two inches or 20 iq points?
- Thread starter BigA
- Start date
My wife was tested at an early age to determine her mental capacity since she developed hydrocephalus shortly after birth. It had caused severe dyslexia and dystonia, so the schools wanted to decide whether she belonged in special education or regular classes. At 18 she had the remnants of her shunt catheter (used to treat hydrocephalus) removed because it had encapsulated. She was rechecked to verify whether the removal had caused impairment not readily apparent. I was tested in 9th grade because I finally decided to take a standardized test seriously, and they wanted to see if I qualified for the Gifted & Talented program. Apparently, they do not declare you gifted for just having a penis of oh say 9 inches (gladly I am under 9); thus, a gifted range IQ helps. I assume you are saying that you are among the smartest people in the world with a 190 IQ? I am wondering when intelligence became determined by geographical location. People in Oklahoma must be inherently less intelligent than those near DC (note the brilliance G W acquired when he moved all the way up from Texas).
I agree that an IQ score is just a score. The equation for determining Intelligence Quotient is reliant on subjective findings. How does one determine what mental age means? Is a 90 year old more intelligent for being 90? We were both measured using standardized intelligence tests apparently deemed reputable by the education system. The problem with standardized tests is that they assume everyone has the same experiences or identical information taught. I'll agree that each test is biased toward its target population. For example: What is the usual cooking time for chitterlings? a) 30 minutes, b) 1 hour, c) 5 hours, d) 24 hours. That is a question used by a test intended for african-american youth. How would most people do with it?
I agree that an IQ score is just a score. The equation for determining Intelligence Quotient is reliant on subjective findings. How does one determine what mental age means? Is a 90 year old more intelligent for being 90? We were both measured using standardized intelligence tests apparently deemed reputable by the education system. The problem with standardized tests is that they assume everyone has the same experiences or identical information taught. I'll agree that each test is biased toward its target population. For example: What is the usual cooking time for chitterlings? a) 30 minutes, b) 1 hour, c) 5 hours, d) 24 hours. That is a question used by a test intended for african-american youth. How would most people do with it?
Smartest person in the world... I'll go with George Foreman. I forget the name of the boxer he sparred with when he came out of retirement briefly, but the fight was one-sided. Foreman beats the poor kid for multiple rounds and the bout gets called against him. Afterward the HBO interviewer kept trying to get George to talk about the fight while George plugged his Lean, Mean Fat Grilling Machine. Wise, Smart, and made a grill that supposedly made a big greasy cheeseburger a healthy meal.
D_Gunther Snotpole
Account Disabled
An IQ of 190 on a test with a standard deviation of 15 is said to rank in the top 0.0000001%.
That would be one in 100 million if I am right (I have no such IQ
, so help me if I'm wrong here).So there would be 65 or so people at that level in the world, assuming there are roughly 6.5 billion people in the world.
Your wife's IQ, you said, was over 200.
So you were suggesting that your household had two people with IQs of over 190.
That's so vanishingly improbable as to be effectively impossible, OKFarmer.
And that would be true in DC, no less than in Oklahoma.
You are looking at standard deviations as if IQ were actually measurable and not based on thought. Please look at how it is calculated. As I said it is a subjective measure not an objective. I understand what you are trying to say. It measures how well you perform on a standardized test over what is assumed to be learned at a specific age.
Supposedly, a 20 year old is more likely to understand what the word hybernation means than a 5 year old. I've met 3 year olds who could use it properly, and 30 year olds that were shocked to hear that "bears sleep for over a week at a time???"
Using a ruler you could measure every person on earth and determine what height is truly average. Then you could determine if you are x number of centimeters then you are y number of standard deviations and in the z percentile.
I was not talking about somehow reaching into everyone's mind and determining how much data was there. I was talking about a score being assigned based on tests administered within a public school system. If someone is subjectively assigned a mental age based on responses to objective questions it is still a subjective value.
We are talking about 2 completely different things. Sorry for any confusion.
Supposedly, a 20 year old is more likely to understand what the word hybernation means than a 5 year old. I've met 3 year olds who could use it properly, and 30 year olds that were shocked to hear that "bears sleep for over a week at a time???"
Using a ruler you could measure every person on earth and determine what height is truly average. Then you could determine if you are x number of centimeters then you are y number of standard deviations and in the z percentile.
