity of non ridiculous hairstyles?
Bro don’t worry – hair transplants/plugs/wigs exist.
>in another dimension
I don’t really like it when people say that for some reason. “Another continuum” is more acceptable IMO, whatever that means.
IQ tests, preserving its specific reliability, is also if compare basketball potential ability with a range of people with different height size. Its unidimensional nature is always explicit..
So I read in the economist that our native language is harder to learn than Sanskrit, Ancient Greek and Latin. I keep telling people that was my toughest subject in high school.
english is a creole, a native pidgin of norman french and anglo-saxon/old english and old norse. like all such languages it’s very easy to learn/become passable at.
but english is so copious and nuanced it’s difficult to become as expert as a native speaker unless your native language is also germanic.
Actually Germanic languages come in 3rd in terms of overall influence in English after Latin and French, Greek comes in 4th at 6%.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_language_influences_in_English
However in terms of which is hardest methinks the writer in the economist is on something, Chinese, Greek and many other languages are far more difficult. Just a trivial detail to illustrate this there are 3 different letters and 2 other combination of letters for a total of 5 ways in which the sound equivalent to the English “e” can be made in Greek.
Greek’s only saving grace is the fact that we have many root words which can be used to create new ones. In fact you could have only a basic grasp of Greek but if you understand the principles behind root words and how to combine them you can infer a lot of other words just by making logical combinations(that is if you can navigate the maze that is Greek grammar). This fact about Greek has surprisingly been put to no greater use other than in English. A lot of words in science and mathematics take advantage of this aspect of Greek. A lot old but some newly coined words too(by non Greeks).
Bio – logy: combining the word bio(to live or life) with logos(expression, reasoning, rationalizing) => the ‘rationalizing’ of living things.
and so on and so forth ad infinitum.
English is not my native language.
mifune looks WHITE…like lots of japs…unlike other ne asians.
he looks like that upper class cuntthrob from puerto rico.
Hello pumpkin person. I have two favors to ask.
1) I’m almost sure I read a post here about someone (not famous and anonymous) with extremely high scores on more than one IQ test and I can’t for the life of me find the post. I think it was a man, but I’m almost certain I remember they had/have kind of a problematic personality. Do you know the post I’m referring to?
2) I want you to estimate Pierre de Fermat’s IQ.
you might be thinking of some articles i did on Mug of Pee’s self-proclaimed GRE scores.
Pierre de Fermat’s IQ was obviously extremely high but I’d have to do more research before feeling comfortable saying anything more precise
and GMAT, SAT, ACT, etc.
peepee has a really bad memory.
no i remembered you claiming you scored 1560 on the SAT (V 760 M 800) and that you got the high score on your actuary exam. But talk is cheap. Show us what you can do:
1)Insert the word that means the same as the two words outside the brackets:
FOLLOW (…..)STEM
2) Insert the missing number:
9 2 5 29
12 4 3 26
15 8 ? 15
3). If L + (border) = (sill), what word means the same as “sill”?
4). If DE + (rank) = disgrace, what word means the same as “disgrace”?
5). Which is the odd one out: January, May, June, August, December?
6). Which the odd one out: Sovereign, Crown, Florin, Shilling, Sixpence ?
7). What 5 letter word means the same as “decorative” and “whim”?
8). An ice-cream seller has 6 different varieties of ice-cream. If he sells two ice-creams at a time and the two flavors are always different, how many different combinations of flavors can he make?
6). Which the odd one out: Sovereign, Crown, Florin, Shilling, Sixpence ?
[correct answer redacted by pp, may 28, 2020]
Even though you get credit for this, your reasoning was different from the test maker’s
4). If DE + (rank) = disgrace, what word means the same as “disgrace
[correct answer redacted by pp, may 28, 2020]
3). If L + (border) = (sill), what word means the same as “sill”?
[correct answer redacted by pp, may 28, 2020]
5). Which is the odd one out: January, May, June, August, December?
[correct answer redacted by pp, may 28, 2020]
8). An ice-cream seller has 6 different varieties of ice-cream. If he sells two ice-creams at a time and the two flavors are always different, how many different combinations of flavors can he make?
[redacted by pp, may 28, 2020]
The wording is not very precise or it’s my English …
You gave two answers. Which one do you think is correct?
I guess the most precise of the two :
[wrong answer redacted by pp, may 28, 2020]
So then he was selling only [correct answer redacted by pp, may 28, 2020]
Very good, though I can’t give you credit since your first guess was wrong. Still 6 out of 8 is extremely impressive!
It’s a problem I wanted to be the most accurate possible and the right answer was 10 second reflection and the « wrong » answer was 2 minutes.
I would say 6,5/7 and even 7/7 because I outsmarted the question 🙂
I have spent less than 15 minutes in total. I can look at the last problem tomorrow. It’s late and
I was having dinner with my girlfriend by friends Pumpkin , so I have drunk a lot . We were celebrating the end of strict confinement in Paris
Thanks for the response, pumpkin person. It was not Mug. I’m pretty sure it was not a commenter, here. They had taken more than one actual IQ tests and some guy on quora had linked to, I think, a post on your site re: that person, but I can’t find that quora guy either. He was banned but his answers are still there, I think.
Perhaps the guy calling himself Jesse waters
Just going out of work and going to dinner so not sure I can get time to think about this later :
2) Insert the missing number:
9 2 5 29
12 4 3 26
15 8 ? 15
For this one I have two stupid solutions but one is too complex (and the test was not that level) so I give the simple one (but that I found a bit dumb):
[correct answer redacted by pp, may 29, 2020]
Your score is now 7/8! Might have been 8/8 had you not been rushed and drinking last night and the test not been in your second language!
So I can consider I got 8 out of 8 because the problem were I gave 2 results, I couldn’t know if was the less precise wording that was in the text maker mind.
[redacted by pp, may 29, 2020]
PS : I hope your not the test maker because you know I don’t want to brag against you dear Pumpkin.
No I did not make the test. I wont say where i got the questions because mug of pee might hunt down the answers so he can pretend to have high IQ. LOL!
You know I don’t do much tests . My grandma loved logical games but I like when I do it but I have to be pushed for whatever reason. It s not spontaneous . Like I have done the mega test after I discovered it was useless for entering mega and I don’t feel the push to do the Titan.
If Bill Gates gave 300k a year salary for people to be in mega environment just for doing tests 15 hours a week, then I would do it . And I would love to know people with 172 IQ to see. I have known one french field medal and he liked me a lot but I found him boring, very meticulous and a bit unpleasant like a « Karen » even if he is considered one of the best mathematician in the century .
And I also had a theoritical physicists at Princeton who was very open to everything but I think he was more 160 . And Bill Gates doesn’t impress me as very clever despite being quite interesting.
I am at the end of my Uber drive … (very proud of having being able to improve my score to 4.96 . It’s difficult when you are not cool, male and white … )
instead of easy and retarded questions peepee needs to post questions from actual IQ tests, like the MAT, which the [redacted by pp, may 29, 2020]
If you find them so easy why are you so scared to answer them?
because you’re a compulsive liar who redacts comments obviously.
nice excuse. Maybe someone will be dumb enough to buy it
Lemme try…
1) [wrong answer redacted by pp, may 29, 2020]
2) [correct answer redacted by pp, may 29, 2020]
5) [wrong answer redacted by pp, may 29, 2020]
6) [correct answer redacted by pp, may 29, 2020]
7) [correct answer redacted by pp, may 29, 2020]
8) [correct answer redacted by pp, may 29, 2020]
How do questions 3 and 4 work? [speculation redacted by pp, may 29, 2020]
[redacted by pp, may 29, 2020]
your number 5 has more than one answer. [redacted by pp, may 29, 2020]
low IQ gypsy answer is [correct explanation redacted by pp, may 29, 2020]
[redacted by pp, may 29, 2020]
It wasn’t Jesse. Not a commenter. Never mind, I might remember it completely wrong.
This George Floyd thing looks like the beginnings of a minor SJW sainthood. I havent read the facts or seen the video but Sailer always digs up relevant background info on the perp or more context about the particular area so that you can begin to understand why the officer is taking no prisoners. I wonder what he’ll dig up this time.
This is the bit SJWs and my previous psychiatrist dont get.
These cops may well be biased and racist and want to beat up blacks for no lawful reason. I don’t doubt that Melo/Loaded are correct in some of these cases.
But then they never answer the follow up question as to why blacks get these types of reactions from people of all races? This stuff happens in Israel, China, Brazil etc too. Its like Santos intellectually vapid answer to why do people have negative reactions to homosexuality – always blame the hater and never ask why the hater is hating. Youre right – its not rational the hatred….100% not logical in most cases.
So then what is it? An irrational behaviour that fits the same pattern among all world cultures and time periods is seen as some kind of rabies or something in the minds of these idiots. Really? Is this how you want to explain it?
At least berkeley sociologists suggest bad parenting/brainwashing as a type of answer to the greatest true moral dillemma of our age: ‘why do the haters hate?’
You’re a dumbass.
It’s called racism/tribalism. The fact that it’s a natural thing, doesn’t mean it’s good to have in modern society.
Just like most people reach sexual maturity in their early teens doesn’t means we should just start fucking children.
Your parent’s sex life is natural but it’s still not good for humanity as it produced somebody like you.
Racism
“Elderly white couple are killed by a black thug”
That’s racism too
Just pseudo social justice warriors (and piill) to deny that racism can be directed towards white people too…
Utopia is always the question
Can we have a better solution for this??
Morality is the use all knowledge you have to adapt and live. Its essence is what is imprescindible and what is not.
All nonhuman species use the maximum of their understanding of reality to survive, adapt, live.
Human species is the only one who don’t. That’s why we can’t blame a parasitic wasp to be parasitic. This is everything she knows to survive. She have no choice. We have..
We are capable to solve all real stupid problems which accumulates erratically throughout history. But humans became at the same time smarter and dumber with the advent of civilization or complex societies.
Do you think slavery was inescapable for whites take the control of Américas??
With civilization the worst of human beings became our leaders.
Melo you just don’t get it. While you were watching CNN and letting the Jews tell you what the best way society should be (i.e. with them on top), maybe you might consider that our reactions to most things aren’t ‘rational’. Like who we like and dislike. Who we find attractive. Who we hate etc. What are you going to do Melo – let the jews police whites to make them not tribal?
No I totally get what you’re saying. It’s just stupid. Try to come to terms with that. Only my views are objective.
You suck Jewish cock
Half white filipinos should be on top.
The naturalness based on pill criteria is
“If Majority is like that or have such vibe”
(!racial) tribalism is so natural as lack of (racial) tribalism
Specially when people are desindoctrinated from conservative ideology , i mean, cult
What’s matter here is
What is the better ??
