/sci/ - Science & Math

probably

Like fucking Voltron? Yes I think so.

>>5873829
yes, thats why committees get much more done that a single intelligent person.

Could chimps join together and outsmart humans?

>>5873838
>implying average people are chimps

>>5873840
>implying they aren't

>could 3 year old people join together and outsmart a 10 year old kid?

>>5873845
their minds aren't fully development.

>>5873848
exactly

>another IQ thread

>>5873848
average iq brains are underdeveloped

>>5873836
Yes, the fact that average I.Q people can outsmart geniuses if they join together. They don't need to compromise anything at all compare to a high I.Q person. They might have slight autism,unhappy for being high intelligence, or left too out for being TOO smart. Average people tend to be well-rounded in all aspects and can outsmart geniuses.

>>5873865
high I.Q brains are overdeveloped

brains with iqs are developed.

>>5873873
naah, high I.Q brains are overdeveloped. Yeah, you can get an insane I.Q of 200 but you'll get fucked over by having short attention span or austim. Your own head screwed you over.

>>5873880
If you leave a babby in the womb longer he will come out a super genius.

>>5873880
having high IQ doesn't make you autistic, being autistic makes you autistic.

>>5873893
No, those were examples. My point was that high I.Q people usually compromise something for being so smart.

I think our life is too short and our gene is too similar to differentiate people with IQ or something. Get the fuck out of /sci/

>>5873894
its because of independent bell curves, not any correlation between the 2.

ok genius, so what happens when a group of genius' compete against a group of average people?

>MIT vs community college

>>5873883
is that really true? I stayed in the womb too long and almost died had to be cut out

it is true African Americans have a 1 week shorter gestation period.. could this be the case?

>>5873902
Nothing can outsmart a group of /sci/ because /sci/ never worked in group.

>>5873902
I.Q caps at some point

>>5873902

Compete in what?

>>5873902
Less than 1% of people have 140 IQ

>>5873914
sex

>>5873939
Average joes win on experience

>>5874072
>because hot chicks like "vanilla-sex-penis-punching-into-vagina" for 50 years.

>>5873902
>MIT
>Genius
Having rich parents =/= smart

>>5874117
>Having rich parents =/= smart

Smart(intelligent) people are more likely to be successful with money => intelligence is hereditable => children of rich people are more likely to be smart than children of poor people

>>5874141
this. People who's parents do technical jobs on average have the same low iq as their parents

>>5873829
No. You're destined to a life of mediocrity, OP. The sooner you accept that, the sooner you'll be able to get on with the rest of your life.

Speaking of which, why aren't you working? Someone needs to do the manual labor, and it sure ain't gonna be a richfag like me!

>>5874141
What a bunch of bourgeoisie capitalist propaganda.

Not for something that requires high IQ.

for example a hundred average people wouldn't be able to beat bobby fischer at chess if they all joined together and offered their input.

Or a hundred average people wouldn't be able to solve a tricky maths problem faster (or probably at all) than a very intelligent person.

lots of people would be good at tasks which don't require much intelligence but simply have a lot of things to do.

If geniuses didn't exist we'd still be in the stone age. History is driven by the individual.

>>5874195

By which society (made of non-geniuses) help to maintain and provide for.

>>5874117
That's Harvard you are talking about, you need actual scores, competitions and shit to get into MIT, you can't just pay for it like Harvard.

>>5874340
nope both are equally impossible for normal people to get into if you are not rich

>>5874351
>what are full scholarships
If you are good enough, you can be piss poor and still get in. Also MIT doesn't care if somebody in your family is an alumni, again that's Harvard.

Bonus:
>what are harvard sport scholarships
>what are merit based scholarships
>what are need blind scholarships
>do I need to continue?

>>5874362
the fact that you even think either school gives out "full scholarships" shows you have no idea what you are talking about.

neither MIT nor harvard gives out scholarships, well MIT gives out a handful but it is a tiny tiny proportion of their financial aid, harvard gives out none. what they do is need blind admissions, they dont even consider your academics for funding, if you are good enough to get in, they provide grants to make up for 100% of the difference between the contribution your family can make and the tuition, and offer you loans for if your family cant cover their full share of it. scholarships are a complete nonissue.

the way paying for it works is if you are a very good student who is mostly qualified to get in and your dad donates half a million dollars to the university they are going to let you in. not paying your fucking tuition. this is just as true at MIT as it is at harvard, neither is going to let you in if youre a moron but if you are a somewhat qualified student you can pay to get in. same thing with alumni, if your parents are alumni and you are a passable student you will get in, not if you are a total moron, harvard has a higher admit rate for legacies sure but being a legacy still increases your odds of getting in exponentially at either.

once again you have no fucking clue what you are talking about.

