NationStates Jolt Archive

>>?<< Awww, shoot, I forgot 120-130...oh well...

Since everyone is going to lie anyway, I'll start the trend. I have an eighty billion IQ. That's right. 80,000,000,000 IQ.

175

It varies, depending on how it was tested ands my state of mind at the time.
This is why I'm a bit dubious of IQ tests.

I've taken a few tests on the Internet, but they all gave wildly different results, so all I can say is "above 100".

Since everyone is going to lie anyway, I'll start the trend. I have an eighty billion IQ. That's right. 80,000,000,000 IQ.
My IQ's also my lucky number, 17! :D:D:D:D

Wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

Since everyone is going to lie anyway, I'll start the trend. I have an eighty billion IQ. That's right. 80,000,000,000 IQ.

Hah! I have ∞ IQ!

Really, I think mine is around 121, maybe a little less. I got a 1350 on my SAT (old score) and fives on my AP history tests...does that help at all?

Higher than my shoe size but less than my weight.

You should have provided us a link to an online test so that we could have some fun with it.

I guess I could stop being lazy and find one myself ay?

Since everyone is going to lie anyway, I'll start the trend. I have an eighty billion IQ. That's right. 80,000,000,000 IQ.
shit. you beat me by three.

I've never been mesured, and I have no wish to be.

Since everyone is going to lie anyway, I'll start the trend. I have an eighty billion IQ. That's right. 80,000,000,000 IQ.
shit. you beat me by three. What'd you get for number 341? I said QQ, but I wasn't sure if it was that or BB.

My IQ's also my lucky number, 17! :D:D:D:D

Wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
well that certainly explains your need for four ":D" smilies.

>>?<<

Maybe it's just me... I've never even been tempted to do an 'IQ' test.... I see the whole premise as flawed, since it seems that yuo could take the same test twice, and theoretically score slightly better the second time, just because of familiarity with the structure...

Also... you see people quoting IQ scores that they scored years ago, or you see a newly scored value... but they don't say how old they are... or even which particular IQ test they took. And, of course, the results mean nothing without that information.

In fact, I'm not sure the scores mean anything, WITH that information...

I haven't had an official IQ test in 17 years. The last one I had (age six, a month after being hit by a car) it was 73, I think. I've always wanted to retest, but I've always been a pussy about finding out I'm less than mediocre.

You should have provided us a link to an online test so that we could have some fun with it.

I guess I could stop being lazy and find one myself ay?

Online tests are unrealiable. On line, I've tested anywhere between 110-200. On an actuall, scientifically valid test, proctored by a qualified individual, I scored 175.

Apparently the avarage is ABOVE avarage...

Online IQ tests don't really mean much. A test that seems pretty good, however, is this one:

http://www.highiqsociety.org/iq_tests/

The results aren't very accurate, though. I got scores from 126-142.

http://www.iqtest.com/

Seriously Steven Hawkins peh he compared to me is like the frog that sits on the tarmac in the middle of the day.

I haven't had an official IQ test in 17 years. The last one I had (age six, a month after being hit by a car) it was 73, I think. I've always wanted to retest, but I've always been a pussy about finding out I'm less than mediocre.
Ah, you're lucky to be mediocre. I'm very sub-sub-mediocre.

Online IQ tests don't really mean much. A test that seems pretty good, however, is this one:

http://www.highiqsociety.org/iq_tests/

The results aren't very accurate, though. I got scores from 126-142.
You reckon it should be lower? This sort of modesty is commendable, but won't do you any favours beyond that.

I took an IQ test about 3 yrs ago and got 126...

I took an IQ test about 3 yrs ago and got 126...

126 dots?

Online tests are unrealiable. On line, I've tested anywhere between 110-200. On an actuall, scientifically valid test, proctored by a qualified individual, I scored 175.


I know they arent...which is why I said "so we can have some fun."
As in not to be taken seriously

>>?<< Awww, shoot, I forgot 120-130...oh well...

128

You reckon it should be lower?

