It's nice that chess taught me I wasn't brilliant so long ago... so I can be happy for you :) there were some hard questions in there for sure, good job!
YOUR IQ compared to" World Chess Champion" Garry Kasparov ..
Sort:
I only got 1... fml. Who else here only got question 3 right? :D Well I did the whole test in a min but tbh I would have only got like 1 or 2 right even if I tried :(( My general knowledge is next to none - its S.H.*.T
Man....you guys are a scaring me!
Jun 13, 2011
0
#146
Global IQ 1950 thru 2050.....Trending downward ......???
http://www.fourmilab.ch/documents/IQ/1950-2050/
| Year | Population×109 | Mean IQ |
|---|---|---|
| 1950 | 2.55 | 91.64 |
| 1975 | 4.08 | 90.80 |
| 2000 | 6.07 | 89.20 |
| 2025 | 7.82 | 87.81 |
| 2050 | 9.06 | 86.32 |
ive g0t 4 but finished it less than 8 minutes...
I solved 9 in no time. I didn't figure the B,E,?,Q,Z
you can call me IQ151 now if you desire
This iq test is probably one of the easiest on the internet. I got a 160 on this. Here's the link: http://simple-iq.com/
[COMMENT DELETED]
Jun 13, 2011
0
#152
trysts wrote:
Question two is 30, 33, not 90, 93.
WRONG! Question two is 90, 93. The sequence is +3, double, +3, double. 6+3=9*2=18+3=21*2=42+3=45*2=90+3=93
Jun 13, 2011
0
#153
In my opinion, intelligence is not a 1-dimensional thing. [An analogy would be a 3-dimensional object which we try to describe by its width in a particular direction]. So any IQ test can only give some sort of combined statistic and can be very misleading with respect to more specialised types of intelligence (such as the ability to play chess well, for which you could have an analogy of IQ just by transforming a rating scale), and particularly abilities which involve much more complex combinations of abilities (such as doing groundbreaking scientific research, for example).
ANason21 wrote:
trysts wrote:
Question two is 30, 33, not 90, 93.
WRONG! Question two is 90, 93. The sequence is +3, double, +3, double. 6+3=9*2=18+3=21*2=42+3=45*2=90+3=93
The notations! Augh kill it with fire!!!
Jun 13, 2011
0
#156
Elroch wrote:
In my opinion, intelligence is not a 1-dimensional thing. [An analogy would be a 3-dimensional object which we try to describe by its width in a particular direction]. So any IQ test can only give some sort of combined statistic and can be very misleading with respect to more specialised types of intelligence (such as the ability to play chess well, for which you could have an analogy of IQ just by transforming a rating scale), and particularly abilities which involve much more complex combinations of abilities (such as doing groundbreaking scientific research, for example).
A more suitable analogy would be using the volume of the object to describe its dimensions. If you take all objects, man-made or not, there will be a pretty decent correlation between volume and width, length and height, respectively, and also between the different dimension parameters.
You seem to imply that humans have different cognitive abilities that would all fall under the general category intelligence, and that these abilities are independent of each other. This does not seem to be the case, as all these abilities (such as memory, verbal ability, spatial ability etc) are correlated on a statistical level. The basis for this correlation is the general intelligence, according to intelligence theory, and this is what IQ tests that only give a single IQ score intends to measure.
If we return to your objects, volume would correspond to this general intelligence and width, length and height would correspond to e.g. working memory, verbal ability and spatial ability. Sure, volume does not perfectly predict length, width or heigth, but objects of greater volume will in most cases be longer, wider and higher than objects of lesser volume. And all people with high IQ will not have a better spatial ability than people with low IQ, but in the majority of cases, they will have a better spatial ability.
Jun 13, 2011
0
#157
ANason21 wrote:
trysts wrote:
Question two is 30, 33, not 90, 93.
WRONG! Question two is 90, 93. The sequence is +3, double, +3, double. 6+3=9*2=18+3=21*2=42+3=45*2=90+3=93
Yes, I believe you are the third person to point that out in this thread. GOOD JOB!
trysts wrote:
ANason21 wrote:
trysts wrote:
Question two is 30, 33, not 90, 93.
WRONG! Question two is 90, 93. The sequence is +3, double, +3, double. 6+3=9*2=18+3=21*2=42+3=45*2=90+3=93
Yes, I believe you are the third person to point that out in this thread. GOOD JOB!
WRONG! 1+1+1+1=4!!! Look at me I can do rithmetic lolze!
Jun 13, 2011
0
#159
OH my goodness how many days are we going to fight about this one .....lol
136 for me and that beats Mr. waffle-hum-bug tooo !
Seems all the ladies on this site are showing me up