Someone here (unnamed) was speaking about President Adams with an IQ of, oh 170 something long long before Binet introduced the idea ... it's a number for verbal, number and spatial acuity
I remember sitting in the high school hall taking this test - the language and number stuff was too easy, the spatial stuff not quite so. The result came back 144+ and my parents asked 'what is the +?' but the reply was 'needs another test'. Who cares!? The number is correlated with but no guarantee of performance.
I recall being bemused by the test, but being competitive by nature, considered how I could get over say 200 - I was 14 or thereabouts, remember.
The number itself never influenced anything!
But who in recent history mentioned it? Considered it significant?
Post Comment

Comments (72)

So some say IQ measure how good you are at IQ tests and not much more.

Jordan Peterson is talking quite much about it.
He seems a bit worried about where the world is heading.

I think it can have some relevance but the term EQ means just as much to me.

Elon Musk, a very successful nerd from South Africa,
he mentioned IQ last, and it is 155 for him.
Plenty good you could say.
Oh.., and he support Trump may I add (while having the opportunity..)
Still.... he talks about colonising Mars.
I consider that totally wasted money, colonise Zahara first.
Another one from Musk that is supposed to be a smart test for job applicants
who wanna work for his companies:

"you walk 5 miles south, and then 5 miles west and then finally 5 miles to the north.
And you find yourself in the same spot as you started. Where are you?"
The answer is the north pole.

Is that really that creative...(?).. maybe, he say it is.
Actually, I was the one, who posted stuff, about American President's IQs. I was merely trying to show, that it is very unlikely, that Trump has ever taken, an approved IQ test, and scored 156; (he claims this score, and also claims, to be a "stable genius").

Now, if the Trumpeters/Trumpettes, can Verify AND Fact Check this; then I will accept it to be true, (although, I would still have, Great Difficulty, in accepting, the "stable" part).

With regards, to the IQ's, of historical figures, obviously many of these predate standardised IQ tests; and are therefore Estimates

The list for the presidents, (from which I quote), is by National Geographic. One would presume this list to be fairly accurate

(Strangely, enough, Trump's name does not appear, on any Fact Checked list, that I have hither to before, seen)

That is the ONLY point, which I'm making, (in those comment/s)

My own IQ? Well, I consider that matter, to be private. I will not disclose it, here.....


(I just had, to add, the Inevitable Professor, for this comment)....

Part of the reason for my posting this thread stems from the number 156 commonly mentioned in association with IQ and Trump. To my knowledge there is no published claim for his IQ and indeed there is just the self-claim of 'genius'. His verbal score alone would surely relegate him to far below average.
Note that the derived numbers for Bush junior accord with my impressions.
That's precisely what I'm talking about, Fargo

If your statements/link (above), are correct, then Trump is neither "stable", nor a genius. ("Genius" is typically specified, for scores, at: IQ 141+)

I'm not praising you, without reason, when I say that your IQ, could well explain your acuity with maths (I do enjoy your maths blogs)...

@grand "you walk 5 miles south, and then 5 miles west..."
Given global warming you might well find yourself 4000m underneath the North pole at the bottom of the Arctic Ocean!
That was weird - how come I appear deleted?
@grand "you walk 5 miles south, and then 5 miles west..."
Given global warming you might well find yourself 4000m underneath the North pole at the bottom of the Arctic Ocean!
Maybe, there's a glitch, in the fabric, of space and time?

In the 4D

f(x, y, z, t)

space, that is to say?

Maybe, we can infer, that the wireless signal, was subject to untoward quantum effects? (While normally accurate, within a specified probability range), in (this instance), the Wave Function, of the signal has collapsed, due to an unspecified observer; hence rendering a null result?
much more probable there is a software glitch in synch in the software
Maybe some signals aren't "packaged properly", and "bounce" off the server? Maybe the server is overloaded?, or there is a poor signal just briefly? I'm not sure, I'm not a computer expert. Your explanation, is probably the correct one...
The value of IQ is what one doe3s with it. A co-worker told me his teacher said the highest and lowest tested IQs, but refused to say to whom each belonged. After class he took him aside and told him he had the lowest at 83. And then told him that if one applied themselves, the lowest would do more than the highest.
I texted in the top 2 percentile. Eligible to join MENSA. And never have. Why? Talk to those in other fields, hobbies and interests that I am not. Or goes over my head because not my field. Or get in a round house with someone who is in my field of interest that doesnt agree with my ideas?
I am ADHD mildly. And have said that genius is the flip side of the coin where retarded is the other side. Average is able to accomplish more quite often. They lack the static that muddles higher IQs minds. I crack up at the movie where the dog gets distracted by a squirrel. Oh boy can I relate! SQUIRREL!frustrated
How does one do all the things of all the books, not get frustrated that time goes by to fast.
Now they are eliminating IQ tests and those scores for college. Perhaps it is bad. Maybe good. A child is ignored because of a lower IQ. Or pushed and pushed and hounded and criticized because his high IQ creates expectations they dont wish to fulfill.
I question how many important people, politicians and others had IQs that got them where they were. Same as income strata one was born into. Personally I rank most of congress and DC to have the brains of a shrimp.roll eyes
This is great news , was worried you are a retard handshake
My IQ and EQ are both very high, but I have never put it on a website...I guess you are very proud too...blushing
I'm sorry spikko, but if it was you'd not say that here.