I just retook it and got 151, which is way too high. I think the results are inflated to make you feel good about yourself instead of displaying an accurate result. On average, professors and researchers have an IQ of 134. If you have anything way above that, you probably took a faulty test, or cheated. :)

Lowest score I've ever gotten was 156, and I was wondering what went wrong...

112, but I only did it in some book, nothing official.

That being said, I get very good marks at uni without having a great IQ, and without actually doing much work. So I don't think it counts for much.

130-something

on tests over the years its varied between 112 and 138, usually ending a few of points either side of 130... meh, good enough for me

Higher than my shoe size but less than my weight.

Mine is much higher than my weight. :)

I don't have an exact number. Just somewhere between 125-140. I'm in the 99th percentile of Canadian students, I think.

Online IQ tests don't really mean much. A test that seems pretty good, however, is this one:

http://www.highiqsociety.org/iq_tests/

The results aren't very accurate, though. I got scores from 126-142.
That ones shit.

IQ tests don't test your knowledge, they test your potential to gain knowledge; your intelligence in relation to your age group.

Any IQ test that asks questions about history and such, or don't ask your age, aren't doing it right,

IQ tests don't test your knowledge, they test your potential to gain knowledge; your intelligence in relation to your age group.

How are you supposed to know how much knowledge you have the potential of gaining if you don't know how much knowledge you have to start out with? How are you supposed to measure knowledge that someone does not have, but might gain? And if that's true, then would somebody who (theoretically) knows everything have an IQ of 0?

Any IQ test that asks questions about history and such, or don't ask your age, aren't doing it right.

I agree. Your ability to memorize various facts has nothing to do with intelligence. They might as well ask for the 235th digit of pi. What I meant to say was that the test (while not accurate, as I previously said) was well-made. It seemed pretty professional.

How are you supposed to know how much knowledge you have the potential of gaining if you don't know how much knowledge you have to start out with? How are you supposed to measure knowledge that someone does not have, but might gain? And if that's true, then would somebody who (theoretically) knows everything have an IQ of 0?

Most look at verbal reasoning, spatial ability, logic and that sort of thing.



I agree. Your ability to memorize various facts has nothing to do with intelligence. They might as well ask for the 235th digit of pi. What I meant to say was that the test (while not accurate, as I previously said) was well-made. It seemed pretty professional.
Ok...

According to tests I've done, 130.

I never took an IQ test. I think I have a really high IQ though.

"If you don't know make a guess"? Really now?

I think I have a really high IQ though.
Everyone does...

"If you don't know make a guess"? Really now?

Nothing against the OP, but it sounds like most people here are full of shit, just trying to inflate their own egos.

An IQ is simply a test of POTENTIAL. It neither increases nor decreases with time. Ergo, you can score the same on an IQ test when you're 3 as when you are 18. It does not measure how much you know, but merely how much you CAN know before your brain explodes.

Nothing against the OP, but it sounds like most people here are full of shit, just trying to inflate their own egos.

Either that, or NSers are all f.ing brilliant.

shit. you beat me by three. What'd you get for number 341? I said QQ, but I wasn't sure if it was that or BB.

No idea. I just answered "Chuck Norris" for each question.

I've never been mesured, and I have no wish to be.

Are you sure? I think I'd like measuring you. ;)

Everyone does...
It would seem so. The average being 130-140. However, that may be because the OP forgot to post 120-130.

It neither increases nor decreases with time.

Nope. It is your potential in relation to your age group.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IQ

Everyone does...

Well, you must admit, a game like NationStates isn't going to tend to attract those of...subpar intelligence. It would follow that a majority of people here would be above average, and that we would have more than our normal share of extremely intelligent folk. But obviously not the Mensa gathering we seem to have in this thread, for sure.

>>?<< Awww, shoot, I forgot 120-130...oh well...

