/sci/ - Science & Math

Bait thread. Only pop science ever pays attention to IQ scales that allow scores above 160.

Remember to sage if you want to play with trolls so you don’t bump their bait.

>>9699440
This is a meme. The WAIS-R has a ceiling of 185 for 70-74 year olds (i.e. you get perfect scores on all subtests but also get extra points to make up for age-related IQ decline).

>>9699432
You're getting the causation direction wrong. Studying science and math makes you better at IQ tests.

>>9699454
Which means nothing. Old people get old people points.

>>9699456
They also lose points, because vocabulary increases with age and skews the verbal section.

>>9699455
Nope. Look at the Study of Mathematically Precocious Youth. Education and career have no noticeable effect on IQ.

>>9699460
And? Still means nothing.

>>9699432
Nice meme OP, bad news for you though.
http://www.cell.com/current-biology/abstract/S0960-9822%2811%2901267-X

tldr: The posterior hippocampi of average-IQ adult subjects who passed the difficult Knowledge exam for London taxicab drivers showed significant enlargement as opposed to before they began studying for it. Pic related. Similar effects not observed in the control group or in those who failed.
This was actually a repeat experiment with a larger sample size, i.e. the results are reproducible. And because all subjects are grown adults, normal brain development does not confound the study's results.

This is hard evidence that the brain PHYSICALLY restructures itself in response to focused training.
In other words it appears that intelligence (which is a manifestation of the brain's organization) is in fact malleable -- and we see that with practice, you can alter you ability to grok proofs and experiments, write papers, recognize patterns, and so forth

Even this joker has an IQ in the 160-170 range.

>scored 1420 on the SAT at age 11 (translates to IQ 160-165)
>perfect score on SAT at age 15 (translates to 160)
>scored in the 99.9998th percentile on a standardized test (IQ 170)

Academia is becoming as competitive as professional sports, and there's nothing you can do about it.

>>9699432
The ratio of male:female faculty should be 10:1 or less to promote a truly merit-based system that efficiently uses resources. Scientific research has just become a big meme and bloated job farm. Frigid career women will gladly take a cushy office at Princeton and do jack shit with it in the name of "equality," which is really "forced outcome parity."

>>9699465
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/iq-boot-camp/201606/new-evidence-way-raise-your-iq

>>9699455
This. See >>9699467

>>9699432
>I think IQ matters

>>9699467
>one study against a literal century of evidence that I.Q. cannot be meaningfully increased with practice

Oh look, it's a run-of-the-mill econ prof at a mid-tier university who had a near-perfect GRE (IQ in the mid 150s) and got tenure by the skin of his teeth.

>>9699467
This. Its kind of sad to see people just accept that they are dumb when really most people can learn to be smart because it is just a skill like anything else that takes years of practice and hard work. The problem is that like any skill the dumber you start off the harder it is to get going in the right direction but once you start to figure out how to think logically you can focus on it and train yourself to exponentially get smarter over time. Being smart just isn't for most people though since it pretty much guarantees giving up being a normie and being a socially awkward virgin for years to come.

>>9699486
>ignoring hard evidence
Only takes one legitimate study to debunk centuries of pseudoscience

Hey, check it out, it's Chris Hirata, gold medalist in the Olympiads at age 13 and Princeton physics PhD at 22. (He teaches at Ohio State hahahaha)

>>9699499
Hardly anyone can become academically successful in the same way hardly anyone can become a professional athlete. Biology matters.

>>9699432
I'm not sure I agree with you, there is a lot of work to do and we need people to do it.

However, I do like this post because I am a physical chemist and my IQ is at least 145

I've never had an issue understanding anything, but the battle of motivation is very real

:)

The problem is, due do Flynn effect, 200 IQ in 1952 is basically the same as 102 IQ in 2018

>>9699499
>it pretty much guarantees giving up being a normie and being a socially awkward virgin for years to come.
Interestingly enough, further analysis shows that the cabbies who passed the exam lost points in other memory tests such as visual memory. So they lost something in the process of gaining their improved spatial reasoning. It's one of the follow-up studies.

