What's the average 4channer's IQ/SAT/ACT score?

>>9125607
>What's the average 4channer's IQ/SAT/ACT score?
higher than yours

>>9125607
1450 (old SAT pre-1994, new ones after 1994 are shit and barely g-loaded) and composite IQ score of 132 from WAIS-IV

SAT was 1900
Didn't take ACT because east coast
IQ is 200
million

File: I kept it because I'm insecure.jpg (424KB, 1210x908px) Image search: [Google]

424KB, 1210x908px

>>9125607
2210 on the SAT; I think all scores were within 10 points of each other - all above 700.

Yes I really am posting my WISC results. Please acknowledge me senpai.

I should probably also point out that my supposed intellect has done nothing to make me happy or successful.

>>9125607
dont know IQ.

1450 on SAT, perfect in math though (1600 system ofc).
32 ACT
77% Quantitative 79% Verbal 98% Writing GRE

>>9125607
I'm not going to lie on the internet for once:
IQ 128 (I had to get tested because I almost got sent to an autism school when I was a child)
SAT: 1280 (old math and reading only)

wppsi 138
old sat 1440 (720 verbal/720 math)
new gre 166 verbal / 164 math
both standardized test scores actually line up pretty close with my measured IQ according to the literature

>>9125607
IQ was 126, after my doctor thought I had autism; don't have a SAT or ACT score because Canada.

IQ 138
SAT 1500
ACT 36

File: lucky.jpg (60KB, 1024x576px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 1024x576px

>>9125607
1560 SAT, 36 ACT. No big deal.
Still only got into a few good schools because muh diversity and muh legacy

>>9125764
I feel you, brother. Got a 34 on my ACT. 4.5 something GPA in high school, 10th in my class. Got the same scholarships and oppurtunities as my friend who failed 3 classes and girls I knew who didn't know shit in calc and had to be carried along by another friend and I.

File: sats.png (10KB, 747x167px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 747x167px

Don't know IQ because I never bothered to take a test for it, also it's a pointless metric for anything more than comparing general populations.

>>9125607

1460/1600 on old SAT. Perfectly-even 730/730 split between math and english sections. A deceased female friend scored a perfect 800 on the english section but got middling math performance (500+ IIRC).

31/36 ACT overall. Four-section breakdown was something like: math 31, english 1-bit 31, english 2-bit 31, science-graph-bit 28.

I took each of the two tests exactly once. I didn't study very hard for either (just reviewing material for a few days before each), and having general physical, situational preparedness. IIRC in the SAT's case a re-take had the possibility to bring my average down so since I was already in the 98th-ish percentile on both (though I could have potentially improved the ACT without hazard), I was content to leave them both alone. Some 35/36 ACT classmate kid went to Yale IIRC.

I've never had my IQ professionally evaluated (I thought they weren't supposed to tell you?) but I've done a few quizzes and based on evidence and self-eval I'm 120-ish, probably a bit dumber than that. I do struggle with certain abstract concepts at first but can eventually pick them up with facility.

I fucked up college, took time off and went back and finished a math degree with a sub-3.0 GPA. I regret nothing especially since I carried no debt and I studied a subject that I still like.

File: cal.png (52KB, 251x200px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 251x200px

>>9125768
Somehow I wasn't even in the top 1% of my class even though I had a 4.7 and had literally never gotten a B, not in a quarter. And that's with almost totally AP and High Honors 5.0 classes.
My brainlet friend somehow had a higher GPA than I did, but he got shat on by the college process so I felt bad for him.
Currently at the world's best school so it doesn't matter. Cry me a fucking river, ivytards.

>>9125780
I got fucked real early in my GPA because I took band my first 3 years. Not AP or even Enriched course. Then I had to take two years of a language starting my junior year. Went from tied to 2nd at the end of sophomore year to 10th without even slacking off.

>>9125607
My ACT was like a 17 and SATS? I can't even remember those because I just bubbled in c for everything, lol. Probably should have taken them serious since I had to take placement exams for everything anyways. Hasn't affected my ability to pass all my calc classes, and get into my junior year upper level physics courses.

