# What's your IQ?



## kevin.carroll (Jan 24, 2006)

*What\'s your IQ?*

Find out here: http://web.tickle.com/invite?test=3001&type=.

I scored 129...Is that good???

[Edited on 1-24-2006 by kevin.carroll]


----------



## RamistThomist (Jan 24, 2006)

130


j/k


----------



## kevin.carroll (Jan 24, 2006)




----------



## Augusta (Jan 24, 2006)

I took this a while back and got a 121.


----------



## BobVigneault (Jan 24, 2006)

I don't want to brag but mine are in dubble dijits. Beet that!

Actually my IQ is just high enough to stop me from giving out that much personal info to a strange website just for bragging rights. Don't do it.

[Edited on 1-24-2006 by BobVigneault]


----------



## Anton Bruckner (Jan 24, 2006)

didn't have the patience to finish.


----------



## BrianLanier (Jan 24, 2006)

140


----------



## kevin.carroll (Jan 24, 2006)

> _Originally posted by BobVigneault_
> I don't want to brag but mine are in dubble dijits. Beet that!
> 
> Actually my IQ is just high enough to stop me from giving out that much personal info to a strange website just for bragging rights. Don't do it.
> ...



Didn't you take the heretic test?


----------



## turmeric (Jan 24, 2006)

127


----------



## SRoper (Jan 24, 2006)

142.

No time limit and a small sample of questions limit the accuracy of the test.


----------



## Puritan Sailor (Jan 24, 2006)

136, visionary philosopher...


----------



## RamistThomist (Jan 24, 2006)

> _Originally posted by puritansailor_
> 136, visionary philosopher...



New score for me...137


----------



## Craig (Jan 24, 2006)

124 "Precision Processor"


----------



## Ivan (Jan 25, 2006)

I took this same test some time back...I was in the 140's.

Yeah, but I LOOK dumb!


----------



## Richard King (Jan 25, 2006)

It is more than ...this many.
(picture me showing all ten fingers)


----------



## biblelighthouse (Jan 25, 2006)

142, visionary philosopher


I wonder what the standard deviation is on this IQ test? I know the Wechsler is 15 and the Stanford-Binet is 16. I wonder if this test is in that ballpark?


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Jan 25, 2006)

> Congratulations, Randy!
> Your IQ score is 133
> 
> This number is based on a scientific formula that compares how many questions you answered correctly on the Classic IQ Test relative to others.
> ...



This test must be scewed. We can't all be above average. Although I must admit two of my son's are around 130 also. Their school has tested them. The other is about 105


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Jan 25, 2006)

> _Originally posted by BobVigneault_
> I don't want to brag but mine are in dubble dijits. Beet that!
> 
> Actually my IQ is just high enough to stop me from giving out that much personal info to a strange website just for bragging rights. Don't do it.



I didn't give them totally acurate info. I must admit I am a little smarter than that. I lied.


----------



## Swampguy (Jan 25, 2006)




----------



## biblelighthouse (Jan 25, 2006)

> _Originally posted by puritancovenanter_
> 
> This test must be scewed. We can't all be above average.



What are you talking about? We are all Calvinists on here. That alone suggests our average IQ should be about 20-30 points above the national norm.

:bigsmile:


----------



## Ivan (Jan 26, 2006)

> _Originally posted by biblelighthouse_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by puritancovenanter_
> ...



Easily...


----------



## VictorBravo (Jan 26, 2006)

I took it last night three different times with three different IDs. 

First, I didn't look at the questions at all but just clicked on what looked like right answers. I got a score of 120.

Several questions I could strongly argue for different answers, so I varied those answers. The scores ranged from 140-160. 

Of course, this isn't a valid IQ test for me because I experimented by trial and error. If I kept at it, I could probably break 200. 

It does remind me of when I was a kid and was given an IQ test in which I deliberately sought out a wrong but justifiable answer every time I could. I wanted to argue with the test giver, but she wasn't playing. 

Instead, I was placed in a form of special ed for a week. It was fun. I played with clay and made baskets. Then they kicked me out of that and sent me back to class.

Vic


----------



## Augusta (Jan 26, 2006)

> Instead, I was placed in a form of special ed for a week. It was fun. I played with clay and made baskets. Then they kicked me out of that and sent me back to class.


----------



## biblelighthouse (Jan 26, 2006)

> _Originally posted by victorbravo_
> 
> Several questions I could strongly argue for different answers, so I varied those answers. The scores ranged from 140-160.



Really? I did not see one question on that test that looked ambiguous to me. Do you remember any in particular?



> _Originally posted by victorbravo_
> 
> 
> Instead, I was placed in a form of special ed for a week. It was fun. I played with clay and made baskets. Then they kicked me out of that and sent me back to class.
> ...


----------



## VictorBravo (Jan 26, 2006)

> _Originally posted by biblelighthouse_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by victorbravo_
> ...



One had to do with shapes with a dot inside. You were to choose the one that didn't fit. All but one were polygons, so you could choose the circle.

Or, you could say that the circle is really a multi-sided equallateral polygon (pixels and all) and reject the rectangle, which was not equilateral.

I think there was a question about 5 animals. You could reject the kangaroo as a marsupial, or you could reject the horse because it wasn't a ruminant. 

(Edit, sorry, the above was not right). I think the question allowed you to reject either a kangaroo or a mule. You could reject the kangaroo as a marsupial or the mule as a hybrid.)

Then there was that weird shape one with the arrows or the overlapping figures. It took a lot of abstracting to make any sort of argument for a choice in that one.

Vic



[Edited on 1-26-2006 by victorbravo]


----------

