By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - What's your IQ? ... Aptitude test results?

 

My IQ is...

Below 80. 8 4.71%
 
80-90. 2 1.18%
 
90-100. 2 1.18%
 
100-110. 5 2.94%
 
110-120. 9 5.29%
 
120-130. 27 15.88%
 
130-140 24 14.12%
 
140-150. 9 5.29%
 
Above 150 21 12.35%
 
Have not taken a proper t... 63 37.06%
 
Total:170

 

my iq is 135, mensa member



Around the Network
ebw said:
Teeqoz said:

I actually knew the answer to that haha. And also, Mensa can eat shit, because true Klein bottles can only exist in 4D.

When's the last time you tried embedding a Möbius strip in two-dimensional (Euclidean) space?  True Möbius strips can only exist in 3D, or higher.

It is a terrible, terrible question relying on popular misconceptions, but it's not terrible for the reason you claim.  The Klein bottle has the same dimension as the Möbius strip: they're both two-dimensional surfaces, so the analogy is very poor.  One of them has a boundary (an exposed edge), while the other is closed.  One can be realized in R^3 while the other can only be immersed in R^3 and embedded in R^4.  That doesn't imbue the Klein bottle with higher dimensionality.

A better answer might have been the solid Klein bottle, which is a 3-dimensional manifold with boundary, just as the Möbius strip is a 2-dimensional manifold with boundary.  But that is a distinct object — it's as different from a Klein bottle as the Möbius strip is different from a circle (1-sphere).

The main issue isn't with the question though, flawed as it might be, the issue is if you know that information or not does that mean you have a more capable brain than someone who happens to have gone through life without encountering this object or information about it? This to me makes IQ tests less a true measure of persons capabilities mentally but more of a pub quiz level of knowledge, fantastic if you happen to know some of the things which happen to come up in your exam, but most certainly not something to be thought of having any indication of someones ability to learn or figure things out in the future or during their lives.

I don't mean to diss your knowledge of the Klein bottle though, I have been educated today! but like it was mentioned by Einstein, if you learn off the contents of a dictionary, does that mean you are more likely to be able to put those contents into use with a problem than someone who happens to have a dictionary with them but knows not what it contains, but how best to use the dictionary to find information that he needs to deal with what he encounters.



Why not check me out on youtube and help me on the way to 2k subs over at www.youtube.com/stormcloudlive

John2290 said:
So...How are the geniuses among us, those who scored above 140? You are in the top .05 percent of the global population. Good for you...now share who you are, I'm curious.

The last aptitude test I took, many years ago, I scored in the 99.98th percentile.  But I don't put a lot of emphasis on these tests. There is no univeral number rating for intelligence. 



lionpetercarmoo said:

I dont see a reason as to why Online tests shouldn't count, but this thread is pointless anyways.

1) Online tests are too easy to cheat on.  I don't mean deliberately cheat, because the poll is self-reported so you could just as easily lie about the results.  But more like, you aren't in a controlled environment with strict time restrictions, so it's very easy to make excuses for yourself ("oh I got distracted halfway through, I'll just retake it now"; "oh I used to know this, I'll just quickly Google this — would've remembered eventually").  Without the intention to cheat you could very easily delude yourself into thinking you deserve that higher score.  It's just not a fair comparison to a invigilated test where there's no compensation for screw-ups.

2) Online tests tend to have systemically inflated scores.  Think about it: standardized IQ tests are calibrated based on actual results applied across a large control population, and they derive value from perceived neutrality and reliability.  But where do online IQ tests get funding from?  In most cases, ads.  So a site that tells 30% of visitors that their IQ is genius level 140 and encourages them to share the results with their friends (or click here to see your full results) is going to be more successful than one that tells people the truth, and no organization is ever going to call them on it.

That's not to say there can't be some good online tests, but it was probably easier for the OP to just exclude them as a whole.



ArchangelMadzz said:
Ka-pi96 said:

That.... looks like what a graph of time/money spent on education per country would look like.

I always thought IQ was supposed to be how naturally intelligent someone was and not just a measure of how educated they are, but apparently not.

It's how good your brain acts and thinks recognized patterns and systems, but the brain like any muscle the more you use it the better it becomes.

So someone who's been educated for 20 years will naturally have a higher IQ than someone who hasn't because they're brain doesn't need a higher IQ because they've not had to use it fully during education.

It isn't a muscle though.

Also everyone uses their brain every day, without using it you would not be able to breath or.... anything, sure you can make certain areas of the brain become more skilled at certain tasks which you repeat over and over again not unlike a CPU caching certain code, but that doesn't require a high IQ to do, nor does having a higher IQ mean you will be proficient at things in a general sense.



Why not check me out on youtube and help me on the way to 2k subs over at www.youtube.com/stormcloudlive

Around the Network
TheLastStarFighter said:
John2290 said:
So...How are the geniuses among us, those who scored above 140? You are in the top .05 percent of the global population. Good for you...now share who you are, I'm curious.

The last aptitude test I took, many years ago, I scored in the 99.98th percentile.  But I don't put a lot of emphasis on these tests. There is no univeral number rating for intelligence. 

You don't put emphasis on a test you took many years ago, but remember your results to that degree, I'm impressed, I would have a hard time remembering my exact score on qualification exams I took within the past year, other than those I scored 100% in of course.



Why not check me out on youtube and help me on the way to 2k subs over at www.youtube.com/stormcloudlive

Ganoncrotch said:
ArchangelMadzz said:

It's how good your brain acts and thinks recognized patterns and systems, but the brain like any muscle the more you use it the better it becomes.

So someone who's been educated for 20 years will naturally have a higher IQ than someone who hasn't because they're brain doesn't need a higher IQ because they've not had to use it fully during education.

It isn't a muscle though.

Also everyone uses their brain every day, without using it you would not be able to breath or.... anything, sure you can make certain areas of the brain become more skilled at certain tasks which you repeat over and over again not unlike a CPU caching certain code, but that doesn't require a high IQ to do, nor does having a higher IQ mean you will be proficient at things in a general sense.

I meant, 'Like' a muscle. The more you use it the better it gets. 

Oh come on you know that when I said not using it I didn't mean not using it AT ALL I mean not using it in an educational setting, learning mathematics etc, I shouldn't have to explain that. 

...

It doesn't require a high IQ to learn, but when you learn you gain a higher IQ because your brain is used to learning new things. 



There's only 2 races: White and 'Political Agenda'
2 Genders: Male and 'Political Agenda'
2 Hairstyles for female characters: Long and 'Political Agenda'
2 Sexualities: Straight and 'Political Agenda'

Ganoncrotch said:
TheLastStarFighter said:

The last aptitude test I took, many years ago, I scored in the 99.98th percentile.  But I don't put a lot of emphasis on these tests. There is no univeral number rating for intelligence. 

You don't put emphasis on a test you took many years ago, but remember your results to that degree, I'm impressed, I would have a hard time remembering my exact score on qualification exams I took within the past year, other than those I scored 100% in of course.

I have an extremely good memory.  I also remember the result especially well, because the school made a big deal about it.  I had just finished second in a national math competition earlier that year.



I did an IQ test once, and it was when I was 12 and I scored around a 100 - 110 I can't remember the exact number. I don't know how I would score now though, so I just put see results.



PSn - greencactaur
Nintendo Switch FC - SW - 5152 - 6393 - 5140 Please feel free to add me :)

I wouldn't put too much emphasis on IQ tests since there is some cultural bias going on and there is also some serious bias that goes with how much education each individual has too ...