I was not talking about somehow reaching into everyone's mind and determining how much data was there. I was talking about a score being assigned based on tests administered within a public school system. If someone is subjectively assigned a mental age based on responses to objective questions it is still a subjective value.
We are talking about 2 completely different things. Sorry for any confusion.
D_Gunther Snotpole
Account Disabled
I am indeed confused, OKFarmer.
I'm not quite sure what you mean by 'subjective' in this context.
Nor am I quite sure why you are uncomfortable with introduction of the notion of 'standard deviation' in any form of statistical analysis.
And I would point out that the three-year-old who can spell hibernation has a leg up over one who can merely define it.
But what is our context here? A couple of posters have expressed doubts about the likelihood of one household having two people with IQs so high that they are virtually unmeasurable. An IQ of 190 would occur, one reads, only once in every 100 million people. You claim an IQ of 195, and say your wife's IQ is 205.
If you both had IQs of only 190, that would happen only once in every 10 quadrillion cases.
To now speak, as you do, of IQ as being subjective only justifies skepticism of any particular score(s). It doesn't at all reinforce a claim that, on its very face, already seems a bit absurd.
I'm seldom so argumentative, OKFarmer. Please don't be offended.
Hey all, new here, but my husband has been posting for a while...thought I would take up and try to clarify things a little...
I am OKFarmer's wife of 4 years. My IQ has indeed been measured at 210, his at 195 (both of us using both methods described below). Since I am such an improbability, I seek a career in powering spaceships for intergalactic hitch-hikers (*waving to Douglas Adams fans). Anyhow, given the obvious statistical improbability of the two of us and the apparent frustration of several people on here, I DO hope to answer some questions that seem to be causing issues:
1) How is IQ figured? Originally, it was a simple calculation of [mental age/physical age]*100...however, because of the breakdown of that formula with age, it was expanded to fit on a Bell Curve model. David Weschler started this expansion in 1958, but it didn't completely catch on until the last couple of decades.
2) What's all this about subjective information? OK...the actual calculation is OBJECTIVE. It's a math problem...no subjective there. However, the reason for the "subjective" caveat is that, since about the early 80's, there began to be a controversy that IQ tests are not accurate measurements because of the types of questions on them. The SUBJECTIVE part is the selection of what questions reflect what someone SHOULD know (ie whoever is selecting the questions subjectively selects questions on certain topics that they feel should reflect intelligence). The argument I remember hearing most (as an example of this controversy) about was over a question on a version of the Standford-Binet IQ test that concerned the definition of "catamaran." The argument was that anyone knowing what a catamaran is likely comes from the upper-income segment of the population and that people, even those of great intelligence, who have always lived in poverty, would be less likely to know such a thing...thus, the contention that the tests are unfairly skewed and are actually subjective. (Though many questions/topics have been attacked with the "catamaran" argument.) Does that help with the Objective vs Subjective discussion?
3) Do people with 200+ IQ's roam the earth? Yes, we do...in VERY small numbers, granted, but we do exist. I personally know about a dozen people who fall into this category. (They are scattered about the country in 6 different states).
4) Is it feasible that there are farmers in OK walking around with these high IQ scores? While I realize that, at face value, it seems odd, I do point out that he holds a doctorate and I am working toward completing mine. We farm because a) (MOST IMPORTANTLY) we enjoy it b) it's quite helpful from a tax standpoint and c) I am specializing in Agroterrorism (bioweapons, attacks on the food supply, and the like). Being on a farm in OK lends itself to that quite nicely because it a) allows me to study and work with basic animal husbandry and b) puts me into a position to work with the farmers and "speak their language" should something like a bioweapons attack happen. They aren't inclined to deal with some hoity-toity scientist who wants to tell them what's best in a lab...they prefer to deal with someone who has dealt first-hand with the economic and implementation challenges that come with new technology. Such issues have been seen time and time again thoughout the global agriculture market. The insinuation seems to be that farmers and/or people in OK are of sub-par intelligence, but since it wasnt expressly stated, I won't address it...no offense is intended to anyone, please understand. I also point out here that we met in the city and then decided to move into the country....so there was a greater population density. We actually met online while seeking other nerd-types, so that somewhat skews the probability of our meeting under normal circumstances.
