By posting this to boast, it demonstrates that his IQ is much lower as he is unable to read the room.
this post was submitted on 09 Jul 2025
182 points (98.4% liked)
LinkedinLunatics
5030 readers
1285 users here now
A place to post ridiculous posts from linkedIn.com
(Full transparency.. a mod for this sub happens to work there.. but that doesn't influence his moderation or laughter at a lot of posts.)
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
That's QE though right?
"Answer sheet for all 29 questions."
So for only $45 you can have a certified 200 iq I guess.
39 questions, that must be very serious IQ testing going on there ... /s
Being charitable I assume this is after you complete the test, but you can just look up the answers for free!
The extra $20 is for taking the test again with the answer sheet next to you
The real part of the test that determines whether or not you’re an idiot
As a kid, I got a high score. As an adult, I don't remember what it was. I'm an idiot now
username checks out. I also don't know lol.
I got 135 once as a kid, and then as an older kid, younger adult, studied up on and learned many of the flaws with IQ testing, one of many being that... you can study for them, and perform better.
That's not supposed to be possible if it is measuring some kind of fundamental, inherent quality about you that cannot meaningfully change.
Studying to ace an IQ test shows you’re not debilitatingly mentally challenged, though. I think that’s all the test is really good for.
Good point. Ultimately this leads me to question the existence of some fixed quality of intelligence. People are growing, adapting, and learning through their lives, so a fixed number defining general intelligence is likely a moot concept.
On top of the prior point lies another major issue with any sort of "general intelligence" test: defining "general intelligence". Intelligence comes in many forms: linguistic, logical-mathematical, musical, visual-spatial, bodily-kinesthetic, interpersonal, intrapersonal, naturalistic, existential intelligence, and more. The IQ test does not test all forms of intelligence.
This being said, It is likely impossible to test all forms of intelligence in one test; and even if we could create this test, how would this test handle differently abled people. For example, a completely blind person would fail the visual intelligence portion every time (for obvious reasons).
On top of the prior point lies another major issue with any sort of "general intelligence" test: defining "general intelligence". Intelligence comes in many forms: linguistic, logical-mathematical, musical, visual-spatial, bodily-kinesthetic, interpersonal, intrapersonal, naturalistic, existential intelligence, and more. The IQ test does not test all forms of intelligence.
This, a million times this.
Intelligence is not simply a thing like an INT stat in an rpg game that just generally makes you more cognitively capable and/or knowledgeable with just consistently broad applicability.
Theres a ton of research that's gone into how to actually teach children and people things that suggests... sure, there is to some extent a broad cognitive ability, but there is also a huge multidimensional component, more domain specific element to different levels of aptitude with different kinds of thinking.
...
Like, me, I'm autistic.... innately good at clear cut and logical things, innately terrible at anything approaching fuzzy logic, like socializing.
I had to put a massive amount of effort into learning that... people often don't literally mean what they literally say, how intonation works, how context works in social situations...
... whereas I excelled at learning how to read and write and do math, how to do logic and critical thinking, apply frameworks of thinking across different fields of knowledge, memorize knowledge sets from books or what not.
Kinesis intelligence? Eh, I'd say I'm decent at it naturally, but that's been greatly augmented by 10+ years of Karate, a bit of shooting range practice, learning the basics of a few instruments... but I'm no where near as 'body' or 'dexterity' intelligent as many others I've met.
...
Anyway, yeah, theres a lot of interesting empirical research nowadays that shows different areas of the brain being more or less engaged in certain kinds of activities, and then trying to basically reverse engineer how all that works, but its enormously complicated.
Also: Epigenetics is a thing.
Nature gives you your DNA... but Nurture changes which parts of it are more used, more activated.
Its all enormously more complex than reducing a person down to a single number.
Oh right and the other big one: implicit cultural bias in the IQ tests themselves. I think this is (somewhat?) less of a problem in actual legit IQ tests these days, but for a very, very long time, it was a huge problem that just resulted in basically scientific racism.
...
tl:dr;
anyone who is boasting about their IQ without a gazillion caveats is doing the dunning-krueger thing, overestimating their actual cognitive abilities.
Rookie. I'm on a wholly different intelligence power level, as this completely factual certificate certifies!
Is this metric or imperial?
Yes
I never did understand why so-called smart people pay money to be told they're smart.
Edit: Probably the reverse of the reason people are paid to tell others, people like you, that you're a no-good waste of space and you don't deserve me even addressing lifeforms as low as you; you disgusting piece of human excrement. That'll be £50, maggot.
I worked for 40 years at a company that made most of NASA's rocket engines, and a host of other impressive technology. There were many, many geniuses there - lots of literal rocket scientists, and leaders in fields like materials science and chemical engineering. One thing I learned early on was that most of the true geniuses looked down on people who mentioned being members of Mensa. It was like a red flag that the person cares too much about being perceived as smart. People who care so much about that put more energy into fostering the image than actually contributing.
and a host of other impressive technology.
like lasers right? Tell me we have laser weapons in space! Or do you mean really small but smart contributions that no one other than rocket scientists would know about!
As for MENSA - for sure. Pretentious little kiddies.
We actually had a very cool laser program for many years. One of the times that the company changed hands, the parent company kept the lasers part.
But we did a lot of very neat electrical power systems, including the whole electrical power management system for the space station.
But we did a lot of very neat electrical power systems, including the whole electrical power management system for the space station.
Can a potato power it?
That probably would have been a good design feature because it turns out potatoes grow well in space, but we opted to go with solar power.
Yes but very shortly.
Absolutely.
As a genuinely smart person I can do that for myself for free. 😏
“That’ll be $50. Ok here it is. Thank you. You’re welcome.”
-Me
I think I'm going to start a testing company with a big-titty mummy milf making a video for each person with a "high iq" instead of a paper certificate. I'll make a bazillion!
Why would she need a bazillion, unless she's going to be naked?
And I do!
Yeah I went to take that same test to see how high it scored, and flex on this chud with a higher score. "Free test" then charges $15 for results. Screw that, I'm not doing that for a bit.
But for those who are curious, it's a pretty straightforward multiple choice pattern recognition test. It's not really difficult at all. Pretty sure I got every question right in like a quarter of the allotted time. It's really funny that he described it as "time crunching" and "adrenaline pumping".
My intuition is that "smart" is a vague word that means a lot of things, but almost all of those interpretations are generally seen as a positive and respectable. The idea of being respected is inherently appealing, so if we entirely conflate the colloquial meanings with a very specific meaning that can be measured accurately on a linear scale, well then you can just show people your good number and take a shortcut to being revered without having to actually behave in an observably respectable way in front of other people.
A person taking an iq test has experience with claims of being smart being met with skepticism, so the next idea is that a third party would help clear up that misunderstanding. They're not paying to be told they're smart, they're paying for the certificate from a third party to back them up.
My guess is that overlooking the obvious issues is more about desperation than anything else. No one calls someone intelligent to convey that they can score high on a specific test that measures nothing meaningful. It also should be very natural to ask whether other people might find reason to doubt the value of a certificate. Not doing any investigation into these thoughts is pretty fucking stupid, but stupid to the point where I think there has to be a certain level of desperation to not see them at all.
Wow you wrote a lot of nonsense. "IQ" tests are BS. The tests were sold to companies in the 50s to address the changing employment needs (more computing / logical / spatial awareness, than previous posts) and science - proper science - has moved on way past the concept of IQ. There are many different branches of IQ that one single test doesn't address.
Wow you wrote a lot of nonsense.
I'm reading what you're writing as saying IQ tests should not be taken seriously but it also sounds like you're disagreeing with me for writing that I think IQ tests are a garbage concept that someone would be inclined to buy into if they're overly insecure and want a shortcut to claim that they're "smart". What did I write that you actually disagree with?
I was replying to a comment wondering how people can take them seriously and I was trying to imagine what could lead a person to entirely avoid looking at the very obvious reasons why iq tests should not be treated seriously. It feels like you're condescending to me while holding the same opinion I have.
If he was rational, he would understand that companies like this have a huge incentive to inflate the score of anyone participating.
If he had got an 87, do you think that he would have posted his score?
Absolutely not, then the company would not get free advertising, costing them business.
I don't believe it is fully fake, but I would not be surprised to see them rounding up any edge cases, this goes for the entire industry
The first time I took an online IQ test was when I was about 12 years old, around 2001. Even then, when I got back high results, I thought, “They probably make everyone’s score high, to encourage them to share the test. I’m going to take this result with a grain of salt.”
I never shared it, because I didn’t trust it. I soon learned that IQ tests are culturally biased anyway, and later on learned about the more up-to-date multiple-intelligence tests.
Seeing a grown adult taking and sharing an online IQ test in this day and age, my inner 12-year-old is rolling her eyes. It seems like someone is desperate for validation.
Similar experience in junior high, took an in-person IQ test and scored highly but instead I thought “this will make people feel envious, I’ll keep it to myself.” When I found out how stupid being proud of IQ results was, I was so glad junior high me lucked his way through cringe-inducing-memory-free.
Also I watched an hour long documentary about “the man with the highest IQ in the world” with my mom and thought “this guy is insufferable, must be related to high intelligence.” But no, it was trash reality TV disguised as a documentary. I think the guy believed he was an unparalleled genius, though.
2001 is a really high IQ..
IQ tests are only useful for comparing population groups with the same shared culture. Think two Midwest towns, but the one that has a chemical plant is 20 points lower. You can't use it to compare different groups that have different skill sets for survival. You can not use it for individuals at all.
I tried some free test once and got something like 90 lol
I’m pretty sure being of average intelligence (as far a test with its own flaws and limitations can tell) is nothing to be ashamed of, just like being of average height is nothing to be ashamed of.
I took one when I was a kid and got a 136, and I feel like an idiot fairly regularly. I don’t think these tests a definitive measures of intellectual “superiority”
It what you do with what you've got that counts.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(6 replies)
Hah, Superior! I'm on Huron level, babie!
Ya, well I'm Huron/Michigan/Georgian Bay!
Well done! I'm still Eerie :/
Hilarious
view more: next ›