navarre Posted July 24, 2008 Author Share Posted July 24, 2008 i like being a nice mix of the two; that way on the flipside i also get to be reasonably smart and pretty? ..is that how it works? I actually think that is the best thing to be. Relatively hood looking with a decent intellect. Not too much of one, but, more importantly, you would possess both qualitites. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxfear Posted July 24, 2008 Share Posted July 24, 2008 A Danish IQ test site? I completely agree with the highlighted part. Does that surprise you so much?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shino Posted July 24, 2008 Share Posted July 24, 2008 130 in that IQ test. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dannyboy-the-Dane Posted July 24, 2008 Share Posted July 24, 2008 Does that surprise you so much?? Bah, I was merely surprised to see something Danish. When you're so small a country, it's exciting every time something from your country pops up on the Internet. I got 128 on the IQ test. I wouldn't say it's completely accurate, though, as it only tests your intelligence with logical sequences. I prefer the IQ test at Tickle, as it covers all the different intelligence fields. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyson Posted July 25, 2008 Share Posted July 25, 2008 130 in that IQ test. Funnily enough, I got the same. I've got this funny feeling that everyone has 130. That said I also got a funny feeling about half way through the test that I'd get to the end, send my score and be hit by a Rickroll. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jayseven Posted July 25, 2008 Share Posted July 25, 2008 i got 110 so now i feel stupid. On an unrelated note; surely being 'fairly good looking' and 'fairly intelligent' goes against the whole ULGY OR STUPID argument. If you're fairly good looking then you'll have a slightly lower than average intelligence. If you're smarter than average, then you're slightly ugly. Quit kidding yourselves about what intelligent/ugly means ffs! We're all, in general, not ugly, mildly intelligent beings. We want to find partners not based upon looks or smartness but through compatible character. So nyer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fierce_LiNk Posted July 25, 2008 Share Posted July 25, 2008 i got 110 so now i feel stupid. On an unrelated note; surely being 'fairly good looking' and 'fairly intelligent' goes against the whole ULGY OR STUPID argument. If you're fairly good looking then you'll have a slightly lower than average intelligence. If you're smarter than average, then you're slightly ugly. Quit kidding yourselves about what intelligent/ugly means ffs! We're all, in general, not ugly, mildly intelligent beings. We want to find partners not based upon looks or smartness but through compatible character. So nyer. That compatible character bit reminds me of my PC gaming days when I was younger. Frantically checking the box of each game I was going to by, making sure it was compatible with my system. Haha, if only people came with that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxfear Posted July 25, 2008 Share Posted July 25, 2008 Bah, I was merely surprised to see something Danish. When you're so small a country, it's exciting every time something from your country pops up on the Internet. I got 128 on the IQ test. I wouldn't say it's completely accurate, though, as it only tests your intelligence with logical sequences. I prefer the IQ test at Tickle, as it covers all the different intelligence fields. I got 133 on that one :p:p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dannyboy-the-Dane Posted July 27, 2008 Share Posted July 27, 2008 I got 133 on that one :p:p Well, that means your intelligence with logical sequences matches your overall inteligence in the other fields. About half way through the test with only logical sequences, I began to find it difficult to find the pattern and started giving more or less qualified guesses. So that's roughly 50% correct answers. The Tickle one tests your logical abilities in many different fields, but the general difficulty isn't as high. It's actually weird that two so different tests produce so different results for what should be the same number, but that just shows the accuracy (or lack thereof) of Internet IQ tests - and IQ tests in general. Intelligence is a very complex thing that is hard to measure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nightwolf Posted July 27, 2008 Share Posted July 27, 2008 I found that on both tests I did pretty badly. There goes my self-esteem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Losername Posted July 27, 2008 Share Posted July 27, 2008 I quit the test on the first question. I'm too smart for IQ tests. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supergrunch Posted July 27, 2008 Share Posted July 27, 2008 I should probably point out that no statistician (correct me if I'm wrong Odwin :wink:) takes IQ seriously. It's a random measure of... something, which isn't intelligence, though is arguably vaguely related to some sorts of reasoning skills. The idea is to make a statistic that is nomally distributed with mean 100 and variance 225, meaning that the outliers have IQs above 130 (historically "geniuses") and below 70 (historically "morons"), the 98th and 2nd percentiles respectively. Of course, the tests never work this accurately, and all end up giving different results, and as they're all asking different questions, what do they actually end up telling you? It's neither a measure of intelligence nor an accurate measure of IQ, whatever that actually is. In my opinion, the worst fallacy is that IQ suggests that intelligence is linear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dannyboy-the-Dane Posted July 27, 2008 Share Posted July 27, 2008 I should probably point out that no statistician (correct me if I'm wrong