So I guess that if you insist on using IQ as a measure of how smart someone is (which I really think is a BIG mistake in most cases), yes, two of the smartest people in the world live on a farm in OK, improbable though it is. Maybe we could be off saving the world or whatever people with such high IQ's are "supposed" to do, but the things that matter to us most are family and home. We continue to always seek new knowledge and to teach our kids well. I don't know what we are supposed to be doing, and maybe we're not living to our full "potential" because we are not cloistered in some government facility doing nothing but thinking for a living. However, in thinking about it, if we didn't do something we "could be proud of" in favor of being there for our kids and trying to contribute to our community, I am more than willing to hang my hat on that....
Does that help?
I am certainly open for questions/discussion, but as for the original question, can he just LOSE 2 inches? I'd would love to have sex that isn't excruciating....
Farmerhedgehog
I am OKFarmer's wife of 4 years. My IQ has indeed been measured at 210, his at 195 (both of us using both methods described below). Since I am such an improbability, I seek a career in powering spaceships for intergalactic hitch-hikers (*waving to Douglas Adams fans). Anyhow, given the obvious statistical improbability of the two of us and the apparent frustration of several people on here, I DO hope to answer some questions that seem to be causing issues:
1) How is IQ figured? Originally, it was a simple calculation of [mental age/physical age]*100...however, because of the breakdown of that formula with age, it was expanded to fit on a Bell Curve model. David Weschler started this expansion in 1958, but it didn't completely catch on until the last couple of decades.
2) What's all this about subjective information? OK...the actual calculation is OBJECTIVE. It's a math problem...no subjective there. However, the reason for the "subjective" caveat is that, since about the early 80's, there began to be a controversy that IQ tests are not accurate measurements because of the types of questions on them. The SUBJECTIVE part is the selection of what questions reflect what someone SHOULD know (ie whoever is selecting the questions subjectively selects questions on certain topics that they feel should reflect intelligence). The argument I remember hearing most (as an example of this controversy) about was over a question on a version of the Standford-Binet IQ test that concerned the definition of "catamaran." The argument was that anyone knowing what a catamaran is likely comes from the upper-income segment of the population and that people, even those of great intelligence, who have always lived in poverty, would be less likely to know such a thing...thus, the contention that the tests are unfairly skewed and are actually subjective. (Though many questions/topics have been attacked with the "catamaran" argument.) Does that help with the Objective vs Subjective discussion?
3) Do people with 200+ IQ's roam the earth? Yes, we do...in VERY small numbers, granted, but we do exist. I personally know about a dozen people who fall into this category. (They are scattered about the country in 6 different states).
4) Is it feasible that there are farmers in OK walking around with these high IQ scores? While I realize that, at face value, it seems odd, I do point out that he holds a doctorate and I am working toward completing mine. We farm because a) (MOST IMPORTANTLY) we enjoy it b) it's quite helpful from a tax standpoint and c) I am specializing in Agroterrorism (bioweapons, attacks on the food supply, and the like). Being on a farm in OK lends itself to that quite nicely because it a) allows me to study and work with basic animal husbandry and b) puts me into a position to work with the farmers and "speak their language" should something like a bioweapons attack happen. They aren't inclined to deal with some hoity-toity scientist who wants to tell them what's best in a lab...they prefer to deal with someone who has dealt first-hand with the economic and implementation challenges that come with new technology. Such issues have been seen time and time again thoughout the global agriculture market. The insinuation seems to be that farmers and/or people in OK are of sub-par intelligence, but since it wasnt expressly stated, I won't address it...no offense is intended to anyone, please understand. I also point out here that we met in the city and then decided to move into the country....so there was a greater population density. We actually met online while seeking other nerd-types, so that somewhat skews the probability of our meeting under normal circumstances.
So I guess that if you insist on using IQ as a measure of how smart someone is (which I really think is a BIG mistake in most cases), yes, two of the smartest people in the world live on a farm in OK, improbable though it is. Maybe we could be off saving the world or whatever people with such high IQ's are "supposed" to do, but the things that matter to us most are family and home. We continue to always seek new knowledge and to teach our kids well. I don't know what we are supposed to be doing, and maybe we're not living to our full "potential" because we are not cloistered in some government facility doing nothing but thinking for a living. However, in thinking about it, if we didn't do something we "could be proud of" in favor of being there for our kids and trying to contribute to our community, I am more than willing to hang my hat on that....
Does that help?
I am certainly open for questions/discussion, but as for the original question, can he just LOSE 2 inches? I'd would love to have sex that isn't excruciating....
