I suspect the IQ of this board has changed as of lately. I f

100% of results will be 150+ and less than 100

>>8737631
Maybe, but the incentive to lie in an online poll is questionable. Especially when said person would get more out of seeing the true IQ's than messing up the results.

>>8737638
Incentive to tell the truth:
Contribute to a servery that you already know will have more false results than true ones

Incentive to lie:
mild amusement for several seconds

The only logical choice is to lie

>>8737651
The reason it'll have fake results is because you started it. I've seen more realistic polls on /sci/ before.
If a simple poll for the sake of curiosity can't be done anymore I've truly lost faith in /sci/.

>>8737630
125. Shit was nuts by question 22.

>>8738122
22 was one of the easiest, assuming we all had the same question 22, was just a logical AND resulting in a white dot on the right most column by quadrant

>>8738167
And the very last one?

135

File: results.jpg (69KB, 1022x523px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 1022x523px

>>8738174
The rules I followed on the last one was that on each turn, everything moved down. If on the result of that turn was that there was a single solid dot row directly beneath the double solid dot row, then the single dot below would be moved two spaces (2 precedents for this). The single solid dot ABOVE the double solid dot would just move down un-impeded. The whole system wraps vertically

These things are hard to explain

pic related
>tfw to intelligent too use their high iq board

>>8738198
>>8738198
That's not the very last one. Three rows of three boxes, all empty but first row, second column a V shape, second row first column a plus shape, and the question was about what to put in the last row last column.

File: problem.jpg (35KB, 809x398px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 809x398px

>>8738242
I took pic related to be the answer. I couldn't find any compelling reason for it to be an arrow shape or plus shape, choosing any of those 4 to be the answer would ruin any sort of symmetry.

Logically the only way to keep symmetry (the only definitive rule) even if the symmetry is the entire system with itself, is to choose the only shape not currently represented

In essence, all of these puzzles are just exercises in building rule-sets and testing them to see if they hold and searching for evidence to contradict yourself

>>8738264
Also 2^1 lines -> 2^2 lines -> 2^3 lines? Maybe

>>8738272
that's I what I thought

>>8738272
>>8738275
I don't understand your reasoning

>>8738277

Oh nevermind, you took the row 2 column 1 shape to be 4 separate lines, I interpreted it at 2 lines.

I see. Can you prove that that assumption has any more weight to it than the symmetry one? Especially considering the position of the missing element

>>8738264
I don't usually find symmetry to be a definitive rule as much as patterns are in these sets. For example, the first row of that question is not symmetrical on a y or x axis, and the second column only has symmetry on the x axis.
this >>8738272 is probably the reasoning I should've gone with, but I guessed something else

>>8738278
No. Besides, they seem to be complementary lines of reasoning to the same solution - sort of a "multiple methods" thing. Considering both shapes that actually occurred are options, neither outweighs the other; considering both shapes that occur have a rotation as options, neither outweighs the other; and likewise in regards to themselves. To have a blank circle breaks basically the only emergent pattern.

And all of these lines of reasoning leading to the same solution, so that helps.

>>8738264
I think it was top right. The X isn't rep'd either. I think the horizontal line progresses upwards while it changes orientatiin, tho my choice doesn't find exactly what i imagine the shape to be

>>8738285
>Considering
I probably should have separated that into a different paragraph, that had little to do with the previous sentence. Sorry, I'm exhausted.

>>8738288
Ii mean vertical line changes orientation

>>8738291
Oh shit, top right also points at plus sign on diagram. Thats the one

File: iq.png (137KB, 1139x678px) Image search: [Google]

137KB, 1139x678px

>>8737630
>last time (2015) i took iq test i had 110 iq
>now i apparently have 125

alright im starting to think iq is sometimes bullshit

File: 2017-03-10 23.57.50.jpg (238KB, 1029x889px) Image search: [Google]

238KB, 1029x889px

Oh come the fuck on, IQ test.

LET ME JOIN THE CLUB ;_;

File: G9hVwgp.jpg (85KB, 671x367px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 671x367px

>>8738301

>>8738297

If you've never taken a test administered by an expert, then you've never taken an iq test. Online "tests" don't count.

>>8738306
Hmph.

>>8738264
I put a blank circle for the answer, because trying to make a pattern out of it is fucking retarded

File: IMG_0524.jpg (83KB, 640x539px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 640x539px

I'LL JUST GO KILL MYSELF QUICKLY, BRB

File: 1475684031554.jpg (47KB, 750x380px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 750x380px

122

File: wojack.png (129KB, 724x611px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 724x611px

Reminder that if you didn't take the IB, you're a brainlet.

In terms of relative knowledge and permeable wisdom my IQ is probably around 180 to 240

Using it normally 40 to 80

Got 122 the first time, just took it again and got 130. I still don't understand question 21.

>>8737630

>believing in online IQ tests which were probably just made up in like hour or two, and have no statistical significance

how bout these ones guys?
http://similarminds.com/int2.html
http://similarminds.com/int-number.html

>>8738437
bull fucking shit

You that would put you between #7 and #2 for the highest iq's ever recorded

>>8737630
24 minutes for a useless IQ test?
I'd rather spend one minute making this shitpost and then spend the other 23 studying more number theory.

This just proves that everyone in this thread who did the test is actually a brainlet, regardless of the score. True geniuses would see this for the waste of time it is and go study more number theory, the only true intelligence tester.

>>8738676
If there is someone with an IQ >200, and IQ is a gauB distribution, doesn't that mean that there also is someone with an IQ < 0?

Lulz, I scored 97 randomly clicking...
Last time I did normal test it was 139

>>8738749
Woah brah..

>>8738749
You know, if you honestly think this then I think you could be right. There is someone with a 0 IQ. It just may not be who just thought it would be.

I scored 130 and I literally have a hole in my brain

Step it up, people

>>8737630
i am in the top 14% of smart people!!!

File: iq.png (74KB, 800x542px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 800x542px

>>8737630
I tried to answer every question wrong. I am not sure if I didn't accidently got one answer right near the end since I didn't want to spend a lot of time to figure out the correct solution.

I got 90. Seems pretty bullshit.

>>8737630
122, pretty avg for this board apparently. It all comes down to how many patterns you're already familiar with though: motion, "add/subtract" shapes, counting etc.

>everyone not skewing the results by choosing less than 100

You had 1 job!

File: Untitled.jpg (94KB, 909x653px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 909x653px

>>8738778
I got 80 by choosing all the wrong answers. I shouldn't have even gotten 60

>BENJAMIN NETANYAHU
>IQ 180

>STEPHEN HAWKING
>IQ 160

>GEORGE W. BUSH
>IQ 125

>RONALD REAGAN
>IQ 105

Interesting website...

>>8738778
Maybe your IQ isn't high enough to be able to figure out which answer is wrong.

>>8738748

It takes 5 minutes tops

>>8738748
What's so special about number theory, compared to the rest of maths, that tests your intelligence so much?

File: 1482023687039.png (335KB, 600x547px) Image search: [Google]

335KB, 600x547px

>>8738936
>BENJAMIN NETANYAHU
>IQ 180

>>8738936
>BENJAMIN NETANYAHU
oy vey

>>8738949
The website said 24 minutes m8.

>>8738954
That everyone knows number theory is the hardest mathematics because to do it properly you need to know everything. You need analysis, algebra and topology to do number theory. But if you do any of those you only need the one you are specializing in.

How good you are at number theory summarizes how much you know about math in general, and everyone knows math = intelligence.

>>8738990
>You need analysis, algebra and topology to do number theory.
So what? You also need maths to do physics, that doesn't mean physics is better than maths. When you make use of tangential fields, it's usually in an applied manner.

Test says 130
So should select 120-130 or 130-140 in the poll?

>>8739006
120-130, someone within the 130-140 range wouldn't have to ask.

>>8738955
>>8738978
Yes, apparently even Hitler sat down to do their IQ test: https://www.iq-test.net/iq-test-famous-people.html

Personally, I'd be interested in a Trotsky vs Stalin IQ-off.

>>8738936

lol, the page is goy.

File: spezisacuck.png (84KB, 729x544px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 729x544px

132? I'm bordering on brainlet tier now.... s-shit

My IQ is 250.

File: 5 FUCKING POINTS.png (75KB, 993x502px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 993x502px

>>8737630
>tfw not quite smart enough to be in the cool guys club

>>8737630
You missspelled "you're IQ" there, OP.

Your welcome.

>>8738778
>>8738930
Their formula probably puts way too much weight on the amount of time you take.

110 master race reporting in.

File: wat.png (39KB, 1177x623px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 1177x623px

How did you guys solve this one?

>>8737630
Definitely a crappy iq test. Literally skipped the last 8 because i was lazy, still got 125..

File: way to intelgent.png (83KB, 997x514px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 997x514px

>all these brainlets

>>8739137
I doubt it does at all desu

>>8737630
130 first time j..j just made it

File: file.png (99KB, 987x560px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 987x560px

>>8739757
I got the same, and 135 is normie tier desu.

>>8739137
I don't think it puts any weight on time. The first time I took it, I scored 122 with less than a minute left. The second time, I rushed through as mayn as I could and focused on the last 6 questions to see if I would change my answer with more time. I changed my answers on 3-4 of those to what I believed was the correct answer. 10 minutes to spare, and I got 130 with (I believe) more correct answers than before.

>>8739603
i would pick the upper right one but im presumably a brainlet so who knows

>>8739792
>14 + 34 + 34 + 14 = 95
It seems who designed it is a brainlet.

>135
Already knew I'm a brainlet

>>8737630
Hi OP,
Please increase the ceiling on the strawpoll. I don't want to be lumped in with the IQ-160 subhumans.
>t. 246 from sub-Saharan Africa

>>8738919
this desu

i found a pattern in all of them and scored a 130

>>8738919
>It all comes down to how many patterns you're already familiar with though

You can show all the patterns to 80 IQ person and he will still not be able to substantionaly increase his score.

>>8739603
Top right. Putting all the pieces together (except the square) forms the square.

>>8740028
How could I not notice that? REEEEEEEEEEEEE I'm a brainlet.

>>8737663
>for the sake of IQ faggotry

>>8738936
>shakira
>140

into the trash it goes

>>8738749

Probability curves don't have to be symmetrical. This is covered in any statistic so class.

>>8737630
Got 120 in this and 135 in the Wechsler I did a few days ago. I don't know if I believe these scores.

>>8740097
She is a genius though. Just because she isn't in academia doesn't mean she's dumb (if anything, deciding to use her smarts to do something actually profitable is a sign of her intelligence).

I've been at supervised IQ tests. My is over 130 but in the end it's just a number. Yeah it'll help you in academic life but in the end we'll gonna die so......

File: iq.png (20KB, 600x158px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 600x158px

130 will be the new 100

>>8740028
you have to have IQ < 130 to be on this board, mods!

File: aaaaa.jpg (55KB, 1200x538px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 1200x538px

Can anyone explain question 22 to me?
I'm assuming it opposite colors destroy eachother leaving nothing , same colors change the color to the opposite of their color and a dot (of any color) and nothing gives nothing , Is my reasoning correct if not explain please.

>>8740318
Add the first column to the second column, wherever you are adding quadrants that both had a green dot, replace them with a white dot. Any other combination results in a blank quadrant

Answer is middle right of choices

>>8737630
122 at 19.

Am i a nigger yet?

>>8738264
Agreed and that alone doesn't prove IQ

>>8740342
Not both had a green dot, I meant quadrants that both had similar colored dots, you replace with a dot of the opposite color in the third column

>>8740318
blank

>>8740318
I think yeah

>>8740318
green + green = white
White + white = green
white + green = blank
white/green + blank = blank

>poll neglects to include the100-110 range, where most college "educated" individuals would fall.

I'm 109. Electrical engineer. Worked pretty hard to get my degree, but never felt like the material was extremely difficult, just that there was a lot of it. A lot on here will claim 120+, but the simplificity and elegance of the bell curve disproves this. See above average effect.

>>8738272
that's why we scored >130 senpai

I scored 120 on the quiz in OP, but I've taken an IQ test at a physical establishment for testing IQ and scored 94.

File: 99 percentile.png (47KB, 1135x574px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 1135x574px

>>8738670
i guess im a genius now

>>8740395
I guess I'm below average then YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY
:)))))))))))))))))))))))
BYE

>>8740395
How long ago was it though?

>>8737630
Intentionally submitted the wrong answer because OP is a catposting faggot.

File: Screenshot from 2017-03-11 21-06-27.png (132KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 1920x1080px

This test is bullshit, I'm a fucking brainlet. Hell, I can barely handle my Calc 2 class I'm taking.

>>8740407
A little over a year ago, it was a much more extensive test(took a few hours) and the end conclusion was I was quite above average in abstract thinking ability but I had below average short term memory that negatively affected my overall score. The testers said I was smart but I probably have some sort of learning disability like adhd.

>>8740441
Stop masturbating, doing drugs, and going on 4chan. Afterwards, hit the books. You'll be a millionaire in half a year!

[spoiler]It's waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay harder than that[/spoiler]

>>8740445
>Stop doing drugs

Are you fucking mad?!? Drugs are a great way to get an edge in life, just look at Steve Jobs or Franics Crick; drugs (LSD) were responsible for their success.
If >>8740441 won't take acid/hallucinogens, he should at least be taking adderall

>>8740318
>>8740342
>>8740347

Here's my solution: The first column has 4 blue dots and 4 white dots, the second column has 3 blue dots and 3 white dots, and by extension, the third column should have 2 blue dots and 2 white dots, resulting in the bottom-right answer being the correct one following this logic.

Do you have a compelling reason why your answer is more correct than mine? Both seem just as arbitrary to me.

File: 1488827283078s.jpg (8KB, 250x164px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 250x164px

>>8737630
this is a very poor test op, im thinking about making a thread with a higher ranged iq test with good reliability later on

>>8740633
this way we can get more accurate results

>>8740633
OP here
I took the test. It's confirmed shit. I got a score of 120 when every other test I've taken has put me at 140.

>>8740642
same, im the second op and this test gave me 105 when its actually 160 from facebook

garbage test

>>8740892
>>8740362
>>8740219
>>8739102
>>8738383
Your IQ's are good and all, but your name indicates autistic

>>8740542
Bumping for inputs on this.

>>8740911
>not taking things seriously is autistic
The opposite would be true and obviously I'm not going to use my real name so might as well make it something funny

>>8740989
the overlapping colors generate the opposite color. two different colors cancel each other out.i chose the empty square

>127
brb. killing myself

File: 6vScT.jpg (137KB, 717x880px) Image search: [Google]

137KB, 717x880px

>>8739102
>[some reddit admin] is a cuck
You know where you should go.

>>8737630
>120-130 biggest group
So we're seeing actual results. This is quite surprising.

>>8741816
The 150+ group is most likely fake though, since the highest IQ posted in this thread is less than 140, and there are only six people with scores higher than 150 on the list of their registered members, while there are a gorillion 130+s: https://www.iq-test.net/iq-test-high-members.html

>>8738670
>67% percentile
Fuck you anon, for making me realize my mediocrity.

File: IQ.png (88KB, 1041x499px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 1041x499px

why have so many people here gotten exactly 130? hard to believe that it is just due to chance

>>8740542
I took the blank square also but your logic is fine too

>both seem just as arbitrary
yes, that's the issue with these "find the next symbol in the sequence" problems

>>8737630
>take effort to do an arbitrary online test to get an """""""""accurate"""""""" result for a test that is itself a poor indicator of intelligence
>or open strawpoll and see 150+ IQ is an option and choose that

hmm i wonder how this will end

>>8738440
educate me on question 21,24 ,25

File: file.png (34KB, 832x429px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 832x429px

>>8741985
>21
Probably what this >>8740028 anon says
>24
No idea
>25 (pic related)
You have the inner square and the outer square. The inner square rotates 45°, 90° and 135°, so clearly 45° more every time. The outer square rotates 90°, 180° and 270°, so 90° more every time. Therefore the inner square will rotate 180° and the outer one will rotate 360° the next time, meaning the answer is the fifth, that is the one marked on my pic.

>>8740369
>engineer
>brainlet
>rationalizations
Not surprised really.

File: square.png (3KB, 213x223px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 213x223px

>>8740028
>>8740054
>Putting all the pieces together (except the square) forms the square.
that does not like like any square I've ever seen

>>8742089
Because we are looking for the missing piece that completes the square, which is the top right piece.

everyone scores in the 120s for this, if you scored 130 or above youre real IQ is probably slightly above average.

Someone with an actual IQ of 130 would score 150 on this, and breeze through it.


t. we used to do these for fun in gifted class, and the 175 IQ guy would just blitz through these online tests in like half the time and score perfectly. Meanwhile the 130+ brainlets would get 150.

File: file.png (185KB, 1280x800px) Image search: [Google]

185KB, 1280x800px

>>8737630
I-I was just tired, I usually get 200+

File: file.png (153KB, 1280x800px) Image search: [Google]

153KB, 1280x800px

Come on guys, it's not that hard.

