-
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 ?
- Thread starter wise47
- Start date
Thermal
August Member
...and 1600... like Pennsylvania Avenue?
We may indeed be in the presence of
W.D.Clinger
Philosopher
I disagree, emphatically.
It is perfectly obvious that many defects of his system are all too evident.
Which is not only evident but obvious.
Here I agree, emphatically, with the word I highlighted.
It seems to me that a great many such things are even more evident and obvious than his "past incarnations reaching of ancient period, these data are certain, these incarnations are: Auguste Comte (1798-1857) French philosopher and sociologist, Edme Mariotte (1620-1684) French physicist and meteorologist, Aenesidemus (1 st century BC) Greek sceptical philosopher, Arcesilaus (315-241 BC) Greek sceptical philosopher, Gorgias (485-380 BC) Greek sophist."
And when the defects of his system and process are even more evident and obvious than conclusions he "was able to establish indisputably", it is fair to say those defects have been established beyond dispute.
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
Stated that way, I agree. What I meant, of course, was that @wise47 seems to think he has explained his technique in enough detail that a person of average intelligence can perform it. It's perfectly obvious he hasn't.
But now that I think about it, in a perverse sense he may have. His technique is to imagine that his I.Q. to has risen dramatically. So yeah.
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
With your high IQ, why do you have so much trouble understanding and addressing the concerns of others in this thread?
Your posts read more like the work of a mindless robot, than of a highly intelligent human being who knows how to communicate clearly with other human beings.
Helen
Implicitly explicit
I really don't think anyone in this thread thinks that that's the limit.
Thermal
August Member
Nor does... anyone really, save our intrepid OP.
The WAIS (note to wise47: that's a real IQ test, not an imaginary one) has no mechanism to reliably score beyond 160ish. A custom administration would have to be created to score beyond that, as an administrator of even superior intellect would not be able to process accurately, and the test is not designed for "off the charts" scoring. What our intrepid OP thinks about IQ scoring is funny, if a bit sad.
Helen
Implicitly explicit
That is what I was referring to.
Thermal
August Member
I know. Responding to wise47 directly has shown to be pretty pointless, as he shows all the intellectual engagement of a shovel, so I thought I'd talk to you instead. How's every little thing, sweetie?
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
I'm even starting to doubt the lower boundary.
As long as we're calling a spade a spade...
W.D.Clinger
Philosopher
Shovels are sharper, but aren't as good at digging holes.
Thermal
August Member
Bang up for shoveling ◊◊◊◊ though?
Thermal
August Member
Speaking of terminology, what's that term for ignoring everything posters say when trying to engage in your topic, but you ignore them and drop in every few days to post one-line vacuous repetitions and log right back off?
Ban this man.
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
Turkish?
Thermal
August Member
The alternative is I guess spouting silly ◊◊◊◊ and engaging on it with escalating silly ◊◊◊◊ for years on end? We could be grateful, I suppose.
P.J. Denyer
Penultimate Amazing
Helen
Implicitly explicit
Things are great, honey bun, I think my IQ reached at least 40 today, maybe even close to 50, when I invented a new way to glue my fingers together! Great stuff, super glue. Especially if you don't manage to poke a hole in the tube with the thingy you were going to glue to that other thingy!
Thermal
August Member
I confess that I spend a disproportionate amount of time worrying about superintelligent Turkish seagulls, often with large headphones on. It seems some earbuds would be more efficient?