Farmerhedgehog
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2006
- Posts
- 821
- Media
- 0
- Likes
- 9
- Points
- 163
- Age
- 42
- Location
- you won't find me
- Sexuality
- 99% Straight, 1% Gay
- Gender
- Male
- BigA,
I expected there to be outragious claims here. But props for going to such lengths to defend them
What seems even more improbable than them living on a farm in OK, is that they just happened to be 1 of 1,856 to view my thread on this forum. So forgive us for being a little skeptical:biggrin1:
What seems even more improbable than them living on a farm in OK, is that they just happened to be 1 of 1,856 to view my thread on this forum. So forgive us for being a little skeptical:biggrin1:
I was simply trying to clarify some things that seemed to be confusing people who seemed to be interested in learning. I'm not interested in defending outrageous claims (although kudos for spelling outrageous incorrectly in a response challenging my veracity). I responded to the thread because it seemed like an interesting discussion, not to go to lengths to defend my own cognition. Yes, technically, IQ's of 200+ are classified as "Beyond Measureable," but that doesn't mean that they do not happen...it simply means they must be calculated manually because they do not fit "into the box." Texas A&M's psych dept has a good explanation available. There are several things that occur in science that "can't be measured." Another example of something that certainly does happen but cannot be measured is the level of infection in some patients. In these cases, the severity of infection is simply called "TMTC" (which, literally translated, means Too Many To Count...but in practice, it refers to the idea that "ok, so it's there, and it's huge, but we don't have a value for it because it is so far beyond our norm.)
If you ask many people if a penis can be greater than 8 inches in length, they will tell you that anyone who claims to be attached to such a phallus is either full of horse apples or using an extension.
Many people will also tell you that any penis will easily fit into any vagina...many of you out there have found out first-hand that isn't true...even though your 7th grade sex-ed teacher swore it.
This is the large penis support group...everyone here is an exercise in improbability...or depending on whom you ask, impossibility.
If you have a big dick, why is it so tough to comprehend a bit brain?
If you ask many people if a penis can be greater than 8 inches in length, they will tell you that anyone who claims to be attached to such a phallus is either full of horse apples or using an extension.
Many people will also tell you that any penis will easily fit into any vagina...many of you out there have found out first-hand that isn't true...even though your 7th grade sex-ed teacher swore it.
This is the large penis support group...everyone here is an exercise in improbability...or depending on whom you ask, impossibility.
If you have a big dick, why is it so tough to comprehend a bit brain?
rob_just_rob
Sexy Member
It isn't.
However, it is abundantly apparent that there are a lot of exaggerators on this site. That was the case before this thread, and it will remain the case when this thread is long forgotten.
I can see your point, Rob. I suppose the thread begs the question, could I gain two inches (of internal girth)? In that case, I'd take the inches hands-down.
Hedgehog
Hedgehog
D_Gunther Snotpole
Account Disabled
Thank you, BigA. You're right.
Which takes the improbability of having two such 190+ IQs together in one household up 100-fold.
Channelwood
Experimental Member
An IQ of 190 on a test with a standard deviation of 15 is said to rank in the top 0.0000001%.
That would be one in 100 million if I am right (I have no such IQ
So there would be 65 or so people at that level in the world, assuming there are roughly 6.5 billion people in the world.
Calculating the number of people in the world with a particular IQ by this method only works if the distribution is Gaussian.
While it is a good approximation for the majority of the population, the distribution severely deviates from a normal distribution at the tails of the curve, especially at 6 sigma above the mean.
I think I'd pick the inches. After all, my IQ is above average as it is. Why not slap on an extra two inches of cock and become the ultimate weapon. Smart enough to impress, dumb enough to avoid intimidation, and a big cock to boot. Sounds like a plan to me!
It's fascinating that the poll now lists exactly 1/3 wanting more IQ points, and exactly 2/3 wanting more inches.
wispandex_bulge
Experimental Member
The main problem with IQ tests is the necessary conditioning to answer riddle like questions...the best test woudl have almost no verbal component. Verbal requirements always reflect by experience/exposure therefore EQ (educational quotient) as used in the SIM games is far more appropriate. I have tested between 130 and 160 on IQ tests, so Ill say 145 for me...but even at my rather "just above average enough to be noticed" level I can see that the tests are very dependent on how the mind of the individual works rather than the sheer and raw computational and comprehensional power. Point in fact: most true savants would fail most mainstream IQ tests despite their remarkable abilities which prove their mind far superior at given tasks...
Similar threads