140 IQ, 35 ACT.

shit work ethic though so it doesn't really matter much

>>9125774
Don't trust online tests. They do absolutely nothing but test your ability to answer as many questions as you can and quickly. Also the scores inflate themselves if you do badly. It's an extremely shitty way to measure intelligence.

Seeing as how SAT scores and IQ are extremely well-correlated, I'd say you're at least approaching 130, especially if you didn't study.

35 on the ACT. I'm into skateboard and pro wrestling

SAT was 1980
No ACT because didnt give a shit
IQ is unofficial, internet says in the 130 range

1740/2400 on SAT circa 2011
127 IQ based on Stanford Binet test which I took in 2014

Dunno what the fuck happened with my SAT, but I will admit that I don't read books.

>>9125774
>they weren't supposed to tell you?
Kek, then how do you think anyone actually knows their IQ? I mean why even take the damn thing if you're not gonna see it. In my case (and probably most people's) they're obligated to show everyone your results because the test is administered to narrow down whatever's wrong with kids who are having an unusually difficult time in school. Also, real IQ tests are dynamic and take for-fucking-ever to finish; they're administered by a psychologist who keeps an eye on you at all times to find out if you're fidgety, easily distracted, lethargic, etc. It's kind of a full battery of your mental abilities and shortcomings.

Btw I dream about doing what you've done. I dropped out of school and desperately want to get a math degree, but I'm 23 so I'll be pretty embarrassed if I go back.

>>9125850
That's impossible. You don't have an IQ above 110 if you scored that low on the SAT, since you can't study for them nor do you need much prior knowledge. The SAT is a VERY good indicator of IQ, so the only explanation is that the test score of 127 was a fluke.

>>9125864
>since you can't study for them
???

Not a burger, but i did extremely poorly in everything at high school.
Currently studying Physics at university and haven't gotten lower than a B. High school grades are a meme.

>>9125864
Honestly it's much more likely to get a fluke SAT score than a fluke IQ score. When you take an IQ test, there are people watching intently to make sure you're doing what you're supposed to to the best of your ability. SATs can easily catch you on a bad day and it's not like you're given a psychological evaluation to make sure you're ready - although I must admit 1740 is quite unfortunate.

I trust him more because he named the test he took. When I see people just throw out their IQ on here with no explanation I can't help but think they just got it online.

164 quant
166 verbal
35act
IQ 145 when I was 8 or 9 and took autism tests at the psych, so probably like 130 now

>>9125864
Burgers take the SAT way too seriously, fucking hell. It's not even a good measure of intelligence anymore. The 0.8 correlation comes from the old SAT, so calm down. It's been a knowledge test for at least a decade, now.

Nothing can replace an IQ test.

File: never EVER.jpg (43KB, 599x364px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 599x364px

>>9125952
I don't know where you're getting that from. I knew a lot of people who got good grades and studied their asses off and still lost pathetically to the smart but lazy types. I know, it's anecdotal, but I've seen it happen often and consistently enough that I strongly believe there's a pattern there.

Also, it being a knowledge test doesn't make it any less valid, especially when comparing people who go to the same school or live in the same district. The smart ones naturally acquire more knowledge whether they want to or not. The dummies may work for knowledge, and they may eventually get it; but at that age, in those circumstances, the smart ones will win pretty much every time. Assuming they showed up to class, that is... but I don't think skipping school in America is very common.

How's the GRE when it comes to measuring intelligence, compared to the SAT

>>9125969
If it's for graduate school exclusively, it's absolutely worthless. Graduates have high IQs. You have a very good chance of running into a couple 130s or even 140s, which will skew the results so hard that figuring out exactly where you fall would be nigh impossible.

This thing is a graduate admission test, right? Like, beyond the SATs? If so, I think you can grow out of worrying about your intelligence and start to accept you've had it all along. If you get a masters degree or PhD, there will be people out there calling you a genius just for that.

>>9125607
>What's the average 4channer's IQ/SAT/ACT score?
Way below average