(1) i don't believe in IQ tests, i find their methodology suspect, their attempts to measure some things that are unmeasurable suspect, their construction undeniably focused upon the western, and ever so slightly the anglo-saxon, world and their boiling down the concept of intelligence to what in essence are parlour tricks, tests of spatial awareness and shape recognition and simple memory tests ludicrous.
(2) I've taken numerous tests, the first when i was 7, when an eductional psychologist tested both myself and my 11 year old brother and declared us both fit to be members of Mensa. My test results in the years since have veered from 160, which i believe is allegedly up there with Einstein, and a fraction above 100, which i believe is on a level with pot plants and the inhabitants of Alabama. At no time during this period did i feel particularly more or less insightful. Therefore, as well as from a distanced, objective stance, i think from my own personal experience that it's all a load of - as the spaniards would say - cojones.

I'm not entirely sure what my IQ score is. I did take an IQ test at one point (apparently scoring somewhere in the 150-160 range - I've never asked for the exact number), but that dates back at least ten years (to kindergarten, no less). Of course, I tend to look more at my seventh grade SAT score (1360) and my four state science competition championships when I try to evaluate my intelligence.

An IQ is simply a test of POTENTIAL. It neither increases nor decreases with time. Ergo, you can score the same on an IQ test when you're 3 as when you are 18. It does not measure how much you know, but merely how much you CAN know before your brain explodes.

Although, if someone takes an IQ test when they're, say, 6 years old, when their brain isn't neccessarily fully developed, it could be different when they take a test at 23. If my ability to learn hadn't changed from a month after I got hit by a car, I'd be technically cognitively handicapped... although I have a mother similar to Sally Feild's role in Forrest Gump...

Well, you must admit, a game like NationStates isn't going to tend to attract those of...subpar intelligence.
Well, I stick with the 112 I got once. I think that sounds about right, because I refuse to believe that I'm any more intelligent than the people around me (although my interest may be a little more ... evolved than theirs).

IQ. i prefer pool Q , short Q , fuck Q, mr Q (older brother of mr T )
any more hilarous Q puns would be appreciated

Well, I stick with the 112 I got once. I think that sounds about right, because I refuse to believe that I'm any more intelligent than the people around me (although my interest may be a little more ... evolved than theirs).

But 112 is above average. By 12 or so points, if we're to believe what "they" say.

At any rate, all the IQ test really measures is a person's ability to take the IQ test.

(1) i don't believe in IQ tests, i find their methodology suspect, their attempts to measure some things that are unmeasurable suspect, their construction undeniably focused upon the western, and ever so slightly the anglo-saxon, world and their boiling down the concept of intelligence to what in essence are parlour tricks, tests of spatial awareness and shape recognition and simple memory tests ludicrous.
(2) I've taken numerous tests, the first when i was 7, when an eductional psychologist tested both myself and my 11 year old brother and declared us both fit to be members of Mensa. My test results in the years since have veered from 160, which i believe is allegedly up there with Einstein, and a fraction above 100, which i believe is on a level with pot plants and the inhabitants of Alabama. At no time during this period did i feel particularly more or less insightful. Therefore, as well as from a distanced, objective stance, i think from my own personal experience that it's all a load of - as the spaniards would say - cojones.
Your I.Q. must be pretty low...or the avarage person is as smart as a pot plant!

The only IQ tests i've ever taken were on-line ones, just for fun, i know they weren't accurate. I got ranges of 99 to 130 something. I've never taken an actual IQ test, but i would estimate my IQ to be about average, or slightly above. I've never doubted my intelligence though, no matter what score i got on any test.

(1) i don't believe in IQ tests, i find their methodology suspect, their attempts to measure some things that are unmeasurable suspect, their construction undeniably focused upon the western, and ever so slightly the anglo-saxon, world and their boiling down the concept of intelligence to what in essence are parlour tricks, tests of spatial awareness and shape recognition and simple memory tests ludicrous.
(2) I've taken numerous tests, the first when i was 7, when an eductional psychologist tested both myself and my 11 year old brother and declared us both fit to be members of Mensa. My test results in the years since have veered from 160, which i believe is allegedly up there with Einstein, and a fraction above 100, which i believe is on a level with pot plants and the inhabitants of Alabama. At no time during this period did i feel particularly more or less insightful. Therefore, as well as from a distanced, objective stance, i think from my own personal experience that it's all a load of - as the spaniards would say - cojones.