Racial tribalism is not the same as racism
Tribalism is not the same as bigotry
Tribalism at priori is when people is united within the same core cultural or biological values included racial self perception and willingness to maintain it specially because It’s easier connect and keep people united by similar appearance..
The best path is always the balance
Too much racial tribalism results in racism, always wrong.
But too little racial tribalism, depending the place you are, can be neutral, better or worse.
Capitalism works to racial miscigenation because its main enphasis is the class and not the race
Race is more about old aristocracy even in such places the two concepts of race (or subrace) And class were mixed, often with the same meaning.
I do the vocabulary that should be easy for Philo because he is a [redacted by pp, may 28, 2020] 🙂
1)Insert the word that means the same as the two words outside the brackets:
FOLLOW (…..)STEM
[correct answer redacted by pp, may 28, 2020]
7). What 5 letter word means the same as “decorative” and “whim”?
[correct answer redacted by pp, may 28, 2020]
Bruno you’re a genius! You got the right answer while using it to get in a witty dig at pill!
Pimpy
The psychiatrist
Because I am a what?
Can’t tell you without giving away the answer to two of the IQ questions
Stalk and fancy.
I still dont get it.
He said you are a fancy stalker. LOL
Stock market is waaaaaay to high. Netflix worth more than Disney Corp??? Ahahahahahaha.
Watched a movie with DiCaprio – Shutter Island. I worked out the twist midway because I’ve seen a similar movie called Mulholland Drive.
Even though it took place in new england they still managed to [redacted by pp, may 28, 2020]. I burst out laughing when I saw that.
Pretty good movie though.
Whats your favourite movies puppy?
Friday the 13th (1980)
Halloween (1978)
The sweet hereafter (1997)
Lion (2016)
The breakfast club (1985)
Carrie (1976)
Silent night deadly night (1984)
American beauty (1999)
Beloved (1998)
The United States of Leland (2003)
Why is there hate in the world? Where does it come from? I believe there are rational reasons for irrational hate and my first port of call is the evolutionary darwinist lens. But there may well be something Freudian going on. I just think the jewish/berkely sociology dept explanation is very lacking.
Marx sees society as an economic regulation regime. Freud sees it as a sexual reproduction regulatory regime. Both are correct. It was definitely true that slavery coincided with racism against blacks but many whites or south asians or whatever were enslaved too. People don’t hate blacks just for money reasons IMO.
Whites refuse to live with blacks because they don’t like dealing with them. That was the basis for segregation.
There wouldn’t have been an abolitionist/civil rights movement if large numbers of blacks lived in the north.
freud wasn’t right about anything. you need to be gassed.
[redacted by pp, may 28, 2020] the reason why black men prefer non black women is the ‘legacy of slavery’ or the reason people have babies is the future net present value of the expected cashflows from a child LOL.[redacted by pp, may 28, 2020]
Huh? The legacy of slavery is only a small part of it. The main reason is caucasoid people are better looking & more feminine.
As for the demographic transition; it’s a combination of birth control & people feeling more invested in each child because they know it will live & are less dependent on child labour for farming
[redacted by pp, may 28, 20202]
[redacted by pp, may 28, 2020]. People have babies cos they like sex . Most pregnancies in the 3rd world are unplanned.
which is why i mentioned birth control. Another reason I also should have added is that people don’t stay in school as long in the third world, so more time to get pregnant.
I know it sounds cliche coming from me but there truly isn’t any basis to saying one race is more attractive than another.
There is no objective standard of beauty except maybe symmetry.
I crave different races when I’m in a different mood.
Black girls make better waifus
That’s just a fact.
Of course you could also argue the opposite, that black women are the most attractive because so many women of other races (except maybe latinas) wish they were black.
Caucasians have some uniquely non primate looking. Even east asians. Lots of them look hispanic with epicanthic eyes. In terms of good looking caucasians are the best. For sure, very beautiful there are in all races but sexual selection has been a thing among caucasians. Not just symmetry but also harmony composition result in beautiful faces. Pale skin and a variety of color eyes and hair textures also helps a lot, but beauty is not just how you look but your behavior. In the end of day sexual selection always works against intelligence selection specially rationality.
“because so many women of other races (except maybe latinas) wish they were black.”
Oh my god. I ddint think it was possible for someone to be this level of brainwashed.
They do though. That’s why white women covet big asses, tan skin, bigger breasts, lips, etc.
Most users here though wouldn’t know that because they aren’t exposed to the real world.
You’re old men who take data at face value.
Puppy you never mentioned birth control in your original answer. You made the point that people calculate how much return they get on each kid in terms of labour before deciding to have sex. [redacted by pp, may 29, 2020]
In poor countries children are an economic investment & more than pull their own weight in labour from a very young age. But I agree that’s not the main reason third worlders have so many kids & if I ever suggested otherwise you were right to mock me. The main reason is lack of access & understanding of quality birth control & people having sex younger because they’re not in school
Filipino women want to be black too.
Specially “vulgar’ white women who want to look nearlysh black, as well men.
No Filipino women want to be white
Lmao. If I went to the Filipinos they’d treat me like some sort of god.
Poor women…
They want to be whiter
pp, what are the correlates of math SAT math IQ and SAT verbal IQ to WAIS IQ?
Specifically (g) and FSIQ
PS and WM seem to not as needed to get a high score.
