Why?

Must you be so retarded. How can you possibly think that nasa is hiding the fact that earth is a cylinder. I can go buy a telescope and see the forces of gravity. I can see the moon orbit the earth. I can go to the beach and see the curve of the earth. How stupid are you people for believing this?

Oh i get it you are from 4Chan aren't you? No one is ever this stupid. EVER! I can go to the deep south and find a retard to prove you dumb asses wrong.

What exactly does the deep south have to do with intelligence?

What exactly does the deep south have to do with intelligence?

they aren't very inteligent

Quote from: Moonlit on August 20, 2009, 12:14:01 PM

What exactly does the deep south have to do with intelligence?

they aren't very inteligent

Your assumption isn't very intelligent or informed.

the average IQ by state map

Who/where is this map of IQs from?

just right click it and copy image location, and then you would get http://vdare.com/images/102206_ss_stateIQmap.JPG

This is interesting....

"IQ at the individual level has strong correlates with race. There are large and intractable mean racial differences in IQ at the person level. The differences are termed intractable because they have been relatively constant across decades and have not been appreciably affected by environmental interventions ( Murray, 2005).Because racial composition of the state is a large magnitude correlate of state IQ, one cannot expect meaningful changes in estimated state IQ as long as state racial composition is relatively stable. While increased education expenditures and smaller class sizes are to be encouraged, the stability of the rank order of NAEP test data suggests that states are not going to alter their standing on estimated state IQ dramatically through such efforts."

Also this:

First, the NAEP isn't an IQ test; it's a school achievement test.

As McDaniel points out, numerous studies show that results on achievement and aptitude tests are highly correlated. Nonetheless, it is possible for public schools to improve (or, far more easily, to deteriorate), so some of the variation is no doubt related to school quality rather than the underlying IQ of the students.

They're based on aptitude tests.

Quote from: Moonlit on August 20, 2009, 12:28:31 PM

They're based on aptitude tests.

Yes and as you pointed out, aptitude is NOT intelligence.

Correct, but you asked what it was based on.

That is completely fabricated. Montana does not have a higher IQ average than states such as Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, or California. Also, I don't remember being given an IQ test, neither do my parents, my siblings, or any of my neighbors and classmates. We never have, and we never will. I doubt that you have, and I doubt that even 100 people on this forum have.

These 'estimations' are based on what exactly?

I was given an IQ test, and the result was 176.

Also, that site is racist.

Racist how?  The numbers are based on facts, not opinion.

It yelled at me and called me a honky

It yelled at me and called me a honky

I lol'd.

I was given an IQ test, and the result was 176.

LOL.

Quote from: W on August 20, 2009, 12:56:27 PM

I was given an IQ test, and the result was 176.

LOL.

LOL.

If your going to claim to be someone with a 1-in-a-million IQ, could you please prove it? 

Stop laughing at him.

The fact that his IQ test result was actually 17.6 makes it just a typo.  Of course, with an IQ of 17.6 he's only 2 points short of a houseplant.   

Stop laughing at him.

The fact that his IQ test result was actually 17.6 makes it just a typo.  Of course, with an IQ of 17.6 he's only 2 points short of a houseplant.   

I love it when people claim ridiculously high IQ's. There's nothing like being told in all seriousness, that they took a test online in 10 minutes and therefore have an IQ of 150.

Reality check: real IQ tests involve spending several days going to a psychologist and taking a battery of tests. The scores are then processed, and you get a bunch of numbers indicating aptitude in various areas that are then averaged into an overall score.

IQ tests don't measure anything that is of any meaning.

IQ tests don't measure anything that is of any meaning.

Just because you are severely lacking in intelligence doesn't mean intelligence is meaningless.

IQ tests don't measure anything that is of any meaning.

That depends on whether your day to day activities involve solving the same sort of puzzles you face in an IQ test. Which they might.

Quote from: Anduie on August 20, 2009, 01:57:40 PM

IQ tests don't measure anything that is of any meaning.

Just because you are severely lacking in intelligence doesn't mean intelligence is meaningless.

IQ tests don't measure intelligence.

Quote from: taters343 on August 20, 2009, 05:24:07 PM

Quote from: Anduie on August 20, 2009, 01:57:40 PM

IQ tests don't measure anything that is of any meaning.

Just because you are severely lacking in intelligence doesn't mean intelligence is meaningless.

IQ tests don't measure intelligence.

"Intelligence quotient"

When I was in first grade the school suspected that I might have a high IQ and thus sent me for testing. The result of that testing was 176. I don't know how you want me to "prove it." Believe it or don't, I really don't care either way.

"Intelligence quotient"

Congratulations on knowing what an acronym means but not being able to understand the concepts. The actual connection to intelligence is tenuous as the test is normally biased for certain segments of society and catered towards certain groups. Also, it's fairly antiquated and most don't even accept it as an accurate measurement of intellect. Besides, IQ is based on general knowledge and can't measure technical knowledge, which goes a great deal into intelligence.

When I was in first grade the school suspected that I might have a high IQ and thus sent me for testing. The result of that testing was 176. I don't know how you want me to "prove it." Believe it or don't, I really don't care either way.

That kind of score would mean that you're a full 5 standard deviations above the mean, which is as rare as 1 in a million (which may be true, but unlikely, obviously). It was probably divided by your small age to inflate it, because the most modern IQ tests are usually restricted to ages 16 and up for accuracy.

Quote from: taters343 on August 20, 2009, 05:31:49 PM

"Intelligence quotient"

Congratulations on knowing what an acronym means but not being able to understand the concepts. The actual connection to intelligence is tenuous as the test is normally biased for certain segments of society and catered towards certain groups. Also, it's fairly antiquated and most don't even accept it as an accurate measurement of intellect. Besides, IQ is based on general knowledge and can't measure technical knowledge, which goes a great deal into intelligence.

A proper intelligence test is not reliant on pre-existing knowledge at all. Intelligence is not about how much you know, but about your ability to make use of what you know and your ability to understand.

Quote from: Anduie on August 20, 2009, 05:44:24 PM

Quote from: taters343 on August 20, 2009, 05:31:49 PM

"Intelligence quotient"

Congratulations on knowing what an acronym means but not being able to understand the concepts. The actual connection to intelligence is tenuous as the test is normally biased for certain segments of society and catered towards certain groups. Also, it's fairly antiquated and most don't even accept it as an accurate measurement of intellect. Besides, IQ is based on general knowledge and can't measure technical knowledge, which goes a great deal into intelligence.

A proper intelligence test is not reliant on pre-existing knowledge at all. Intelligence is not about how much you know, but about your ability to make use of what you know and your ability to understand.

Thank you. Might I also add that it is a lot of problem solving that requires little to no prior knowledge, such as recognising patterns as well as other similar types of tests.

Quote from: Anduie on August 20, 2009, 05:44:24 PM

Quote from: taters343 on August 20, 2009, 05:31:49 PM

"Intelligence quotient"

Congratulations on knowing what an acronym means but not being able to understand the concepts. The actual connection to intelligence is tenuous as the test is normally biased for certain segments of society and catered towards certain groups. Also, it's fairly antiquated and most don't even accept it as an accurate measurement of intellect. Besides, IQ is based on general knowledge and can't measure technical knowledge, which goes a great deal into intelligence.

A proper intelligence test is not reliant on pre-existing knowledge at all. Intelligence is not about how much you know, but about your ability to make use of what you know and your ability to understand.

Are we operating with the knowledge/intelligence dichotomy or no? It sounds to me as most here are immediately going with higher IQ scores directly translate into knowing more.