Sounds to me like you're insecure with yourself, either consciously or sub-consciously, and making excuses to legitimize your own self-centred view of the world. 100 isn't bad. Potted plants would score something like 10; citizens of Alabama would score 5.

Sounds to me like you're insecure with yourself, either consciously or sub-consciously, and making excuses to legitimize your own self-centred view of the world. 100 isn't bad. Potted plants would score something like 10; citizens of Alabama would score 5.
So conceivably, only Bush could score a negative score?

550 gibitrillion.

So conceivably, only Bush could score a negative score?

Well, what about Bush supporters?

My I kew iz arond 56

127 last legitimate one I took in high school.

Another one I took was 148 but I pretty much considered that a bunch of hoopla. I had two brilliant teachers and they were around 145 so to be smarter than them is unbelievable. Not to mention to jump like that in a year didn't make sense so I just stick with my first score.

i was hung over when i did mine. 119

Well, what about Bush supporters?
They're not necessarily as dumb as their pawn.

Sounds to me like you're insecure with yourself, either consciously or sub-consciously, and making excuses to legitimize your own self-centred view of the world. 100 isn't bad. Potted plants would score something like 10; citizens of Alabama would score 5.

Thanks for that, from one paragraph about my objections to IQ tests on a purely methodological basis, which are shared by many experts in all that crazy brain type stuff, and from one paragraph which - unbidden - admitted my low score on one test (and then dealt with it in a jokey fashion), you now have complete access to my inner psyche. I'm quite impressed with that.

PS:- have you ever heard of the term "ad hominem"?

Your I.Q. must be pretty low...or the avarage person is as smart as a pot plant!

I've held some fascinating conversations with pot plants actually. Mind you, they didn't say much and i was usually wasted, but they kinda wafted about a little and inhaled carbon dioxide which says to me they were enjoying it.

I forget my official number, but I know that it is "above average". Somewhere in the vicinity of 140, me thinks. :)

I did one of those tests on the internet and it said 125, another said 157

both are too low:D :)

by the way did anyone notice that there's not an option for 120-130 on the poll?

I refuse to answer the question. What a person's IQ realy indicates about their mental capacity is negligable and the whole darn system should be thrown out

"Hah! I have ∞ IQ!"

Well, i have 2^∞ IQ!!!!:D

I refuse to answer the question. What a person's IQ realy indicates about their mental capacity is negligable and the whole darn system should be thrown out

i've just been told holding that opinion makes you insecure.

I've rated consistently between 139 and 141.

As part of my mooching of the state exercise I had to get a educational psychologist's report (it cost £245! :eek: but paid for, luckily, by my university). It was a series of tests looking at different reasoning abilities. It identified that my working memory was significantly below that of my processing speed, perceptual organisation and verbal comprenhension. Couple that with a few background details and apparently it means I'm dyslexic and eligible for the Disabled Students Allowance. :D

My highest stuff was infomation comprehension and block design (reproduce a pattern using blocks with 3 images on them - one side all white, another all red and a third split by a diagonal and half red & half white) Got >99 percentile rank for age group in those. :D

My lowest score was letter-number sequencing where the psychologist read out a series of letters and numbers of increasing length and you had to reorder that sequence into the numbers as they were said, and then the letters as they were said (for the hardest ones you had to repeat them in reverse order). An example of what she'd read out was V-4-3-S-D-9 -> 4-3-9-V-S-D. I got in the 50th percentile rank for that.

(there's nothing like someone telling you that you're clever after you've just dropped out of your degree the year before c.c)

Got 124 in one of them and 110 in the other, so thats 117 avg. ;)

i've just been told holding that opinion makes you insecure.

Thank you for dictating meaning to my message.

"Hah! I have ? IQ!"

Well, i have 2^? IQ!!!!:D

you know, 2^? = ?

<.<

Thank you for dictating meaning to my message.

Quite alright. Thank you for alleging to know an iota about my personality from a message i post on an internet forum.

Since we're bragging, 2310 new sat, 1580 old sat.


And a 118 IQ.


Guess what I think the IQ tests are worth?

(1) i don't believe in IQ tests, i find their methodology suspect, their attempts to measure some things that are unmeasurable suspect...
<snip>As far as I know you're right about about them having an anglo-saxon bias. Though I think what they do test is perhaps quite valid. They seem to test how much you can store in your short term memory, how fast you can process infomation, and how well you can comprehend and decipher infomation. These three qualities all seem to be condusive towards analytical thought.

As for point (2) I think IQ tests are easily effected by many factors, such as your mood, your diet, your level of sleep, your level of hydration and others. So they can vary wildly.

Since we're bragging, 2310 new sat, 1580 old sat.


And a 118 IQ.


Guess what I think the IQ tests are worth?I dunno, but mine are worth £1000 to me. Free stuff! Weee!

As far as I know you're right about about them having an anglo-saxon bias. Though I think what they do test is perhaps quite valid. They seem to test how much you can store in your short term memory, how fast you can process infomation, and how well you can comprehend and decipher infomation. These three qualities all seem to be condusive towards analytical thought.

As for point (2) I think IQ tests are easily effected by many factors, such as your mood, your diet, your level of sleep, your level of hydration and others. So they can vary wildly.

Mmm, ok, now, thats a more rational response than the one i got earlier. However, i have a huge problem with testing what is such a varied and complex mess of different things. If intelligence is merely mimetics, deciphering and processing, then computers are intelligent. I think intelligence has a little more to it than that, meself.

Mmm, ok, now, thats a more rational response than the one i got earlier. However, i have a huge problem with testing what is such a varied and complex mess of different things. If intelligence is merely mimetics, deciphering and processing, then computers are intelligent. I think intelligence has a little more to it than that, meself.Do you have an idea about what you consider intelligence to be, is it even possible to measure?

One part of the test I did recently involved looking at a picture and identifying what is 'wrong' with the picture. eg. a tree had no shadow, in a winter picture everything was covered in snow except for a pile of logs. The test measured how quickly you identified what was out of place. I think this test is definately trying to measure some complex form of reasoning. It requires you to understand what is going on in the picture, identify the norms and find the item that does not conform to the norms of the picture.

Of the individual subtests I think each part measures a very distinct quality which is not much use on its own. Perhaps what IQ tests lack is how well and individual combines these qualities.

I'm going to take the modesty route and say that I just don't give a shit, because really, I don't.

Do you have an idea about what you consider intelligence to be, is it even possible to measure?

One part of the test I did recently involved looking at a picture and identifying what is 'wrong' with the picture. eg. a tree had no shadow, in a winter picture everything was covered in snow except for a pile of logs. The test measured how quickly you identified what was out of place. I think this test is definately trying to measure some complex form of reasoning. It requires you to understand what is going on in the picture, identify the norms and find the item that does not conform to the norms of the picture.

Of the individual subtests I think each part measures a very distinct quality which is not much use on its own. Perhaps what IQ tests lack is how well and individual combines these qualities.

I'm no expert on the theory of the mind, granted, and as i say, i've scored sufficiently high on scores for it not to be the sound of a disappointed loser or sour grapes or the like. But, yanno, when i say something is complex and indefinable and unquantifiable, then...pretty much thats what i mean. Perhaps we should divide the thing up into "cognitive skills" such as the above test discussed by yourself (which, yes, i can see the possibility of being measured and appreciate) and a broader more inclusive "intelligence" which encompasses all the vague and inchoate things which i'm too sleep deprived to actually formulate into a reasoned response ;)

I have my doubts about the accuracy of an IQ test in exhibiting true intellect. For what it's worth, I scored a 530 math &730 verbal on the SAT about the time I turned 13, about a year ago. I don't think of this as a true indicator either, since trying to quantify intellect at the present time is impossible. Furthermore, I don't really think a high IQ is worth much. Someone who is not as smart but is nicer/more creative/whatever is to me better then a genius with a heart of stone. It's not about the skills you have, it's how you use them.:)

I'm no expert on the theory of the mind, granted, and as i say, i've scored sufficiently high on scores for it not to be the sound of a disappointed loser or sour grapes or the like. But, yanno, when i say something is complex and indefinable and unquantifiable, then...pretty much thats what i mean. Perhaps we should divide the thing up into "cognitive skills" such as the above test discussed by yourself (which, yes, i can see the possibility of being measured and appreciate) and a broader more inclusive "intelligence" which encompasses all the vague and inchoate things which i'm too sleep deprived to actually formulate into a reasoned response ;)Alright, but that sounds sorta like religious mumbo-jumbo. That there are somethings that can't be defined. Which there probably are, but I don't like to admit that.

Funny how nearly everyone thinks they're above average.

I'll start off by saying that I've never taken an official IQ test. However, I've taken multiple online. The only one that asked me for my age gave me a 183; the most difficult one I took gave me a 148, IIRC. So, I voted 150+.

Also, for some proof, I scored a 1580 on the old SAT last year (9th grade), 42nd in the nation on a middle school math competition (MathCounts) in 8th grade, and a 136 on the AMC12B math competition last Wednesday, for those of you who know what that is.

Funny how nearly everyone thinks they're above average.

I'll start off by saying that I've never taken an official IQ test. However, I've taken multiple online. The only one that asked me for my age gave me a 183; the most difficult one I took gave me a 148, IIRC. So, I voted 150+.
And not just above average, but extremely high. I am surprised by how many voted 140 to 150+.

Yeah, that was actually what impressed me more: that the vast majority of people think they have an IQ of 130-140, when it really should average out to not much more than 100, if any more. Of course, it's possible that smarter people just tend to congregate to NationStates, or even more specifically to polls like these, but I kind of doubt it. :P

"Someone who is not as smart but is nicer/more creative/whatever is to me better then a genius with a heart of stone."

Let me be the first to agree with that. :) Smart but arrogant/stuck-up people really annoy me. I hope I never come across that way.

And not just above average, but extremely high. I am surprised by how many voted 140 to 150+.

Be honest though, whilst there will probably be an element of self-aggrandisement, the very nature of the site that this forum is dedicated to isn't going to invite huge amounts of knuckle-dragging jocks who can barely tie their own laces...

Be honest though, whilst there will probably be an element of self-aggrandisement, the very nature of the site that this forum is dedicated to isn't going to invite huge amounts of knuckle-dragging jocks who can barely tie their own laces...
Indeed it isn't. Yet the average being 130-140 and a large number being above 150+? I am a bit doubtful as to how valid that is.

Yeah, that was actually what impressed me more: that the vast majority of people think they have an IQ of 130-140, when it really should average out to not much more than 100, if any more. Of course, it's possible that smarter people just tend to congregate to NationStates, or even more specifically to polls like these, but I kind of doubt it. :P
Indeed it is.

"Someone who is not as smart but is nicer/more creative/whatever is to me better then a genius with a heart of stone."
Anyone can be arrogant. :)

Let me be the first to agree with that. :) Smart but arrogant/stuck-up people really annoy me. I hope I never come across that way.
Most of my friends are that way :x I tend to be less of an egotist.

Higher than my shoe size but less than my weight.
pounds or kilograms?

Indeed it isn't. Yet the average being 130-140 and a large number being above 150+? I am a bit doubtful as to how valid that is.Or that it exposes your own naivety about human nature. God forbid that anyone would like about their IQ. Either that or they did one of those online IQ tests that gives you a hugely over-rated score and then asks you for $10 to see the full report.

Or that it exposes your own naivety about human nature. God forbid that anyone would like about their IQ. Either that or they did one of those online IQ tests that gives you a hugely over-rated score and then asks you for $10 to see the full report.
Exactly why I am questioning it. I have had an official IQ test, yet even so I believe that results can vary depending on your state of mind, so it's never 100% accurate.

Hah! I have ∞ IQ!

Really, I think mine is around 121, maybe a little less. I got a 1350 on my SAT (old score) and fives on my AP history tests...does that help at all?