I have no data on how it correlates by sub-scale but wechsler vocab seems like a good proxy for SAT verbal & wechsler arithmetic seems a good proxy for SAT math
Pimpqueen
I’m so surprinsingly happy (not by current context) that even your idiotic censorship will take the smile from my face …
Just teaching that
Work in “creative” professions don’t make you automatically more creative//insightfull or inventive than the mediancy…
Majority of actors are not more creative because they work as actors, a “creative” (artistic) profession.
S
O
R
R
Y
!
how many eggs can oprah lay in an hour?
how many eggs can [redacted by pp, may 28, 2020] eat in a minute?
poor Mug of Pee.
being poor sucks.
especially traped on a desert island.
Some people I know online take IQ tests for fun. I don’t and it is the same reason I don’t play videogames. The mental effort is too much. It takes energy to complete tasks and there is way too many. I get drained. Things were different 10 years ago. Life stressors had not eroded my stamina just yet. But over time the burnout happened over and over again. I could work around my working memory shortage in school but Life is not school. It would be nice to know what these discrepancies mean in my indices. I can do high-level abstractions like imagining the quantum nature of time travel. But I need time and research. And because I lack energy I get fewer results.
The point is that you do not need an abstraction to be complicated. You need simple symbols combined and you gain intricate presentations.
Pumpkin, is it true that a difference between any of the indices of over 20 IQ points that person is considered to have a learning disability. It’s a serious question because I have a gap of 38 points between Perceptual and Processing.
If you are thinking of a new topic for your blog I recommend a post on skewed discrepancies. and Test validity like rr is on about (why are things skewed, that is)
I would like a topic on this too, because reconciling a 140 IQ with my day-to-day performance hasn’t been easy. I just default to 120s in my mind.
I have self-destructive anxiety, leading to terrible procrastination; in the past, as a teen, I attributed this to some apathetic nature about me. The reality may be that not only can I not process things well enough, but I’m seriously stunted in my CPI; my working memory, even, isn’t stable, considering the spread.
I’m a slow reader and things take a good bit for it to settle. I feel overwhelmed, not by difficulty, but volume of work, that I withhold doing it for some time. I daydreaming whenever I’m stuck; I get brain fog at times, and feel sleepy when I’m stuck on a difficult problem. The only thing has helped me is adderall. However, it seems that people with ADHD typically have a profile with low working memory, though generally poor CPI is attributed to many neuroatypical traits, regardless the distinction.
illuminaticatbob, Billy
You both need to work on your cognitive stamina! You might be taking intellectual performance for granted, as if it’s this fixed innate magical thing and you expect it to function seamlessly and flawlessly every time. That is not how it works, not for anyone. Much like the body the brain needs to be trained to be strong, consistent, agile, and resilient and whatever else it needs to be in order to live up to it’s full potential.
Another thing you might need to work on is your intra-personal intelligence. This is the mechanism by which we learn how to tend to our minds motivate ourselves and make the most out of what we have but since it deals a lot with the self some people conflate it with self absorption and being self centered. That is not true, it is the number one thing people need to tend to before they deal with anything else, for if they drop the ball on this one aspect it has a knock on effect on all other aspects of our personalities and cognition, and it makes us less able to live up to our responsibilities. I would suggest brutal honesty with yourselves until you regain full control of your neurotransmitters(and your brains) get those juices flowing properly again, learn to take care of yourselves mentally again and head off any difficulties you might be faced with.
Of course you knew all this, I didn’t have to tell you, it’s not rocket science, is it, but all too often we take for granted the simplest things.
PS: illuminaticatbob, it might be helpful for you to stop thinking of IQ as this fixed thing, the truth is it is not. It can fluctuate throughout our life and throughout the year even depending on our mood, state of mind and physical/mental health. It is however the best thing we have and works well enough at gauging intelligence for most people, but not for everyone. All you need to do is realize that IQ scores are given with a 95% confidence interval of 10-20 points. What that means is that the score they give you has a 95% chance it is within a window of 10 – 20 points. So if you are given an IQ of 120, it means that it could actually be 110 or even 130 and for 1 out of 20 people their ACTUAL IQ lies outside this range. Well, depression, personal issues, mental illness and a whole host of other reasons can put you in that 5% of people very easily. So don’t take this stuff toooooo seriously, yes its fun, yes we should not dismiss it at all because it does have validity and value but never take it so seriously to the degree that it stifles your spirit.
As I have said many times before, the real value in IQ testing is not so much in individual testing but rather in population wide statistics, there it’s accuracy is immaculate(provided there was no selection bias with the sample population of course).
I believe that intelligence has limits you can tell from two metics. Scale/quantity of production over time and quality which is the creative original unique side to intelligence.
A person never goes beyond these boundaries and it makes measuring intelligence super simple. There are outliers like getting hit in the head and becoming a savant, but that is rare. Peoples’ intelligence stays steady throughout life.
I love how Philo is so dumb he doesn’t understand why his comments are constantly moderated.
Puppy is protecting you. Thats why.
I doubt Pumpkin could care if my feelings are hurt. We insult each other quite often.
I think he’s just tired of your dumb and pointless comments.
I seldom moderate your attacks on melo unless they’re completely unprovoked. I’m actually enjoying this OLD WHITE MEN vs YOUNG HYBRID war. Even though technically pill’s not white.
What is Philo?
Let me be racist to him. It’ll be fun.
he’s too ashamed to say
That’s hilarious.
Puppy wont even let me explain why russiagate is so dumb just to keep melo’s little CNN bubble intact.
He probably just doesn’t want you to embarrass yourself.
Russiagate is irrefutable.
I remember Pumpkin believes to an Itinerant ethnic group like Gypsies or Irish Traveler in the UK or Tinkler-Gypsie. If that were true, Philo would be the Einstein of this group because they have a subsaharian IQ.
Not that there is anything wrong with sub-Saharian because my MtDna is L2 wich is « pure » black.
When I discovered that and the age of the mutation (between 1000 and 3000 years ago), it means that my ancestor was a slave either from Phenician (going to Spain through Malta), either a slave of Roman Empire (working in the gold mines), either a slave of the Arabs (working in the salt mines for south west Spain and South Portugal). Those are the three major possibilities.
That this slave was able to reproduce to, at least, my grand-mother, mother, and sister and my niece today, is conforting. I hope I ll know when the specific mutation occurred. There were not enough black person I suppose to generate this mutation. So probably it’s a founder effect and the date gives the earliest date at wich those slaves came, allowing to rule out one or all of the three. The fourth possibility was some iIllegal slave trade in XVIII century Spain (also for salt mines) but it’s improbable because else this mutation would be found in Africa (and it’s only in Malta, South Spain, Portugal up to north west Spain ).
So I am also a minority somehow like maybe our Tinkler-Philosopher-Gypsie-Wanderer of Galloway, converted into a sedentary high end London boutique as, not fortune, but shop teller : « Wellcome my Lord. How may I please you Sir » 😊
A few key things in mind.
1) Trump has nothing to do with rigging elections via Russia.
2) Trump is making it out to be that the investigation is a fraud because it is about himself.
3) The democrats do not see the investigation as about him and Russia.
4) The investigation is about Trump blocking the real investigation, not about Trump and Russia.
Have you read this one before PP?
https://www.pnas.org/content/113/18/4909
What are your thoughts on it?
[vulgarity including correct answers to items 7,4 and 3 redacted by pp, may 29, 2020]
mugabe has answered all 8 of 8 correctly AND AS PREDICTED PEEPEE IS LYING ABOUT IT.
if your answers differ, then you need to kill yourself.
You’ve hinted at answers to the math items but not actually provided them. You’ve given multiple answers to item 6 without choosing and you’ve provided no discernible answer to item 1.
I did NOT make this test, it was made by one of the biggest names in psychology.
because 6 has multiple answers [redacted by pp, may 29, 2020]
EVERYBODY SHUT UP! one of the biggest names in psychology just got raped!
Part of intelligence is picking the BEST answer
the way it’s written 1 doesn’t have a legitimate answer, just like all of the questions except 8.
[redacted by pp, may 29, 2020]
Part of intelligence is judging what the test designer thinks is the right answer (social intelligence)
the “test designer” has a low IQ.
If you’re not happy with your score (which is quite good btw) merely state categorically what you think are the intended answers (even if you don’t agree with them) for items 1, 2, 6, & 8.
Mug thinks question 8 is the best when it’s phrases in a way that is ambiguous.
I gave two possible answers first try, including the right one, but it was the answer less « close » to the wording of the question that was the right one.
But it was my mistake not to eveluate correctly the level of the test maker and what was expected.
Doing it at 3am, very quiclkly (10 minutes) with alcool on the blood, in english, a foreign language that is not my best, are factors that – besides the fact that my choice was correct in the technical sense – I chose the wrong In test maker mind among my two answers.
The good thing is that getting only 7 can incite others to do the test. If someone had 8 before me, I probably wouldn’t have done it, because you re sure to do less good (aka have the same score later) . It’s like for the visual test. I did it because nobody had scored 4 before, else you get a bit humbled if you’re competitive or just french 🙂
PS : I m very competitive when i decide to do something but most of the time is just reading stuff and there is nobody giving MCQ about the book to all readers (when you are not a university student any more) . I d love to be paid just to read books and then get comprehension MCQ btw.
Yes you lost credit on item 8 not because you couldn’t solve it, but because you weren’t sure which solution the test author wanted. However knowing what the test author wants is probably much less g loaded than solving the stated problem, so the ambiguity in questions probably lowers the g loading.
If I just go by the ability to solve problems (regardless of whether you know which solution is “right”) the scores would be:
Bruno 8
Austin Slater 6
Mug of Pee 6
Animekitty 2
Asuuming there are roughly 10 regular commenters and that virtually 100% of those capable of scoring high attempted the test, then only the top 10% are capable of true scoring 7+ and only 33% are capable of true scoring 3+
Since the IQ distribution of the readership is known to be 125 (SD = 15), then 3 = IQ 130 and 7 = IQ 145
If we extrapolate linearly from there:
8 = IQ 149+
7 = IQ 145
6 = IQ 141
5 = IQ 138
4 = IQ 134
3 = IQ 130
2 = IQ 126
1 = IQ 123
0 = IQ 119 or lower
You would need at least 20 test takers like for the visual. Maybe you could guarantee an anonymous scoring for those who don’t care if you know but who doesn’t want everyone to get their score.
Because the average IQ of you readership was around 127. So it means people are a bit put off by this one test. Generally you have much more than 4 people taking the test or answering questionnaires.
Or maybe it should be a separate entry … for the one who don’t go so deep in the comments
(If that doesn’t make sense, I had an entire afternoon lunch, and in France it means so many different wines, I am realizing I have an Uber -alcoholic life btw … )
Your new scale is much better . It would be good that Billy & Gond take the test too to fine tune it.