But I forgive your clumsiness.
It's not as easy to hate you as I initially thought but I'm trying my best rolling on the floor laughing rolling on the floor laughing

You have All my Support...Good Luck and Go Well...?
Hey snookums good to see you are back with the same M.O.

So you can't be that smart

rolling on the floor laughing
You are entitled to Your opinion too...
@spikkel as I said the number has never influenced anything. The reason for mentioning 144 is that then that was the maximum measure under that standard test. Many other tests are more like 130; I am accordingly very skeptical about this number 156 which has been bandied about, or 170. As with other tests they measure the ability to do the test. Same with GMAT or SAT or GRE. I am very much on the down-path with these tests these days - at 14 I was an Ace, but having done the GRE recently I am more like a Jack!
Congrats. ) .eYe was only 137+?.
I used to be 173, but with the shrinking spine doubt I now make even 170 - cm that is! Always vertically meagre as I was/am, my mum was just 149 and dad 163, from the days of the depression. Only numbers of similar magnitude - neither height nor IQ number affected my life, I think. My children's mum was also 149, so they are not giants either.
I feel sorry for anyone that is IQ of 200 or 300 or even 400. How frustrating must be the world to them. Limits of knowledge, time and physical ability. A brain of a million ideas trapped in the limits of their body and other people.
@ orzz

No one in the world has the IQ of 300, or certainly not 400. IQ scores are based on a Gaussian Distribution (the numbers get scarcer, the more one travels to either extreme end of the curve). Also, the GD (hence IQ) depends on the Standard Deviation of the curve. For example an IQ of 180 (at SD 15), would be equivalent to an IQ of 230, (at SD 24).

@ Fargo

Without disclosing, I'm a member of one of the high IQ societies; however; I'm not around the extreme upper limit of the curve, (as in the example above) - Very Few People Are!!! As with you, my verbal IQ is highest (in a timed test) - I suppose that is why I'm a compulsive writer of poetry
* By Standard Deviation of the curve, I mean the Standard Deviation of the Individual Test
* Without disclosing an actual IQ score, that is
@ Fargo

(Above), when I say your maths ability may be related to a high (verbal) IQ score, this would be because of what intelligence researchers call 'g' (or crystallised intelligence). This means that a high scoring ability in a specific area, may actually translate into ability in another area (in your case mathematics). In fact high scores in specific areas are often "coupled" to abilities in other (diverse) spheres of intelligence. (Disregard comment, if you already knew this).
This is interesting....

Some people are no good at timed tests! (Their actual mental abilities, far exceed, what a timed test, score would indicate)

Another famous example, would be the physicist Richard Feynman. It is recorded that Feynman scored 'only' 125, on a timed test; yet is often mentioned in the same sentence as Einstein. It would be, a very safe bet, to say that Feynman's IQ, was a very good deal higher than this. There are many other famous examples, also. This, in my opinion, exposes the limits of (timed) IQ test scores.
* Yet he (Feynman), is often mentioned...
I'd estimate this dog's IQ, to be around 115 to 120, (see link, below)...

Not so far fetched, is it?

thumbs up

People underestimate animal intelligence....

18, 188, 16, 133, 13, ?, 9
19, 199, 18, 188, 16, 133, 13, ?,9
@lcbr you do know I assume that any such sequence has infinitely many plausible polynomial solutions which can provide the 'next' term, or the next m terms if you have m '?'. There is no unique solution to any of them, and the one you have in mind is just one of infinitely many, it is not right or wrong.
? = 100

The missing term is a 3 digit number

? = 1XX (all other 3 digit terms start with a 1)

XX = 00

Take the smallest number from the largest in pairs, in sequence:


and divide by the same amount to get the last 2 digits, of the next 3 digit term



19,18,16,13, 9
? = 100

The missing term is a 3 digit number

? = 1XX (all other 3 digit terms start with a 1)

XX = 00

Take the smallest number from the largest in pairs, in sequence:


and divide by the same amount to get the last 2 digits, of the next 3 digit term



(It is not possible to extend this series, further in either direction)
Eg 19-18=1

From 199, consider the 9

Take 1 from 9



Implies 188

And so forth...
From the 188

8 - 2= 6 (difference between 18, and 16)

6÷2=3 (divide by the same amount)

Implies 133

but just as plausible is that there are two series for odd and even terms, so 188,133,? can simply be 188,133,78 - arithmetic with delta = 55, and 199, 188, 133, ? can be geometric 199,188,133,-142 with delta = 11*5^s or quadratic 199,188,133,34...with second delta 44 and delta = 11,55,99...
(Sorry about the first series, it did not contain enough information)...
Post Comment - Let others know what you think about this Blog.
Meet the Author of this Blog
FargoFanonline today!


sydney, New South Wales, Australia

Retired but teaching and studying every day, travelling whenever I can and at home wherever I happen to be. From a small family but wishing I were part of a larger one. My students are scattered all over the world, as is my family. Language is a part [read more]