>>8742089
get a load of this brainlet

holy lel

File: 24.jpg (36KB, 806x436px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 806x436px

>>8741985
>24

I took this one to be a symmetry puzzle. Considering its missing 3 blocks in the last row, then I assumed that the whole thing was symmetric about the middle and chose the answer that fulfilled that. The symmetry was the number of colored squares in the column

How are you supposed to score more than 150 on this. I'm certain I got only 2 questions wrong yet it gives me 130

>>8737630
This test is horseshit, I want a proper MENSA, because there's no way I'm 130 plus

Someone give me a quick rundown on #13, the ones in the 20s are easier imo

File: Screenshot_20170312-190829.png (102KB, 720x1280px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 720x1280px

>>8742356
Pic related, seriously, I can't do science anymore and I'm dropping it next year, I don't have the IQ to handle logic or patterns anymore. Don't waste your time.

Can you even get above 135 on this? I see alleged 160s on the front page of the site, but even if I intentionally answer the last 6 or so wrong I only get 127. So a 20/26 is worth 127 but a 26/26 is a 162?

File: trump2020.jpg (73KB, 761x563px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 761x563px

some questions are really ambiguous, dont trust on psychologists to measure your intelligence

File: pleb.png (106KB, 1047x614px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 1047x614px

>>8742128
Get on my level

File: 1473102152695.jpg (28KB, 327x316px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 327x316px

>>8742475
LUL YOUR SO FUNNY BRO KEEP IT UP MA NIGGA

>>8742362
I got 120 on this one and 128 on Mensa (the online norwegian one), so I guess if you did it you'd score higher).

>>8742616
I have my doubts, my friend. I think you'd probably go higher than me in a real MENSA IQ test. I don't feel I'm in the >98% of people bracket, or even near it.

File: file.png (23KB, 811x438px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 811x438px

>>8742358
The number of those circular thingies decreases, first it's 5, then 4, then 3, and finally two. The trick with two is that since they have to form a shape with an area and not just random lines, and they are connected at the ends, you end up with something that looks like an ellipse. The leg thingy rotates around 90 degrees with each turn, so the right answer is the one I marked (at least in my opinion). I think it doesn't rotate exactly 90° because the shape also changes, affecting the angle.

>>8740318
Blue + Blue = White
Whie + White = Blue
Otherwise = Nothing

>>8742099
anecdotal evidence stfu

>>8737630
127
smarter than I expected

>>8741844
Someone with a veritably high IQ would have already had it tested and would be too intelligent to waste time on some fake click bait quiz

>>8744675
There is a guy with 190 IQ who develops his own crackpot theory about the universe called the cognitive-theoretic model of the universe. 190 is by no means god level IQ, so if his bullshit had any merit to it, someone serious would already have picked up on it, but that hasn't happened. High IQ clearly doesn't prevent you from being very fucking stupid.

>>8738749
At that point you're just braindead

>>8739603
the piece that completes the square with the other 2

File: 1475881333359.jpg (68KB, 410x410px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 410x410px

I may get a decent score on this but i still manage to embarrass myself in public and remain a total outcast who has no friends

>>8744900

you can do it I believe in you

>>8740542
You might be smart, but you're also color blind

>>8740078
Actually why is IQ such a big deal to people. Isn't i t basically the processing power of our brains? Isn't there a few more equally or almost equally important parts of our intelligence.

i got 127 on it and on the other mensa test one i got 131 online iq tests seem a bit cucky. like i said i spent like four years homeless stealing food from grocery stores, living in a sleeping bag, going into cafes drinking coffee smoking cigarettes and shitposting on 4chan.

this is not a lie i did this from the time i was 18-24 then just randomly moved back home. things still arent great. just seems weird that an online test would say i have superior intellect if not genius intellect but ive lived my life like a retard. oh well.

I don't have the attention span for these things. 97.

>>8744686
>implying stupid people come up with a cognitive-theoretic model of the universe

Implying fine or coarse smart is grown and exists

Did anyone else see the first question, think that the test was a meme and start spamming random answers?

I did.

File: Screenshot_2017-03-15-08-21-04.png (272KB, 1080x1920px) Image search: [Google]

272KB, 1080x1920px

Bullshit, i cant even do linear algebra and calculus properly

>>8749860
That is because 130 is still brainlet level. You are maybe a talented brainlet.

True intelligence can be found at >160 IQs

>>8749868
t. 115 brainlet

>>8744686
>190 is by no means god level IQ
I don't think you know what a 190 IQ means.

>tfw only 127
>average tier

REEEEEEEEEEEEEE

How do I stop being a brainlet?

>>8750174
There are multiple people who have similar IQs, and none of them have thought up concepts so complex that the average mortal could never grasp them. But if you know so fucking much about IQ, please explain to me what exactly 190 IQ means.

112.
Fuck your poll.
Does anyone else feel that IQ tests are nonsensical? Yes they're meaningful if you can see a pattern, but this sense of meaning attenuates faster than the the answers become difficult to tell.

Isn't it a problem for a lot of people that IQ tests are so completely abstract and removed from the real world? I don't think 112 is off the mark, but I don't think this is a good test of my intelligence as a whole.

Are there people who have IQ disparities in different contexts, eg. verbal, spatial?

>>8750242
Having a high IQ is not just about understanding concepts (human intelligence does not vary to the point where people on the lower end of the spectrum are literally incapable of understanding the concepts created by people on the high end), is but doing so really fast and creating.
Anyone with an IQ so high can concatenate information fast enough to seem superhuman to most people (even high IQ people), not only being able to quickly understand very complex and abstract stuff, but to create new, equally complex stuff.

>>8750256
>Are there people who have IQ disparities in different contexts, eg. verbal, spatial?
It's less common, as the g-factor correlates all intelligences, but it's definitely possible. It's not rare to STEMfags to have good quantiative/spatial skills paired with subpar verbal skills and humanitiesfags to have good social/verbal skills paired with subpar quantitative/spatial skills.
I myself have above average quantitative and verbal reasoning and mediocre spatial reasoning.

I chose random answers for the last 5 because I got bored and got 127. I think this test is inflated.

File: brainlet.png (17KB, 658x260px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 658x260px

>>8750293
In my original post I said that not even people who have 190 IQ points can think up ideas so complex that they are incomprehensible to all the rest of the population, thus people can't say that the cognitive theoretic model of the universe, thought up by a 190 IQ genius, is actually right, just incomprehensible to us. I never implied that I think that the only thing IQ affects is thought complexity, but not the speed of thinking, and "god-level" is not a clearly defined term, so arguing about whether 190 IQ is "god-level" is useless.

>>8737630
Reminder that after an IQ of 120 the rate of Nobel prizes is a fairly even distribution.

I got 130. Was pretty confident on all my answers apart from 3 of them, which I narrowed down to a couple of options and then guessed.

I used all the time. I suspect it is time dependant, which is why people rushing though putting wrong answers are getting inflated scores.

I scored 130, usually score about 120-125.
The test is inflated.

>>8750436
I bet the odds of winning a Nobel Prize as a physicist are a lot better than the odds of playing the lottery.

How many physicists are there?

>>8737638
>the incentive to lie in an online poll is questionable
being this disconnected from reality

>>8737638
>said person would get more out of seeing the true IQ's than messing up the results.
Not really, considering the fact IQ is a meme
t. less than 100

>>8737630
I didn't take your test, I just put down the bracket of the lowest IQ score I've ever gotten (which is the most credible by my reasoning since many online tests seem hilariously inflated). I hope that's ok.

File: iq.jpg (76KB, 861x583px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 861x583px

Should I answer 120-130 or 130-140 ? :^(

>>8742389
Logarithmic

>>8752363
The incentive is only there if there is a clear "funny" choice, like selecting Temple OS in a "what operating system do you use" poll. If all the choices are mundane, then there is no trolling potential in selecting something randomly, unless you can vote multiple times, which you can't. Sadly, there was clearly a troll choice this time, that's why you see so many 150+ IQs.

File: Image.png (644KB, 1279x719px) Image search: [Google]

644KB, 1279x719px

>>8738198
>>8738261
>>8738744
>>8738778
>>8738930
>>8739102
>>8739109
>>8739757
>>8739792
>>8740362
>>8740429
>>8740892
>>8741867
>>8742128
>>8742362
>>8742396
>>8749860
>>8752476
>If your IQ scores is >130
>High IQ members board
>130
>High IQ
Why would the website blatantly lie about this?

>tested twice 150 as a kid with specialists
>pretend those tests are still relevant today even though I'm probably in the 120s, because I was shamed as a kid that my high IQ didn't translate into me being some kind of supergenius, which made me very self-counscious about my own intelligence
lalala, can't hear you

>>8752677
Linux sucks lmao