Time for another IQ test methinks

143 :D


"Only 2.27% of all test takers have scored in your range or higher. Your IQ is approaching genius level."


Woohoo
 
134

(hehee, Eddy, I'm way wiser than you are! :D )


Hmm, how many sides does an octagon have?
And why do they have to ask a question about the nickel & dime syndrome every time? :mad:
 
Originally posted by Slash Freeman
apparently, i have already taken the test, but i haven't.

the last iq test i took i got 151 though. which beats you all hands down!!!!! :p

:)


edited 'cos i can't spell

Bah. To prove your superiority, take this test (on another computer), and come back. ;) :p



Umy: Intelligence and wisdom are two different things... :p
 
Originally posted by Eddy

Umy: Intelligence and wisdom are two different things... :p


133 and 134 point at merely the same intelligence level, it's wisdom there that makes the 1 point difference!
However, as I mentioned, you're way below my wisdom so I do not expect you to get my point ;) :D


Malveaux, that test is valid enough a cause to waste time... at least as valid as this board is.
 
Originally posted by Malveaux
Silly test. No one with a decent IQ would waste time and effort in taking it.

well, i don't know about anyone else, but i'm quite insulted by that. i do have a decent IQ and i still took the test, because i was interested in how it would compare with othger iq tests i've taken.

btw, i don't know i have decent iq from taking tests, but from everyday life. the test i took that told me i had an iq of 151 surprised me, and i don't think it's that accurate, but i reckon my iq would be over 140.


edited becuase i can't spell (still).
 
if you ask me, IQ tests aren't really an accurate measure of intelligence. I think that someones intelligence is not just their problem solving ablities and knowledge and understanding. i think intelligence should be considered more a measure of the things a brain can do. for example someone might be a great musician but really useless at sciences/languages, but that doesn't mean they're not intelligent because their brain knows how to produce all these fantastic sounds. likewise a footballer could be amazing on the football pitch but might not be able to pick out the odd shape out from a circle, a square and a rectangle. again, it doesn't mean their not intelligent because their brain can coordinate body parts to be able to do fantastic things with a ball.

This is just my opinion, though. :)
 
There are probably a dozen IQ tests and each one is different. If you look at the Mensa guidelines, they list minimum IQs by test. On one test you need like a 160 and on another you need a 125 (or something like that, it's been a while since I looked it up) because of the relative difficulty of the 2 tests. So it isn't accurate to compare the results of one particular test to another test. Comparing results from the same test will provide semi-accurate relative intelligence though, so comparing your results from this particular test isn't a waste of time, IMO. I'll have to take it when I have some time and see how I do.

Later.