>>9699432
We have this thread everyday

>>9699550
yeah, OP is super insecure

or has delusions of grandeur

>>9699467
A 5 point deviation is not significant, try again.

>>9699503
>implying there is any reason to believe that the "study" you keep spamming in every IQ-related thread is not pseudoscience and meaningless
The odds are not in your favor, brainlet.

>>9699693
>implying that any number of confirmation bias IQ-statistics "studies" carries anywhere near the same weight as even a single study based on PHYSICALLY-OBSERVABLE, REPRODUCIBLE results
Biologists took the IQ """""""science"""""" field and shitted all over it in a single study. No amount of mental contortions can change this fact.

>>9699710
Stop this anti-IQ autism, we get your point, people can get smarter

>>9699711
>L-let me bait in peace
>OP's post isn't autism, but blowing OP out is autism
At least sage if you believe it faggot.
If you don't like it either stop posting IQ autism, or show clearly and cogently why the study doesn't blow OP the fuck out. We simply have no reason to continue until you do.

>>9699710
>Biologists took the IQ """""""science"""""" field and shitted all over it in a single study.
I´m sure they did. Playtime´s over, kid - time to go to bed.
>No amount of mental contortions can change this fact.
No amount of mental contortions can change the fact that you crusade against well-documented and empirically sound tests of cognition that place your brainlet ass at the bottom of the barrel.
>take an IQ test
>score in the double digits
>sperg out about IQ
Story of your life, right there, in three greentext sentences.

>>9699486
Show all that century-spanning hard evidence that intelligence is set in stone.

>>9699752
The hard evidence says that intelligence cannot be significantly (i.e. beyond 2-3 points that may or may not be a result of better concentration and a full stomach) increased. It´s the reason behind why retards are kept in special classes, the average joe graduates HS and gifted people attain a university degree in at a reputable school and/or in an objectively difficult (i.e. STEM) field.

>>9699768
No, you can't just say "the hard evidence says". Present that hard evidence along with your argument.

>>9699774
I´m not the contrarian, and as such I will not indulge you in proving what you can easily find out yourself by googling.

>>9699797
>Guy posts a study
>"Nuh-uh science says ur wrong"
>Someone asks for you to back up your claims
>"Find it urself dummy"

>>9699559

We've already established OP is projecting. The real question is why does /sci/ allow these retarded threads to get bumped?

SAGE.

>tfw got 155 on the WISC when I was 12
>afraid to take the adult version and see a vastly inferior result

>>9699739
>all those non-arguments
Not even "crusading", just posting this one study and laughing because none of you pseudoscience worshipping hacks can say anything in response. I mean your only argument has sadly been based on the ABSOLUTE NUMBER of pseudoscientific IQ studies.

>your brainlet ass at the bottom of the barrel
>double digits
>Story of your life, right there, in three greentext sentences.
Appeal to motive, another fallacy. Do you even have a single valid argument?
But let's address that "motive" just to clear the air.
WISC full scale in the 5th grade full scale ~153
SAT 720/720=1440 (correlates to a ~141 IQ)
scored 166/164 on V/Q on GRE with 0 study which correlates to a ~150 IQ
and of course faggot OP's test, scored 143 just rushing through it without taking time to actually think.
>your IQ doesn't mean you know shit about IQ
>you're larping

>>9699884
Has your life story tracked what you would expect from a 155er?

>>9699432
Alright im gonna go smoke a bowl and take your gay test.brb

>>9699521
This makes sense, and makes me wonder about the price we pay for mastering a skill in great detail (in terms of other skills), especially if the skills aren't complementary.

>all the people in this thread who think they're owed a high IQ

Fuck off. The reason I'm rich and successful is because I'm smarter than you, stop trying to ruin it.

>>9699432
Is this a good IQ test > http://test.mensa.no ?

>>9699432
lol this is why i'm an engineer

i seriously, honestly cannot believe why anyone would willingly study math with a sub 150+ IQ. it's complete and utter delusion.