>>5874371
Since you can't into reading, I was addressing your statement
>both are equally impossible for normal people to get into if you are not rich
by pointing out that IF you are accepted, money won't be an issue.
> they dont even consider your academics for funding, if you are good enough to get in, they provide grants to make up for 100% of the difference between the contribution your family can make and the tuition [...]
Blah blah, thanks for writing out my complete point and then missing it.

>if you are a very good student who is mostly qualified to get in and your dad donates half a million dollars to the university they are going to let you in
Something tells me that if you are qualified they'll let you in without the million dollars.

>harvard has a higher admit rate for legacies sure but being a legacy still increases your odds of getting in exponentially at either.
Yeah, I said that if you bothered to actually read. Harvard includes legacy, but not MIT.

I'm not even sure if you know what you are arguing about. Harvard being a rich school for really gifted and for those with rich parents was never an issue. MIT on the other hand, courses are challenging and if you are smart enough to do them, you never needed daddy to pay for your entrance in the first place. You can't buy your way in like you can on Harvard.

>once again you have no fucking clue what you are talking about.
I really don't care about proving myself to an rude anon, but let's say that I actually do know what I'm talking about.

>>5873829
What up /sci bros! Chet Hanks here and maybe you guys have heard of my dad Tom Hanks. Lots of negativity in this thread, you bros need to chill.

I am enjoying my full ride to Northwestern and working on my MC skills.

Can you drop out of HS, get into community college after some time, get good grades there and then transfer to MIT provide your CC grades are excellent ?

>>5874432
Theoretically, yes. They usually cherry-pick those who were proven successful while in highschool, but I think that if you have good grades and some cool projects behind yourself they'll accept you. If you are into CS, program something nice, get into FOSS scene, if you are an engineer build something interesting with your own hands etc etc. Good grades alone may not get you admitted, but cool projects usually do.

>>5874141

Paris Hilton is a genius.
Eminem is retarded.

Richard Feynman's daughter is a photographer.
Michael Faraday was a genius.

>>5874469

Eminem is not a genius.

>>5874469
>Eminem is retarded.
Are u avin a giggle there m8

>>5874472
He's not a retard either. I'm not very fond of rap, but it takes certain skill to write good songs. You could say the same for any kind of poetry.

>>5874472
I would consider him a genius. The way he at times manipulates words and language does take logic and wit into account.

>>5874472

I'm sorry, but although I disagree with Eminem's music, his mastery over the English language is far more advanced than most poets who are commonly regarded as "geniuses". Given the fact that he literally writes rhymes down everywhere he goes (to the point where he can't get to sleep because of it), there's definitely something autismal going on there. Also, bear in mind he never went to school while most poets have a very good education.

>>5874484

I think he's definitely autistic. He never leaves his house, doesn't have a girlfriend and has barely any friends despite being mega-rich and probably the most popular person on the planet. He's basically a hikki.

>>5874489
>eminem confirmed for being a robot

>>5874607
>>5874489
>>5874484
>>5874483
>>5874481
>>5874480
>>5874472
his control over the english language is pretty amazing considering he dont have any sort of education
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yo7ilJC0Dsc

>>5873829
No. Hard work makes you smart. The "smart kids" you see at school study hard as fuck. Its alot easier to work on something in a group though.

>>5875247
>The "smart kids" you see at school study hard as fuck.

No we don't.

No, they can't. Give me one person with an IQ of 190 sd 15 with 45 years of education vs 100.000 jersey shore kiddos with an below 100 IQ. Do you really think they would stand a chance?

>>5875874
what's the probability that you, with your 250 IQ, get any arbitrary IQ question with 6 answers right 1 out of 1 times?

what's the probability that they, with their 50 IQ, get any arbitrary IQ question with 6 answers right at least 1 in 100 times?

confirmed for 50 IQ. assemble your chimp army.

>>5875874
You're choosing a relatively exteme example.
Consider instead some problem that an engineer with 145 IQ vs. a comitte of engineers of 120 IQ each work together to produce ideas for solutions to.
With a wide enough disparity perhaps you can see diminishing gains but within limits I think OP's is a reasonable assertion.
Multiple properly organized intelligences can outperform a single higher intelligence.

>>5875247

Everyone who I knew who actually studied struggled with their brains and only did well academically by virtue of finishing their homework.

I always understood things intuitively and almost automatically, didn't do my work, got a D, and then brought it up to a B with perfect test scores.

I've met some "smart" people who study hard, but they were sensors. They were clever, quick witted, and could move gracefully. They didn't have that intuitive grasping of ideas that I had though.

IQ has nothing to do with genuis or intelligence, it is just a statistical measure of how fast you can solve some math/logical problems. So does a calculator.

Yes, that's why democracy is so great anon.

>>5875937
What a breathtaking amount of ignorance.

>>5875247
maybe in high school

>>5875247
>The "smart kids" you see at school study hard as fuck.
I remember slacking before easy exams while other kid was breaking his brain only to fail.
I failed a few times due to lack of homework though.

Yes. Provided they weren't lazy useless gits

>>5874351

MIT will fully pay for your shit if youre poor and you get in kiddo

>>5875874
Only if the Jersey shore kids formed hive-mind and outsmarted Issac Newton himself

>>5873829

nope. here's why I believe it:

I conceptualize IQ values as words. so for your random average person off of the street that has 100 IQ, they have 100 "words" to use at their disposal for things, as many/little as they like, in any combination.

now consider how much more someone who's a little smarter than the random average person: going with one standard deviation above them for 115 IQ. they have 15 MORE words to use in any combination or quantity.

so can the person with 100 IQ compete with the person with 115 IQ? nope. it's impossible because the person with the 115 IQ is capable of coming up with things that are IMPOSSIBLE for the one with 100 IQ to come up with

I am making the assumption that the IQ "words" someone learns are identical across all groups of people that learn, and that the higher the IQ the more complex the words become

No
source:

"the IQ of a mob is the IQ of its most stupid member divided by the number of mobsters,"

— Terry Pratchett

>>5876352
lol, didn't know that quote

similar to torque
if you need to apply 45 lb/ft on a screw there is no way to succeed by applying 3 times 15 lb/ft.

>>5874472
Has anyone even claimed he was?

He's just another rhyming wigger.

>>5876298
I Disagree.
My parents are avergade people, and I am 'very smart' (IQ speaking... if it's means something)
A little part is about genetic, but the most important part is about "education", in a very large acception.
(who u meet, what u read, social factors, ...)
So there are correlations, but no causality

>>5876216
Like your same fagging and shitposting yeah

Looks like that IQfag is on the loose again.

IQ is not knowledge

depends on the task

I remember reading something about how a group of people guess the number jelly beans in a jar, some were very high some were very low, but when the average of all the number were taken, it was very close to the correct answer.

I suppose the right genius could guess the number in a single shot.

I think the true advantage of a fair amount of working working towards something is covering each others weaknesses.

>>5880313
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_large_numbers

Yes, but the essential component is that they're different--they think different, have different beliefs, etc. This discourages groupthink, where nothing gets done, because everyone just basically agrees with each other, and no progress is made.

>You have group A of one person who has an IQ of 163 (My IQ).
>You have group B of five people who have IQ's ranging from 100-130.
>The two groups compete in "Who wants to be a millionaire" or some other questionnaire game.
>Group A, regardless of his IQ only has one large frame of reference to answer the questions of the game (His own brain).
>Group B has FIVE smaller frames of references in which to answer questions from (5 different brains, regardless of quality).

It is not a fair match up even if Group A wins.

Although,

>Group of geniuses vs group of average people.
>Geniuses win hands down.

If the effort between the average people is coordinated efficiently, I believe they could outsmart the genius.

Then again, I'm biased because I do parallel computing work.

>>5880403

>Group of geniuses vs group of average people

More like

>geniuses will be unable to work in a team and will become immensely butthurt over perceived slights to their egos, and will expend all their energy in brilliantly written shit-flinging remarks directed at each other.

>>5873838

I'd like to see you escape a chimp hunting pack in the forest. Those fuckers are merciless and experts are working together for hunting.

>>5873829
If average people could work as a group to outsmart geniuses, then why haven't they proven or disproven the Reimann hypothesis yet?

Get cracking, plebs.

>>5874190

On the other hand, 100 people could probably pass an IQ test with extremely high rating. Just take the most popular choice for each question, and it will almost certainly be leaning towards the correct answer, even if there's a big spread.

>>5876352

lel, terry pratchett reference

*tips fedora*

>>5880448

Obviously not the most intelligent person on 4chan are you. What you just typed is an opinion and in no way shape or form has any impacts on the results in reality. (I'm very grateful for this).

The reason why I can look at what you typed and laugh at how unintelligent you are, is because I can see your ego is obviously out of control. And I've seen first hand how well geniuses can work together.

On the other hand, geniuses have trouble working with morons like you because they have to dumb themselves down for you to even understand them. Which nothing gets done.

>>5880464

Geniuses (at least underacheiving ones) tend to see everyone else as morons, even other geniuses.

>>5880467

I'm not a genius. And your a fucking moron for even assuming your close to one.

>>5880467

I have a high IQ but don't consider myself a genius. And like I said, your ego is obviously out of control if you think your stupid ass is even a quarter of a genius.

>>5880472
What makes a genius? not the other guy, but just wondering.

>>5880507

Fuck you, pleb.

never argue with a moron, they will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience

never argue with a moron, they will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience
-Mark Twain

In the end of the day it doesn't fucking matter lol.

Look at you nerds all butthurt and shit.

Just do your fucking jobs.

>>5880457
This made me laugh more than the quote.

>>5880618
>Just do your fucking jobs.
Without a cognizance of my IQ, how will I know what career fits with my intellectual abilities?

The true sign of intelligence is not knowledge but imagination.

Albert Einstein

>>5880618

Back to the fields, peasant.

>>5873829
In matters of reasoning, the short answer is no.

Galileo Galilei was making this argument six centuries ago: "The testimony of many has little more value than that of few, since the number of people who reason well in complicated matters is much smaller than that of those who reason badly. If reasoning were like hauling I should agree that several reasoners would be worth more than one, just as several horses can haul more sacks of grain than one can. But reasoning is like racing and not like hauling, and a single Arabian steed can outrun a hundred plowhorses."

>>5873923

1327 is 1% of 4chan's current users. Clearly IQ is a valuable measurement.

>>5873829
Well, if you could directly connect the neurons in their brains, then maybe.

Otherwise no.

>>5882826

Makes sense.

The more a problem can be broken up, the better the group of non-geniuses will perform against the lone genius.

Of course, not even problem can be easily divided, and arranging the division itself can be nontrivial...

>>5882872

He was speaking of reasoning, not task division.

>>5882776
It doesn't surprise me that he said this, given the fact that he failed babby's first differential geometry.

>>5884112

Explain? I know he had Levi-Civita correct his mistakes.

>>5875250

Yeah, in high school I probably studied like 4 hours for each subject, total. For like the whole year.

>>5878675
Yes it is. Many IQ tests competently measure the crystallized intelligence.

I'll take a society of average intelligence people over a naked genius alone in the woods any day.

I don't know if humans would have been able to progress as far as we have if we eliminated outliers of superior intelligence, but I do know that without the backbone of society, all the geniuses in the world would eat berries and shit in the woods like anyone else.

>>5880472
>I have a high IQ but don't consider myself a genius

How high?

>>5886113
less than her
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marilyn_vos_Savant

Just sayin' , no troll :)

>>5886205
That does not completely answer the question.

>>5882826
for two days I agreed with Galileo, but it kept bothering me.

Now I disagree: reasoning IS a race, but the goal or the end of the race is unknown to every contestant. It's more of a search (i.e. for a solution to a problem) and it doesn't matter how fast you run, if you're running away from the solution.

It really depends,
personalty and beliefs probally matter more
lets say you goal is to prove "god is dead"
you have one genius atheithest and 1 million die hard christins who would give their lives to god.

My bets the atheithest is going to get further.

just like when hiring people
you hire the guy that will do the job, not the guy who could do the best; that part you hope happens to coincide.

Indiviudal traits > than base attributes
for most cases

>>5887399
or one guy how doesn't care about spelling vs the army of grammer nazis that about to barrage him

>>5887408
>grammer
Not sure if irony

>>5887445
I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and assume he was joking.

Someone has been keeping at least 35 threads alive
by bumping them twice a day. Compare the post times of
>>5876216 >>5877644 >>5882048 >>5882772 >>5884112 >>5884855
>>5886113 >>5887337 >>5888785
to the post times in other threads.
It's clear most of these are the same person.
The threads being bumped:
>>5858447 >>5861383 >>5862983 >>5863249 >>5865823 >>5866853
>>5867452 >>5867640 >>5868097 >>5868460 >>5868538 >>5869504
>>5869595 >>5869759 >>5869946 >>5872951 >>5873166 >>5873829
>>5874378 >>5874727 >>5875025 >>5876410 >>5876819 >>5878449
>>5878607 >>5878684 >>5878722 >>5880041 >>5880453 >>5880775
>>5881738 >>5883998 >>5884116 >>5884625 >>5885545
Write to moot@4chan.org if you want it to stop.

>>5888785
It is a bad joke.

>>5873829
No. The number of tasks that come down to raw computing power is very small. Abstract thinking is what makes a genius unique, and that occurs on the individual level. It's similar to how you can't put 100,000 8th graders with knowledge of basic algebra in a room together and have them invent calculus. It takes an individual who can think outside the box and grasp completely new concepts.

>>5880379
confirmed for IQ of 13 and for lacking the ability to even read

>>5889611
Why is the law of large numbers not applicable here?

>>5873838
Couldnt ants join together and outsmart humans?

IQ means nothing.

The only reason asians have higher IQ is because their education system is based on rote learning and memorizing facts.

Western education is more open and tries to teach you to be creative and innovative.

IQ means nothing.

>>5873829

>>5888918

>>5891261
HAHAHAHAHHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAAAAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Western culture more open

must have went to a rich rich school then

Depends what you mean by outsmart.

Trick into giving up a muffin or a lollipop? sure.
come up with the Dirac equation? probably not.

>>5891261
>IQ means nothing.
This board is about science and not your idiotic beliefs.

>>5891391
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10774597

>>5891269
It's almost certainly more open than most Asian cultures. Extreme amounts of studying and memorization are staples of most Asian educational systems. We can't compete because they train to take tests. They develop a work ethic, but not critical thinking skills. If you knew any first or second generation Asian immigrant students you'd have realized this yourself.

We also can't compete because we have shitty demographics.

>>5891402
Nice pseudoscience you got there. I'd love to see how that publication fails every pear review.

>>5893089
>pear review

pic related: what your brain looks like

>>5893113
Stop trolling. No one has a brain that looks like that.

Language may not be genetic, but it's certainly hereditary.
Moreover we don't just get our language from our parents; we develop language according to our friends and peers and those that interact with us regularly in school or public.
Language is also essential in developing intelligence and critical thinking skills. We take for granted that we can define abstract concepts in our minds but rarely do we realize how important it is to have the faculties of language available that give us the foundation of our language of thought and the ability to communicate ideas to others.
It is my hypothesis that herein lies the main source of the differences in intelligences between human populations. Tribals that communicate via clicking cannot define complex concepts to themselves, let alone communicate them to others. East asian tongues are tonal languages. So they're ideal for some sorts of intelligence but their shortcoming is in creative faculties. Indo-European tongues; German, English, Sanskrit, are not as competent as their east asian counterparts in efficiently defining analytical problems but hold their own well enough and also dispose toward more creative expression.
I think the foundation of differences in intelligence and culture between populations can be traced to languages that follow fundamentally different rules of syntax and grammar, prose...
Try speaking ebonics for a month and see how it influences your worldview, attitudes, even intelligence.

>>5893089
but you're just speculating, whereas he provided a evidence.

My IQ was measured at 115 5 years ago. What does this restrict me from doing?

What is the maximum level of success I can achieve?

>>5893848
supervisor at mcdonald's

>>5893884
That can't be true. Surely I can achieve greater?

>>5893892
the average iq of a college graduate is 125

so you're above average but...yeah

>"Could people of Average I.Q join together and outsmart geniuses? "

If by "outsmart" you mean trick, lie to or deceive, sure. Deceiving those who value truth is easier then deceiving those who don't.

If by outsmart you mean surround and destroy, sure thing. Packs of wild animals can do that.

If by outsmart you mean advance human knowledge and understanding more, I doubt it. An honest genius benefits others more then he benefits from his genius.

IQ is only how quickly you put information together. High and low IQ people are still subject to the same flaws as one another, such as using bad information. Bad input = Bad output, and the high IQ person will just give the wrong answer quicker. IQ doesn't give you a cutting edge on very much, tbh.

lol i posted an IQ thread again!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

>>5894014
>IQ is only how quickly you put information together.
>only

Are you saying this is not an important skill?

>>5873829
History seems to suggest the opposite.
Compare all of Ancient Greece of Archimedes. That guy thought up and built shit that no group could rival. I mean look at this shit

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antikithera_mechanism#Inscriptions

It took the Arabs at least another 700 years to come up with something similar to it and it was possible the original device inspired it.

>>5894994
>not realizing IQ as measured today is essentially the download speed of the brain
>downloading "corrupt files" isn't possible
>actually studying anything to give you an advantage over peers(implying anyone does this in lazy murrika)
>it all ends up boiling down to personal determination.
See any slacker genius for more info

>>5873829
I went to a programming competition but all my teammates couldn't make it so I was alone, but most people had 4 person teams. Now, I'm a math major and most of the other guys were CS majors, so I'd say its a fair assumption that I had a higher IQ than most people there. I ended up placing second (but the team that won had another math major on it).

So, I'd say no. None of the low IQ people have enough insight to see things like a person with a high IQ, so even with groups it just doesn't work. It's like asking if a dozen blind people can see better than a sighted person.

>>5875250
Actually, I think you might be mistaken by just how hard you work. I mean, of course you don't study the _actual_ course material much because that'd be over with quickly. But if you have an interest in math and science you spend more time thinking about it. Going through it until you completely understand it from several angles. Most people just try to memorize a bunch of rules that allow them to get the right answer most of the time. That's why they fail horribly down the road.

>>5895495
Seconding this.

>>5895484
What did you have to program at the programming competition?

>>5895495
How do I understand?

how does IQ works?
is the human such simple for being measure?

>>5897765
It is a definition. In science we need to define our tools of measurement. Length is measured with a ruler and the unit is meters. Intelligence is measured with an IQ test and the unit is IQ.

>>5899209
16 hour bump, good job

This thread again?

>>5899209
There are other units of length. What about intelligence?

>>5899844
There are many different online IQ tests.

>>5901077
How do we convert between them?

>>5901865
With a calculator.

>>5903271
What do I need to enter?

>>5903980
Numbers and operators.

>>5905472
In what sequence?

>>5906269
There is only one sequence making sense.

There is an eleven point IQ difference between the categories of retard, and the category of average according to the mean.

Now think about this. There are two retards in a class. Could two of them solve a problem faster than a statistical normal? No.

Now take the difference between the retard and a normal person. Triple that difference and add it to the statistical norm. Now you have a "genius". How many normal people can outsmart a genius?

There's your answer. You people look like fucking chimpanzees to me.

>>5907937
it's scary how can we have to fucking clue about things that other people understands.

>>5907937
it's scary how sometimes we have no fucking clue about things that other people understands.

>>5907937
Most IQ tests only test how well you can see and complete patterns. Your IQ or 150 has nothing on my creativity, necessarily.

>>5908032
IQ tests measure intelligence. Creativity is a part of intelligence.

>>5908032
False

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford%E2%80%93Binet_Intelligence_Scales
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wechsler_Adult_Intelligence_Scale

>>5907937
>You people look like fucking chimpanzees to me.

Chimpanzees are very intelligent animals.

>>5873829
could you peons please stop posting in this thread.

it's making my 180 IQ deteriorate

>>5910162
180 isn't very special. It's the lowest score in the Mega society.

>>5911886
keep telling yourself that ,cretin

>>5911886
Jacob Barnett has the highest score.

>>5912852
How high is his score?

>>5914201
170

>>5873829
not if the playing field is level. then they have no shot.

>>5873866
iq = basic smartness.

so yea normal /=/ average there's a wide margin of difference.

so the smarter always wins because the threads about "outsmarting".

fucking stupid ass thread you people are nuts for making this most commented

I don't know about the whole IQ debate, but I did see something on the science channel about linking our brains together like a hivemind, so sure why not.

>>5873829

experience > intelligence

>>5873913
no, it has a margin of error

>>5873923
no, thats isnt two standard diviations above the average so yeah, no

>>5874195
not really true considering the most successful people in society are on average around the 120 range with iq because they have the intelligence and decisiveness to get shit done

You have been visited by the Spooky Skeleton!
Repost this to 3 other threads or your mom will die in the next 24 hours.
█████████████████████
█████░░░░░░░░░░░█████
███░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░███
██░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░██
██░░▓▓░░░░░░░░░▓▓░░██
██░░▓▓▓▓░░░░░▓▓▓▓░░██
██░░░░░░░░▓░░░░░░░░██
███░░░░░░▓▓▓░░░░░░███
█████░░░░░░░░░░░█████
█████░░▓▓▓▓▓▓▓░░█████
█████░░▓▓▓▓▓▓▓░░█████

>>5875939
no

>>5914674
What kind of experience are you talking about?

>>5914769
What is better in your opinion?