The answer to #5 is [correct answer redacted by pp, may 31, 2020]. It’s really obvious now. Not sure what I was thinking.
1)Insert the word that means the same as the two words outside the brackets:
FOLLOW (…..)STEM CHECK
2) Insert the missing number:
9 2 5 29
12 4 3 26
15 8 ? 15 CHECK
3). If L + (border) = (sill), what word means the same as “sill”? CHECK
4). If DE + (rank) = disgrace, what word means the same as “disgrace”? CHECK
5). Which is the odd one out: January, May, June, August, December? CHECK
6). Which the odd one out: Sovereign, Crown, Florin, Shilling, Sixpence ? CHECK
7). What 5 letter word means the same as “decorative” and “whim”? CHECK
8). An ice-cream seller has 6 different varieties of ice-cream. If he sells two ice-creams at a time and the two flavors are always different, how many different combinations of flavors can he make? CHECK
8 of 8.
Melo black women are objectively the most hideous in the world. I feel sad that Jeff Zucker has your little mind wrapped around his finger like this. If black women truly were desirable wouldnt your jew masters be going out with them? Hahaha. Poor Melo. Suddenly the truth strikes into his CNN bubble.
You are the dumbest person I’ve ever encountered online Philo. MeLo owned you when he legitimately said all white girls wanna be black. That’s a truth and cannot be separated from reality no matter how much your dumbass wants it to be.
The ideal woman if not full black will always be part black. That enough is the truth.
You two are fucking mental. Are you trolling? Theres no way you could believe that.
If you don’t think this black woman isn’t the sexiest thing you’ve seen in a while then you’re just gay.
This goes for anyone here.
Gay often have good taste.
I’m not gay thank god and I can tell you objectively black women aren’t hot. Youre disgusting.
>Doesn’t think the woman in said video is hot
>says he’s not gay
This is a contradiction Philo. The evidence clearly suggests you love getting your asshole rammed by an elderly Jewish man. Preferably while he’s wearing his gold chain.
”I’m not gay… thank god”
huahuahuahuahuahuahua
“God” make you schizo, self-black-hater, retard and loser
“God” wasn’t particularly good with you
😉
You’re not in the position to choice woman when you have none.
Melo I don’t like women that look like animals. Blacks are very bestial looking. Have you ever noticed the way most female black actresses and models are actually mixed race and not black? Case Closed.
Santo – I’m not black you idiot. Lol you haven’t worked that out yet???!!
That’s because Hollywood likes to whitewash everything. The actress in the video was barely lighter than Kendrick, who’s a pretty dark skinned black guy and she’s gorgeous. Mixed girls got their own thing going on but they all pink on the inside bruh. I don’t discriminate on any shade of the ass. You clearly need to open your eyes because there’s a lot of dark skinned girls who got it going on.
Hollywood is too afraid to show black men/white women interracial relationships, but you probably wouldn’t know about that because of that retarded narrative you try to stick to.
LOL Hollyweird is desperate to show interracial romance. They’ve been shoving it in our face for years. WTF are you stoned?
That’s the dumbest fucking logic I’ve ever read and I read Mugabe and RR’s drivel quite often. So that’s quite the feat.
Well then mention a powerful jew whos with a black woman. Thats right. Case closed.
Lmao you can’t be serious.
I saw the police arrested a CNN reporter in Minneapolis. Hahaha thats wxactly the treatment that should be given to a [redacted by pp, may 30, 2020] propaganda outfit.
I only put the answers I could bet my life on. That is the other answers I have no clue whether I live or die.
5). Which is the odd one out: January, May, June, August, December? CHECK
[wrong answer redacted by pp, may 30, 2020]
6). Which the odd one out: Sovereign, Crown, Florin, Shilling, Sixpence ? CHECK
[correct answer redacted by pp, may 30, 2020]
8). An ice-cream seller has 6 different varieties of ice-cream. If he sells two ice-creams at a time and the two flavors are always different, how many different combinations of flavors can he make? CHECK
[wrong answer redacted by pp, may 30, 2020]
8) is really [wrong, but incredibly close answer redacted by pp, may 30, 2020]
Revising the hall of fame:
Bruno 7
Austin Slater 6
Mug of Pee 4
Animekitty 1
If I had to guess how this little quiz maps to IQ (assuming linear relationship):
0 = IQ 109 or less
1 = IQ 115 (bright)
2 = IQ 120 (very bright)
3 = IQ 126
4 = IQ 131 (brilliant)
5 = IQ 137
6 = IQ 142 (very brilliant)
7 = IQ 148
8 = IQ 153+
Of course such a short test would be way too unreliable to take seriously, especially if you score near the floor or ceiling
[correct answer to item 8 redacted by pp, may 30, 2020]
Good job! I can’t give you credit because you provided this answer after being told your first attempts were wrong, but at least you know you have the ability to solve it so your official score underestimates your true ability.
[redacted by pp, may 30, 2020]and [redacted by pp, may 30, 2020]should take it. And Mugabe should finish when his hangover wears off.
Let’s not put people on the spot. If they want to take it they will.
Questions about IQ childhood
RR
What is “IQ”??
What is childhood??
LOL! That’s exactly what he’d say.
CNN became communist??
A person’s intellectual output can be gaged. But not all output is generalized. It is usually specialized. A person becomes smarter dealing in a specialized field. But if (g) is involved a person can learn more specialized fields at the same time.
Because the number of Fields increases the higher g is different designs emerge as combinations of what the person knows to mix together.
If a high g person is working in many fields at once a marked amount of work will be seen as a result. With elements not seen otherwise.
Many fields of course require high g and are still specialized. And man high g persons work in teams. Specialization never goes away. The spread simply shifts.
Reading a piece in the Economist that has very interesting HBD overtones. Apparently 90% of billionaire wealth in south east asia is held by ethnic chinese people. Thats quite fascinating. Is there really such an IQ difference between chinese people and the natives? Theres been a fair bit of admixture so you would imagine some locals would have benefitted genetically from chinese settlement over the last 1000 years…but no!
It also brings to mind a phrase I heard when I was studying in Singapore – that the Chinese are the jews of asia.
My observation is that chinese people might share some of the ‘entrepreneurial spirit’ of the jews but personality wise, comparing apples and oranges.
I feel even sorrier for melo that most filipino wealth is actually china people.
They share the spirit of tribalism too. In my experience US Asians participate in a lot of interest group activism. Probably on the same level as latinos.
They’re just not taken as seriously because fewer pokemon points. And they’re more of a threat to Jewish elites.
^^^^ DING DING DING We have an answer!!
Austin youre one of the few people talking any sense in this blog. Unfortunately puppy has a history of removing straight talkers like us.
It would be interesting to see if ethnic chinese businessmen influence their host governments to protect and agree with China on everything. My understanding is that s.e asia was traditionally tributary states to china anyway before white people came in their gunboats.
The real interesting story about asia isn’t china anymore. I see a lot of potential in India. They just need to get the birth control element correct. I’ve never met a stupid indian. When I was in Singapore I used to observe the foreign bangladeshi workers were much darker skinned than most of the south asian ethnics I met in the west. There probably is a large IQ differential between light and dark skinned south asians.
Fascinating article on china’s establishment and their attitude to QE in China. So apparently a commy government respects fiat money more than a capitalist one. Most of the chinese elites don’t want to monetize debt because of worries about inflation but IMO the last 30 years in Japan/the West has shown you can print money and hand it to the government and the only inflation you get will be in rich peoples portfolios.
There probably has been inflation like old monetarists would claim but it appears to be in things like houses, yachts, private jets and the like.
It would be interesting putting a graph of sothbeys auction sales besides the balance sheet of the Fed and seeing any link.
Japan can’t generate inflation with QE because it keeps handing the money to banks/corporates. If they really want inflation, they should print money and hand it to citizens. Central bankers arent retards. They know its obvious that it matters who you give the money to. But for years theyve been handing it to elites pretending its great for everyone else.
You would have to have serious levels of autism if you didn’t think it was a bit weird that the power to print money was given to ‘independent’ civil serveants in most countries since the 90s and wonder whether it really is like that.
I have always speculated that the deep state probably has its own access to the printing press or that a few individuals, our Masters, have secret access to the press for their own uses and vices.
steve sailer undermined your secret wealth theory. He did a google earth search and found no secret mansions.
Lol, he personally scanned the whole world using google earth for this?
He scanned part of the world and found no evidence for huge hidden fortunes
You realise how ridiculous it is to believe if a guy could check an entire state, nevermind country for evidence of secret wealth.
I don’t know the details as I only skimmed the article. I’ll try to find it.
But if you really believe Bob Rubin or whoever has unlimited access to a printing press ask yourself why he lives in an ordinary house and flies by commercial planes. Perhaps he needs to hide his wealth from Forbes by giving it out to other people but then he’s technically not a billionaire if he can’t own big assets in his name, he’s just someone with a huge amount of power.
Of course we don’t have to imagine secret access to printing press when there are far more evidence based explanations for his power
You know I never said Bob Rubin was the one benefitting from the printing press. In fact I would suggest we know next to nothing about those people which is exactly why the system works so well for them.
but why assume there’s a secret class of billionaires that run the world? why not assume the world is run by the billionaires we know about.
it’s like if my lunch was eaten, i would blame it on my dog. i wouldn’t blame it on a secret dog i don’t even know exists.
The people that would have access to the printing press wouldn’t care about being billionaires or trillionaires. They would just take money when they need it. Why would you need to directly own anything if you had infinite wealth? At that point youre doing it just for show. It might even arouse more interest from some government tax officials.
They would probably never take the ‘money’ (its electronic) in their own name but probably through the tax haven offshore plumbing.
You have to get rid of this idea that they care about owning ‘a stock of’ something. It would just be like liquid, you wouldn’t need to safehouse or deposit anything into a bank etc.
it’s possible there are people helping themselves to the printing press but why believe a theory for which there is no evidence when there are so many other well documented ways for people to control money?
Because it defies common sense or basic social intuition to think that they give the power of printing money to a ‘independent’ bureacrat? You never wonder whether certain people might be tempted to bribe, threaten or blackmail the central banker to provide access? Its not far fetched at all. Judges are political at the highest level, why not central bankers? Remember – they never allow the Fed to be audited. Think about that for a moment.
lol. there’s not just one little old lady running the printing press as an independent bureaucrat. you would have to bribe a large number of people to gain access and people are going to notice if an unusual amount of paper and ink gets ordered one month. it’s pretty closely guarded because if limitless cash gets into circulation we get runaway inflation. not saying it’s impossible but has anyone been accused of doing this or are there examples of this happening in the past?