>>9699884
I took the RAVEN when I was 10
got a 99.4th percentile or something around that.

now I'm 23 with a 108 IQ

JUST

>>9699943
Probably the best. It's quite harsh, though, so don't take it unless you really do want to know your IQ. (Online tests usually inflate scores by 0.5 to 1 standard deviation, and in some cases higher).

>>9699953
Heck, I've known people in the 150 range at college (perfect SATs, etc) who struggled big-time in graduate math because they didn't have the discipline.

>>9699804
Read the wikipedia page on IQ you dumb brainlet.

>>9699902
The strength of your argument is about the same as claiming that global warming is a hoax because we had a cold winter.

>>9699953
>>9699960
>friend has a 115 IQ and has been acing upper div undergrad math just through sheer hard work
>will hit the ground hard soon

how do I fucking tell him

>>9699962
Wikipedia is not a credible source. There is nothing you can say that's going to change my mind on this topic.

>>9699958
What about this one? This one requires you to have a backpack of knowledge unlike the first one tough.

https://wechslertest.com/quiz/full-quiz

Oh no god heavens my heart starts beating faster than normal and my palms get sweaty doing the mensa IQ test, it's not that I don't know the answers but I hate timed tests and I'm a very neurotic individual.

>>9699967
>There is nothing you can say that's going to change my mind on this topic.
Then stay safe in your delusions my brainlet friend.

>>9699966
Impressive that he hasn't hit the wall yet with an average undergrad IQ. Is he verbally retarded and just a savant with abstractions or something?

>>9699971
one of the better ones I've seen

for reference, I scored 135 on iqtest.dk, 134 on the test.mensa.no, and from an actual WAIS-IV that I took when I was 19, I scored a 113.

nothing can really compare to a proper iq test, desu

>>9699974
Not at all. Scored around average on his fullscale IQ tests and didn't have any glaring weaknesses. This is at UCLA so maybe it may not be rigorous as other unis.

>>9699964
Backwards.
My argument is like global warming is real because I have shown a reproducible, physically observable causal link between greenhouse gases and warming of a closed system.
And your argument is like "but what about these 100's of weather studies showing temperature hasn't changed?"

>>9699979
Damn, I really fucked that last sentence up

>>9699971
>https://wechslertest.com/quiz/full-quiz

50 questions in 12 minutes; this is basically a Wonderlic. It's not a bad test (you can pretty much just double your raw score and add 60 to get your IQ), but, unlike formal IQ tests, it favors speed over stamina. Mensa usually has a Wonderlic before the main test to catch people whose brains work best in bursts

>>9699974
>115
>average undergrad IQ
seems a bit high, even for math, and especially for engineering.

>>9699977
That's a hell of a difference, but not impossible. The Mensa Norway sample test is taken from an actual IQ test, so it's reasonably accurate.

>>9699966
he won't though. it will be he who has something to tell you.
he'll continue to get better at math while you shitpost on internet forums

>>9699991
i'm sorry but IQ is by far the most important trait you can have when it comes to studying a subject as vastly g-loaded as pure math.

not even self-studying every day for 3 years will bring a 120 IQ to the level of a 150 with literally zero knowledge

>>9699988
yeah, but it's only one subtest on a proper IQ test, desu

really caught me off guard when I took the WAIS-IV. not surprisingly, I did best on the matrix manipulations sections.

>>9699977
That's the thing with this one you need to remember some math concepts, I don't remember some of them so I would have to revise before.

>>9699986
You're right, I think that score is outdated. Since college admissions have gotten laxer, the average has probably dropped. But I also think that 115 was for *graduates* specifically (tons and tons of students are accepted but drop out). Actual undergrads may be closer to 110.

>>9699997
That's interesting. Just out of curiosity, do you remember any your subtest scores, like digit span or vocabulary?

>>9700011
vocab was above average
processing speed was slightly below average
information was only slightly above average (bit miffed about this one, but only because I'm fairly ignorant in general)
I don't remember my digit span but I didn't do well on it.
symbol search was also cancer

>>9700003
would you say that 110 is strictly for STEM?

I always thought of myself as being in the 110 - 115 range at best, due to my absolutely lackluster SAT scores which are dead average for the admitted student profile here, and slightly below average for the admitted STEM students, but my classmates in EE are generally braindead, even in upper divs. I'm doing fine and getting As in my courses here at a mid-tier UC.

>>9699774
His "hard evidence" is pure pseudoscience pushed by """"scientists"""" whose entire lifetime of work needs intelligence to be fixed in order to stay relevant.
But there are recent studies which indicate the possibility of 20-point IQ swings with the proper training (the "Relational frame method")
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1041608016300231
This on top of the Flynn effect, another embarrassment to the IQ concept. And of course the physically-observable, reproducible, study-trigger grey matter increases already mentioned ITT.
Obviously, when confronted with facts and logic, he will cop out and tell you the evidence is out there but that it's your responsibility to find it, much like a Jehovah's Witness or a Mormon.

>>9700026
SAT scores aren't as good at measuring IQ as they used to be. That's partly intentional, since the legal system looks down on IQ tests (and outright bans them as job requirements). So ETS basically revamped the SAT to be more of an IQ/knowledge composite, especially on the math section. You should get an actual IQ test if you want to know your IQ, which sounds higher than what you suggest. STEM undergrads are most likely a bit higher than 110. Math and physics grad students average 130, as a comparison.

>>9699995
Prove this or fuck off.

Anyone can claim anything, but without support for your claims, you're literally just making shit up.

>>9699967
That was someone else.

Saying "Wikipedia says" still doesn't cut it. Show me actual, real studies or fuck off.

>>9700037
Your IQ, in the sense of your intelligence rank, can't be meaningfully increased for the basic reason that it's got more to do with the physical structure of the brain, such as its surface area and neural density, than any sort of learnable culture or "software." Societies as a whole can get huge IQ gains from culture (as you mentioned with the Flynn effect), but that doesn't change the rank order much. It's a rising tide that lifts all boats. You still have the basic fact that people vary greatly in terms of brain structure. And once any tricks get discovered for boosting performance on IQ tests, they get stamped out during renorming pretty quick, since the point of the tests, again, is just to figure out the rank order of native mental ability in the population.

>>9700066
Addendum: You can see how there will never be a learning trick that lets you constantly stay ahead of the general population, because everyone has access to that same trick and will eventually catch up. It's sort of the efficient market hypothesis; the equilibrium always wins.

>>9699486
I've never heard of anything of this century of evidence you're talking about, are you sure you're remembering correctly?

>>9699995
This is what someone who got an IQ of 154 when they took a test 3 years ago says to justify the fact that they haven't worked very hard and are starting to be surpassed by their peers who don't brag about their IQ.

>>9700111
>3 years ago
He could take one right now, still score high but still be a total failure.

>>9700066
>it's got more to do with the physical structure of the brain, such as its surface area and neural density, than any sort of learnable culture or "software."
Welcome to the thread. Unfortunately, your assertion is categorically false.
The hardware is modified by what you call the "software" aka study and practice. See >>9699467 >>9699710
It is quite possible their IQ is higher than 145 because they are scientists, not the other way around.

ITT: iq BTFO

I knew it. I always asked why I was a failure in making any effort, poor as fuck, and failed to surpass the first year of my degree 3 times in a row even though I had been tested by a psychologists and got 139 score while wasting half the time of the test making up new formulas for simple fractions and divisions instead of doing them.

Funny how these shills went back to their echochamber to embrace a new brand of retarded psychology babble.

>>9700460
It's all /pol/ trying to justify their """"""""""""ethnostates"""""""""""""""

>>9700460
pretty sure iq hasn't been "btfo" by any stretch of the imagination
what is your point? that you're a dumbass?

>>9700460
High IQ doesn't mean that the person will use their time for what society considers and values as "useful". What made you think that in the first place?

>>9700568
*tips*

>>9700572

>>9700575
So you were a disgusting weeb

Take your pedophile cartoons back to >>>/a/

>>9700576
>he actually is a /pol/tard
Not surprising

>>9700581
>ad hominem
Disgusting.

>>9699711
It's not about smarter
It's about adaptation

You can train someone into specific tasks regardless of generic intelligence. There may be hope for niggers like you still