If you HAD said IQ, you'd realize that your IQ is NOT ultimate. My IQ, the ultimate, is ∞ to the ∞.:D

Wow. You all realize that 90-110 is average, right?

I've taken the test.


The real one, not some online scheme.

I'm also in MENSA. I joined the adult group at the tender age of 12.


My I.Q. is estimated at around 152

Exactly why I am questioning it. I have had an official IQ test, yet even so I believe that results can vary depending on your state of mind, so it's never 100% accurate.I know, I said that in the other thread. But at least official IQ tests don't try to exagerate your IQ... or maybe I'm being naive now as well.

...I must admit, I have MANY personality disorders.

I know, I said that in the other thread. But at least official IQ tests don't try to exagerate your IQ... or maybe I'm being naive now as well.
Well I don't think they do so to the same degree. Remember, they can also underestimate your IQ. In any case, I would prefer knowing that I had around 130 then being misled into believing I have 150+. Ultimately, it makes little difference since I know my own intellect.

Well I don't think they do so to the same degree. Remember, they can also underestimate your IQ. In any case, I would prefer knowing that I had around 130 then being misled into believing I have 150+. Ultimately, it makes little difference since I know my own intellect.

I concur.

Though I took the standardized test; I then joined Mensa.


I really don't need a number to tell me how intelligent I am. I have a good idea myself.

I concur.

Though I took the standardized test; I then joined Mensa.

I really don't need a number to tell me how intelligent I am. I have a good idea myself.
Precisely. :)

According to my Mensa admissions test, my IQ is 135.

According to my Mensa admissions test, my IQ is 135.


The test is highly inaccurate.

According to that, I have an I.Q. of 167.


No way.


I really have a 152.

140. But as we say in Dungeons and Dragons, High intelligence, low wisdom.

Dunno, never taken a legitimate test.

But as we say in Dungeons and Dragons, High intelligence, low wisdom.

Hahahahaha, yeah....that's me too. :D

140. But as we say in Dungeons and Dragons, High intelligence, low wisdom.

That's why I play GURPS...

That's why I play GURPS...
P'shaw...Arcana Evolved pwns you all. :)

Hah! I have ∞ IQ!

Really, I think mine is around 121, maybe a little less. I got a 1350 on my SAT (old score) and fives on my AP history tests...does that help at all?

where im from a 5 is an F, 1 is an A, not sure if thats the same there, anyways

I've only done internet tests. My score ranged from 125-140.

I've never been mesured, and I have no wish to be.
I'm sure you're off the scale anyway, bigger-than-life that you are :-p

According to various online tests, my IQ ranges from 136 to 142.

I'll just use the average of 139. Not too shabby, if I do say so myself.

I took a test 6 months ago; 124.

I think the last time I took an IQ test I got 116. I don't really know if that means anything though, because there seems to be a huge range of values people score in when they retake it... My actual performance is above average, so I'm not so sure it was accurate.

Though I took the standardized test; I then joined Mensa.

I really don't need a number to tell me how intelligent I am. I have a good idea myself.

I took the standardized test, and then threw out all the material Mensa sent me trying to get me to join. *grin*

I don't need a number to tell me I'm intelligent, but I don't need a group of other people to support me in my intelligence either. I'm fine just being a normal person, thanks.

It's not how intelligent you are, it's what you do with it that counts.

I've been tested ("real" test, not just internet test); I have an IQ of 133. Which is just barely in the genius level. However, (I can approach this from high ground because of my high IQ) I don't think that IQ is the best way to evaluate intelligence since merely measures one "type" of intelligence (which just so happens to be the one that I am best at it). Intelligence is only relevant insofar as it is functional; since most people do not "do things" that require abstract thought (which is the main thing that IQ measures) it does not accurately measure their capabilities.

It's none of your business! *shifts eyes suspiciously left to right*

where im from a 5 is an F, 1 is an A, not sure if thats the same there, anyways
AP scores are graded on a scale from 1 to 5, 1 being no recommendation, 5 being full recommendation. For college credit, ofc.