• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

How to increase your IQ level ?

I really do enjoy the premise here.

"I take my IQ to <some absurd impossible value> through some spooky method I really don't want to get into."

"How do you know it is <some absurd impossible value>"

"The conductor on my Imagination Train told me so."

This is an amped-up version of a tea party with my kids and their dolls when they were little.
 
novaphile said:
Reminds me of the joke:

"How to you make a small fortune out of motor racing?"

"Start with a large fortune."
Click to expand...
I can confirm. My former head of mechanical engineering built race car engines from scratch and raced them. One of the tracks he raced at was used in the "Mormon Twins" scene of Ocean's Eleven (2001).
 
I don't know how this method would work for an IQ level of 70, but if someone has, say, 100 points, they should be able to understand what this method is all about.
 
wise47 said:
I don't know how this method would work for an IQ level of 70...
Click to expand...
Then why should anyone believe you have a useful scale? You admit that your scale is "imaginary" and now you seem to admit it's not compatible with the scale that gives the scores you're comparing. That simply doesn't work.

wise47 said:
but if someone has, say, 100 points, they should be able to understand what this method is all about.
Click to expand...
No.

There is nothing at all evident or obvious about your system. You say its statistical model is "imaginary," And you will not describe the process used to raise the I.Q. beyond vague, handwaving terms such as "tune in."

This is all pure gibberish.
 
EHocking said:
Funny thing is, traditionally straw is spun into pure gold.
Click to expand...
He's spinning something, but it ain't straw...

While the OP has written a few things in his other essays that are at least not untrue (if facile and pointless), his I.Q. claims are obvious trash. He has no tangible hypothesis, no objective metrics, and no interest in developing the idea further. Then he tacks on a phrenology justification which is not even factually correct (i.e., Einstein's brain mass), let alone scientifically unrisible. But to go further to say that if you can't see how his method works then you yourself must have substandard intelligence is a step toward intentional insincerity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom