yes, if they were professionally administered they should all be accurate, and that would make you one heck of an anomaly!
There are other factors that can affect your test, like if you had an emotional trauma or were extremely sick that day or whatever. I'd go with my top two, if they were all 100% legit tests. The reason for that is that there are reasons why you may test out low (divorce and death and stuff), but there isnt any reason why on one particular test you would test out high on accident. If it were me, I'd say it's "around 140" and be done with it.
Besides, as someone who tests in the top one percentile, you know like I do that the higher you get on the scale, the less discernable difference there is in your ability to perform and relate. I find that people with an IQ of over maybe 125-130, there's rarely a whole lot of PRACTICAL difference. Functionally theres a pretty big diff between 100 and 120, but way less-so if youre comparing someone with a 140 to someone with a 160. Smart is smart.
Congrats on your score BTW, not too shabby my fren.
Disagree. The difference between 100 and 120 is exactly the same as the difference between 140 and 160. That's how the scale works. Stephen Hawking (~160) is much smarter than me (~145). One standard deviation smarter (significant)
yeah, when it comes to rocket science... but here's what I mean. Mine is high. I can't even mention what it is. I have lots of friends of all mental capacity. When my friends are under around 125, it shows. I can't get them to follow what I mean through certain conversations or concepts. But everyone I've ever met over about 125, in a regular conversation, they can all follow and add to ideas and conversations. They are competent and even excel at work. They can debate me and teach me things. So unless we are working on building a turbo-engine together, I'd rarely ever notice that our intellects don't exactly match. Sure there's a difference, but that difference in real life is hardly ever going to be highlighted.
I mean, can you tell what mine is? No. Because its sort of in many ways (not all ways obviously) all the same once you get up into the higher numbers. To me, anyway.
Stephen Hawking wasn't (my bad, I forgot he died) a rocket scientist. He was a theoretical physicist
What do you mean, you can't even mention what your IQ is? I've never heard of an unmentionable IQ
How many people have you met who have been administered an IQ test and told you their scores? In my entire life, I've known one person, who was a member of Mensa. The vast majority of people will never be administered an IQ test. They cost about $1,000. Anything outside of a professionally-administered test isn't a real test. An online test told me my IQ was 162, but that's meaningless. Again, throughout my lifetime, on real tests, I've consistently scored around 145
The Mensa member I mentioned had an IQ of about 130 (I don't remember the exact score) and there was a noticeable difference between us in real life that was always there
Of course I can't tell what your IQ is based on a handful of posts to a message board having nothing to do with spatial reasoning.
I'd be more inclined to agree with you around 160+ (perhaps because that's all I, as a relative Luddite, can appreciate). IQ scores are less reliable past that point anyway because there's so few people to compare to
Ultimately, ours are subjective opinions, so we can agree to disagree and perhaps agree a bit too
yes, if they were professionally administered they should all be accurate, and that would make you one heck of an anomaly!
There are other factors that can affect your test, like if you had an emotional trauma or were extremely sick that day or whatever. I'd go with my top two, if they were all 100% legit tests. The reason for that is that there are reasons why you may test out low (divorce and death and stuff), but there isnt any reason why on one particular test you would test out high on accident. If it were me, I'd say it's "around 140" and be done with it.
Besides, as someone who tests in the top one percentile, you know like I do that the higher you get on the scale, the less discernable difference there is in your ability to perform and relate. I find that people with an IQ of over maybe 125-130, there's rarely a whole lot of PRACTICAL difference. Functionally theres a pretty big diff between 100 and 120, but way less-so if youre comparing someone with a 140 to someone with a 160. Smart is smart.
Congrats on your score BTW, not too shabby my fren.
Disagree. The difference between 100 and 120 is exactly the same as the difference between 140 and 160. That's how the scale works. Stephen Hawking (~160) is much smarter than me (~145). One standard deviation smarter (significant)
yeah, when it comes to rocket science... but here's what I mean. Mine is high. I can't even mention what it is. I have lots of friends of all mental capacity. When my friends are under around 125, it shows. I can't get them to follow what I mean through certain conversations or concepts. But everyone I've ever met over about 125, in a regular conversation, they can all follow and add to ideas and conversations. They are competent and even excel at work. They can debate me and teach me things. So unless we are working on building a turbo-engine together, I'd rarely ever notice that our intellects don't exactly match. Sure there's a difference, but that difference in real life is hardly ever going to be highlighted.
I mean, can you tell what mine is? No. Because its sort of in many ways (not all ways obviously) all the same once you get up into the higher numbers. To me, anyway.
If that clarifies.
Stephen Hawking wasn't (my bad, I forgot he died) a rocket scientist. He was a theoretical physicist
What do you mean, you can't even mention what your IQ is? I've never heard of an unmentionable IQ
How many people have you met who have been administered an IQ test and told you their scores? In my entire life, I've known one person, who was a member of Mensa. The vast majority of people will never be administered an IQ test. They cost about $1,000. Anything outside of a professionally-administered test isn't a real test. An online test told me my IQ was 162, but that's meaningless. Again, throughout my lifetime, on real tests, I've consistently scored around 145
The Mensa member I mentioned had an IQ of about 130 (I don't remember the exact score) and there was a noticeable difference between us in real life that was always there
Of course I can't tell what your IQ is based on a handful of posts to a message board having nothing to do with spatial reasoning. I'd be more inclined to agree with you around 160+ (perhaps because that's all I, as a relative Luddite, can appreciate). IQ scores are less reliable past that point anyway because there's so few people to compare to
Ultimately, ours are subjective opinions, so we can agree to disagree and perhaps agree a bit too