Puppy these days you wouldn’t even need to actually ‘print’ anything. It is done literally on a keyboard.
The conspirators would only need to influence senior management of the Central Bank.
I mean for all we know, they are the ones that choose the officials to tend to the central bank. i.e. the creation of an ‘independent’ central bank is part of the plan.
Yes that La casa de papel serie (like it !).
I have a cute young junior colleague (and friend) now working for the French Mnuchin . And he is bright but he was the slowest among our group of 4 . So I called him Denver at a cocktail party at a big company HQ were we were having fun. And he responded « do you want some more Champagne » Berlin. & Everyone laughed at me.
Swank is right that you would have to be autistic to also believe judges always follow the constitution always and uphold an abstract ideal, whatsoever you may define it. In reality judges take bribes or are influenced by media or powerful people to make certain decisions or basically make shit up due to some political bent.
I think its also true that central bankers are also probably leaned on by financiers or other powerful actors to divert funds to certain ends.
Ideally judges and central bankers would be autistic people.
Wouldn’t it make sense to invade/take over a country to just own its printing press?
Maybe this is what people mean by debt slavery.
They never fully audit the Fed btw. Just so you know.
Just reading that a famous economist named Alberto Alessina believed in Ricardian equivalence. This is something straight up from [redacted by pp, may 30, 2020] school of economic thought – that spending cuts would boost growth because people would think their tax burden is lower in the future. Wow. Thats autism squared.
Yes those people are insane. Literally no one makes decisions based on single digit cuts to tax rates.
People only think about taxes when they’re trying to exploit loopholes.
About hidden wealth, Philosopher is backed by Thomas Piketty hypothesis. Sailer tested it but only with golf property in California and Beach houses in the East cost (like Hamptons). He himself recognizes it’s not a rebuttal. It would be a rebuttal for the top 99.9% is mostly hidden (people earning more than 1M e year). But not for the 1% of those, it doesn’t do.
I have only two strong anecdotal evidence :
Anne Sinclair (ex wife of Strauss Kahn) is not in any Forbes list. I know she has more than 200 paintings with a value above a billion ! She has only sold the minor one knows who were recovered from governments because of Nazi « spoliation ».
Then I know an aristocratic family who have property in a street in Paris (Avenue de la Paix) wich is valued more than 500M. I know they have much more but don’t know what exactly. But for the 500M, it’s certain.
So I am totally agnostic about it. I think it would be possible to study the hypothesis in a place like Sweden were there is very big openness about people property and see if wealth is almost only professional or if a hidden private mostly historical part exists.
HBD people shouldn’t be against the idea that people pass more wealth at the same time they give their genes and that the individual merit doesn’t produce 55% of the very rich and that there are more of those than 2600 …
But as for the idea that there would be a secret assembly for the very occult rich controlling the world, that’s as possible as the « symbols rule the world » of vigilant citizen and the Illuminati, meaning on the low end of probability.
PS : But until the 80ies, Italian university professors, judges, politician, said there was no mafia and that it was a « journalist» legend. So the fact that people can coordinate and have big impact on the world is not impossible.
No Im not even saying inherited wealth. If you had access to your countrys printing press you wouldn’t need to store your ‘wealth’ in property, gold or even art like you say. You get infinite IOUs from people that believe in the sanctity of the fiat money.
forbes just lists all the billionaires they can authenticate much like biology books list all the species they can authenticate. and just as we discover new species, forbes discovers new billionaires, but it’s impossible to know what percentage of all extant species/billionaires have been discovered.
the other issue is net worth is not an exact science. one appraiser may tell you a property is worth $500 million while another might value it at only $50 million. Until an actual sale takes place it’s kind of subjective. And then many properties might have multiple owners so forbes must divide to get individual net worth and factor in debt.
Actually theres a historical element to my conspiracy theory and that is the presidency of Andrew Jackson and how he tried to stop a central bank being created. In his mind he equated it with giving control to a small elite of bankers. After the panic of 1907 there were some good reasons put forward to create a central bank in the US. Theres a book about it I’d like to read someday called ‘The Creature of Jeykll Island’ which basically asserts a similar but different theory to mine.
The history of central banking in the British empire is basically that the Rothschilds did a lot of functions of the central bank until the Bank of England gradually got more control. The Rothschild family around europe were basically a network of clearing banks running parallel to the Banque de France and Bank of England and so on.
In both the American and Brit cases the gold standard applied until the last 50 years or so meaning they couldn’t create insane amounts of money or inflation would happen on the streets. But I still don’t see no reason as to why money, even linked to gold, could not be minted/printed for individuals.
It’s possible. The weak point in this theory is that the ECB makes it much more difficult to do that because national central bank don’t create any money any more and everything goes either though ECB either government budget controled by UE rules.
It’s well know that french around the presidents used to print loads of money for their political parties and for themselves. In fact, each cabinet official in France were paid on top of civil service salary a certain amount in cash that went from 120K to 600k a year. And the secretary and ministers used to empty all the cash in their coffers when they left office.
It’s believed that Raymond Barre, when he had to
handover is Prime minister position, took the equivalent of 4,5 million euros. It’s known because he sent a young guy in a motorbike to get the money for him and didn’t give him anything to reward it. The anecdote is written in a book by Raphael Hadas Lebel who belongs to most elite French circles. And whose wife Mireille has written a very interesting book about the war between the Jews and the Roman.