Odwin :wink:) takes IQ seriously. It's a random measure of... something, which isn't intelligence, though is arguably vaguely related to some sorts of reasoning skills. The idea is to make a statistic that is nomally distributed with mean 100 and variance 225, meaning that the outliers have IQs above 130 (historically "geniuses") and below 70 (historically "morons"), the 98th and 2nd percentiles respectively. Of course, the tests never work this accurately, and all end up giving different results, and as they're all asking different questions, what do they actually end up telling you? It's neither a measure of intelligence nor an accurate measure of IQ, whatever that actually is. In my opinion, the worst fallacy is that IQ suggests that intelligence is linear. I don't get all the statistics, but that last quote is great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gizmo Posted July 27, 2008 Share Posted July 27, 2008 Not another person with coloured text :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mundi Posted July 27, 2008 Share Posted July 27, 2008 I should probably point out that no statistician (correct me if I'm wrong Odwin :wink:) takes IQ seriously. It's a random measure of... something, which isn't intelligence, though is arguably vaguely related to some sorts of reasoning skills. The idea is to make a statistic that is nomally distributed with mean 100 and variance 225, meaning that the outliers have IQs above 130 (historically "geniuses") and below 70 (historically "morons"), the 98th and 2nd percentiles respectively. Of course, the tests never work this accurately, and all end up giving different results, and as they're all asking different questions, what do they actually end up telling you? It's neither a measure of intelligence nor an accurate measure of IQ, whatever that actually is. In my opinion, the worst fallacy is that IQ suggests that intelligence is linear. Yeah, IQ numbers is not a universal number on what you know, more of a how much you know based on what the person(s) who made the test considers to be intelligent. I believe that what you know is what you have experience in your environment and what is considered smart different in differant environments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nightwolf Posted July 27, 2008 Share Posted July 27, 2008 I hope so otherwise I'm incredibly stupid. I never do well in tests in the first place but by god I hate IQ tests -.- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Letty Posted July 27, 2008 Share Posted July 27, 2008 I got 110 on that test. It was piss until like the last 9 questions... wtf?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slaggis Posted July 27, 2008 Share Posted July 27, 2008 I found that on both tests I did pretty badly. There goes my self-esteem. I'm sorry, but I read that and laughed so hard. I'm not entirely sure why, I think it was the way I heard you say "There goes my self-esteem" in my head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shino Posted July 27, 2008 Share Posted July 27, 2008 Not another person with coloured text :p Yeah... Yeah, IQ numbers is not a universal number on what you know, more of a how much you know based on what the person(s) who made the test considers to be intelligent. I believe that what you know is what you have experience in your environment and what is considered smart different in differant environments. I think you're mixing knowledge with raw intellectual power. But I think I agree with you, different people have different intellectual aptitudes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nightwolf Posted July 27, 2008 Share Posted July 27, 2008 I'm sorry, but I read that and laughed so hard. I'm not entirely sure why, I think it was the way I heard you say "There goes my self-esteem" in my head. hehe, I'm glad, because I wasn't actually being serious and did say it outloud as I'm sure you imagined. well done haggis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Captain Falcon Posted July 27, 2008 Share Posted July 27, 2008 I've never bothered taking any of those IQ test. Whilst I don't believe them to provide any sort of accurate estimation of ones IQ, I still know that I would feel gutted if I got even an average score. I would personally argue that intelligence must have some grounding in someones ability to survive and adapt. It's as much survival of the fittest as it is the smartest. If there were 2 people each stranded alone on identical desert islands, there is no guarantee that the one with the higher IQ will leave alive before the other. Somewhat more on topic, if your beauty was truly immeasurable (in a good way), then your intelligence would be so low that you could survive on ignorance alone. If your intelligence was so high but you suffered looks wise, until you learn to accept your looks, you will always have self esteem issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bluey Posted July 27, 2008 Share Posted July 27, 2008 hehe i scored 105 on the danish test. i'm a little tipsy right now though so thats probably higher than it should be Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCK Posted July 27, 2008 Share Posted July 27, 2008 To be honest I'd rather be stupid. I suppose that when you're stupid you won't know as much what you're missing compared to when you're ugly. Having said that, I'd absolutely hate being stupid more than being ugly, but ignorance is bliss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Maase Posted July 27, 2008 Share Posted July 27, 2008 That test is boring. I clicked with my mouse randomly and i had 140, does that mean im lucky? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shino Posted July 27, 2008 Share Posted July 27, 2008 That test is boring. I clicked with my mouse randomly and i had 140, does that mean im lucky? It means you're a liar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts