mkl puts his money where his mouth is?
Poll
 | 1 vote (2.32%) | ||
| No votes (0%) | |||
| No votes (0%) | |||
| | 1 vote (2.32%) | ||
| | 1 vote (2.32%) | ||
| | 1 vote (2.32%) | ||
| | 16 votes (37.2%) | ||
| | 17 votes (39.53%) | ||
| | 1 vote (2.32%) | ||
| | 5 votes (11.62%) |
43 members have voted
Quote: mkl654321OK. You pick the test. You send the Wiz the money. When he acknowledges receiving it, I will do the same. However, I only offered to wager $100, so unless you're laying odds...
The test can be any one of a number of standard intelligence tests. To settle the bet, the test scores would have to be correlated against IQ score ranges.
Wizard.
I accept this wager - my $100USD against mkl's $100USD that the person on this site who goes by the handle mkl654321 will not achieve a score of 180 or higher on a standardized IQ test. To make things seem equitable regarding the selection of the test I suggest that one test be randomly selected by you (MS) from 5 widely accepted standard intellgence tests of your choosing. The test must be taken under the same conditions and within the same time frame as it would when normally administered.
I'm happy to go ahead with this any time Wiz. Think you'd like to adjudicate? Let it be known that I've offered to bump the wager to $500 but mkl seems to prefer $100 and I understand his taking the less expensive option.
Quote: thecesspit[x] Neither TheNightfly or MKL can agree on the precise terms.
Ooh, just like how most of the propositions go for the standing bet MichaelBluejay has about betting systems!
By the way, how are you going to verify that 1) it's mkl taking the test and 2) he's not being deceptive about the results? Is he going to take it in person somehow...?
Quote: TheNightflyThe test must be taken under the same conditions and within the same time frame as it would when normally administered.
This means in person by a third party familiar with giving the test. Otherwise its worthless. This doesn't mean by somebody MKL knows and 'trusts', gimee a break. A verifiable independent 3rd party.
Quote: EvenBobThis means in person by a third party familiar with giving the test. Otherwise its worthless. This doesn't mean by somebody MKL knows and 'trusts', gimee a break. A verifiable independent 3rd party.
I'm sure that someone with a 180 IQ shouldn't have any trouble sorting out a few minor details. I'm amenable to suggestions.
Quote: TheNightflyWizard.
I accept this wager - my $100USD against mkl's $100USD that the person on this site who goes by the handle mkl654321 will not achieve a score of 180 or higher n a standardized IQ test. To make things seem equitable regarding the selection of the test I suggest that one test be randomly selected by you (MS) from 5 widely accepted standard intellgence tests of your choosing. The test must be taken under the same conditions and within the same time frame as it would when normally administered.
I'm happy to go ahead with this any time Wiz. Think you'd like to adjudicate? Let it be known that I've offered to bump the wager to $500 but mkl seems to prefer $100 and I understand his taking the less expensive option.
Since my score of 190 twenty years ago equates to a score of 150 today (as I explained elsewhere), it would probably be impossible to score 180 even if I got every single question correct--the scores don't go that high any more, because a different scale is used today.
Therefore I amend the challenge to read: I will score at either an IQ equivalent of 150, or the 99th percentile, whichever you prefer.
Quote: TheNightflyI'm sure that someone with a 180 IQ shouldn't have any trouble sorting out a few minor details. I'm amenable to suggestions.
Its 190, don't knock him down till the test is over. There was a test in the back of Boys Life when I was a kid, maybe thats the one he took.
Quote: TheNightflyI'm sure that someone with a 180 IQ shouldn't have any trouble sorting out a few minor details. I'm amenable to suggestions.
I suggest the Mensa proctored test. I've never taken it (I joined Mensa based on my college exam scores), but it might be fun to take it now.
I don't know if they have an IQ correlation, though, so we might have to go with the 99th percentile.
Edit: And I assume that test has a fee, so whoever wins the bet pays that cost as well.
Quote: mkl654321I will score at either an IQ equivalent of 150,
LOL! What did I tell you. I've seen this before on other forums, it ALWAYS comes to this: The test is sooooooo much different now, I couldn't possibly do as good. I take IQ tests every few years just for fun, they haven't changed that much and they sure as HELL haven't changed 40 points worth.
Quote: mkl654321though, so we might have to go with the 99th percentile.
I just looked it up and 134 and above is what 1% of the population scores. So we've gone from 190 to 150 to 134. Thats EXACTLY where I said he'd score by the way, between 130 and 135. Pretty funny.
Quote: thecesspit99th percentile (~IQ 135) and IQ 150 (99.95th percentile) are about 1 standard deviation apart. Quite different things.
Exactly, there is a HUGE difference between 134 and 150. 134 is very common, 150 is not. My sister has a 135 and my daughter is 138. My daughter was also Valedictorian of her class, but now I'm bragging.. The range from 132 and up is actually the top 2%, thats how many people have IQ's in the 130's. Vere very common.
Quote: EvenBobI just looked it up and 134 and above is what 1% of the population scores. So we've gone from 190 to 150 to 134. Thats EXACTLY where I said he'd score by the way, between 130 and 135. Pretty funny.
No, you said I'd score that "on a good day". Don't lie, Bob.
Quote: thecesspit99th percentile (~IQ 135) and IQ 150 (99.95th percentile) are about 1 standard deviation apart. Quite different things.
I said I'd accept the HIGHER of the two as a benchmark, and only use the 99th percentile if there was no IQ correlation to at least 150.
Quote: EvenBobExactly, there is a HUGE difference between 134 and 150. 134 is very common, 150 is not. My sister has a 135 and my daughter is 138. My daughter was also Valedictorian of her class, but now I'm bragging.. The range from 132 and up is actually the top 2%, thats how many people have IQ's in the 130's. Vere very common.
I said I'd accept a goal of 150, and only use the 99th percentile if the test chosen (remember, it'll be chosen by someone else, not me) doesn't have an IQ correlation.
Quote: EvenBobLOL! What did I tell you. I've seen this before on other forums, it ALWAYS comes to this: The test is sooooooo much different now, I couldn't possibly do as good. I take IQ tests every few years just for fun, they haven't changed that much and they sure as HELL haven't changed 40 points worth.
It IS different now, Bob. If you had a higher IQ, you might be able to look that up.
1. I will take any one of a number of standardized intelligence tests for adults. The particular test will be chosen by the Wiz or another disinterested third party. The test must be of at least equal length to that of the standard test as normally administered.
2. I will achieve a score corresponding to a measured IQ of 150.
3. If no such measure is available, I will score in the 99th percentile.
4. If I do 2. or 3., I win the bet, If I fail to achieve the needed score, I lose.
Quote: mkl654321I said I'd accept a goal of 150, and only use the 99th percentile
Top 0.00003% is 190. Top 0.07% is 150. Top 1% is 134. These are all 99% and above. They are also a universe apart from each other. You want to go from 0.00003% to 0.07%, is that what you're saying?
Quote: mkl654321Just to be crystal clear:
2. I will achieve a score corresponding to a measured IQ of 150.
3. If no such measure is available, I will score in the 99th percentile.
4. If I do 2. or 3., I win the bet, If I fail to achieve the needed score, I lose.
Why would a 150 measure be unavailable? They don't lump all the scores 130 or above in the same category, that would make no sense.
Quote: mkl654321Just to be crystal clear:
1. I will take any one of a number of standardized intelligence tests for adults. The particular test will be chosen by the Wiz or another disinterested third party. The test must be of at least equal length to that of the standard test as normally administered.
2. I will achieve a score corresponding to a measured IQ of 150.
3. If no such measure is available, I will score in the 99th percentile.
4. If I do 2. or 3., I win the bet, If I fail to achieve the needed score, I lose.
Do tests not report beyond the 99th percentile? I really don't understand why 2 and 3 are different, and you don't state 99.9% on 3?
Quote: thecesspitDo tests not report beyond the 99th percentile? I really don't understand why 2 and 3 are different, and you don't state 99.9% on 3?
Some tests do. If the chosen test does, we can come to some kind of agreement as to whether the benchmark is 99.0 or 99.5 or whatever.
I will also consent to a benchmark corrsponding to whatever percentage of the adult population scores 150 or higher on a standardized IQ test, and apply that percentage to the test, i.e., if 0.3% of the population scores 150 or higher, then I will have to score in the 99.7 percentile, if the test does that.
Quote: thecesspitand you don't state 99.9% on 3?
150 is 99.93%, actually.
Quote: mkl654321then I will have to score in the 99.7 percentile
How did we get from 99.99997% to 99.7% just on your say so? I don't give a DAMN how much the tests have changed, you didn't drop 40 points. I know what my IQ was in 1969 and I know what it was in 2008 and its almost the same. How does yours get to drop 40 points??
Quote: EvenBob150 is 99.93%, actually.
I took the MENSA tests, a while back, and scored 158 - unfortunately, this was about 20 years ago so I'm not sure how that relates now. However, I was told that I was in the top 0.5% of the population at that time.
MENSA will give you IQ rating as well as % of the population that you are in (in the UK anyway). Back then, if I remember correctly, 135 got you into MENSA.
The one thing that I still remember vividly is a lime-green tie that I brought (with the 'M' Mensa symbols on) - I don't think I ever wore it (unless I wanted to be seen at night :-) ).
Edit: It may have been 148, not 135, that number seems to ring a bell.
Quote: thecesspit[x] Neither TheNightfly or MKL can agree on the precise terms.
That's the one that I would have picked.
Quote: Switch
The one thing that I still remember vividly is a lime-green tie that I brought (with the 'M' Mensa symbols on) ).
l.
Put it on Ebay, it'll sell.
I'm sure the results (or details of an equally likely backdown) will be eagerly anticipated by all.
Quote: AussieSo a 190 IQ has become a relatively pedestrian 135 IQ in the blink of an eye. It doesn't get much more hilarious than that!
I'm sure the results (or details of an equally likely backdown) will be eagerly anticipated by all.
This is a guy who claims he "knows" I'm Rob Singer 101%, yet he wouldn't put up a hundred bucks towards absolute proof that I'm not. Such a mensa should now be expected NOT to walk around and minimalize backing up ridiculous claims about himself?
Quote: mkl654321
Edit: And I assume that test has a fee, so whoever wins the bet pays that cost as well.
...You mean whoever loses the bet, right? It's pretty foolish if the winner uses the bet proceeds to pay for this...
I've known a number of very intelligent people who believed the stupidest things; such as astrology, numerology, creationism, etc. No amount of intellignece will keep a smart person from being a fool if he choses to be one. Likewise no amount of intelligence will give anyone a pleasant personality.
If mkl tests in the low 200s, would you then like him any better? I'd lay money on that.
Quote: NareedMissing choice: Who gives a damn?
I've known a number of very intelligent people who believed the stupidest things; such as astrology, numerology, creationism, etc. No amount of intellignece will keep a smart person from being a fool if he choses to be one. Likewise no amount of intelligence will give anyone a pleasant personality.
Absolutely agree 100%.
Quote: mkl654321 (From J.L. ThreadI would also be quite happy to take any general intelligence test you care to name, and I'm willing to bet you $100 that I score in the 99th percentile, or whatever score equates to an IQ of at least 180 (to allow for measuring error). Of course, you'll have to put your money where your mouth is before I bother to do that...
Quote: mkl654321Since my score of 190 twenty years ago equates to a score of 150 today...
Therefore I amend the challenge to read: I will score at either an IQ equivalent of 150, or the 99th percentile, whichever you prefer.
This is the biggest joke I've seen in a long time. You were very eager to and made it very clear your IQ was 190. That's all I read about for like two days, how smart you were, how your a Mensa elite or watever....Yada Yada Yada....Now that you got called out on it, your backing out like a (insert adjective (I don't want to get banned))..... Why now aren't you claiming your 190 Newtonian equivalent IQ?????
Take your medicine like a man... Lebron James thinks you recant your statements too much...
Quote: rdw4potus...You mean whoever loses the bet, right? It's pretty foolish if the winner uses the bet proceeds to pay for this...
Yes, I meant loses.
Quote: SOOPOOI am not good a looking for old posts. But someone here can. If mkl stated that he HAD an IQ of 190 then I would say he should be allowed to retrofit the bet for the year/age adjusted number of 150. But if mkl stated that he HAS an IQ of 190, well, then, he should back it up, or admit that he was in error when he made that statement. By stating that he HAS an IQ of 190, that statement was made in 2010, and the word HAS locks in the 2010 meaning of 2010. If someone can find the original post I would be MOST appreciative. I may also remember mkl using statistics to show how far to the right of the bell curve he was, and that discussion implied a 2010 IQ of 190. Thanks all.
SOOPOO, how much chutzpah does it take to estimate what his REAL IQ now is when a dumbass like me spotted him as just another pretender masquerading as an anonymous self-described internet genius, in the first couple days I was here?
Quote: pcket5sThis is the biggest joke I've seen in a long time. You were very eager to and made it very clear your IQ was 190. That's all I read about for like two days, how smart you were, how your a Mensa elite or watever....Yada Yada Yada....Now that you got called out on it, your backing out like a (insert adjective (I don't want to get banned))..... Why now aren't you claiming your 190 Newtonian equivalent IQ?????
Take your medicine like a man... Lebron James thinks you recant your statements too much...
If you take LeBron James as your role model...well...
And I amended the challenge simply because it isn't POSSIBLE to score 180/190 on an IQ test any more.
Quote: EvenBobHow did we get from 99.99997% to 99.7% just on your say so? I don't give a DAMN how much the tests have changed, you didn't drop 40 points. I know what my IQ was in 1969 and I know what it was in 2008 and its almost the same. How does yours get to drop 40 points??
That was an "if" statement, Bob. An example. If a percentile evaluation is used, I'll accept whatever benchmark equates to 150.
Quote: NareedMissing choice: Who gives a damn?
I've known a number of very intelligent people who believed the stupidest things; such as astrology, numerology, creationism, etc. No amount of intellignece will keep a smart person from being a fool if he choses to be one. Likewise no amount of intelligence will give anyone a pleasant personality.
If mkl tests in the low 200s, would you then like him any better? I'd lay money on that.
Nareed, no one is going to like you any better if you say such things about people.
You're big on getting accepted, tolerance, endorsement of your lifestyle, sex change, etc. etc. etc. You want that from the world. But you are one of the least tolerant persons here. You reap what you sow.
Quote: ItsCalledSoccer[X] MKL takes the test, receives some score, and invents a "scale" to say he scored 190, and calls you an idiot if you don't use that "scale."
I know you don't like the fact that I oppose religion.
Quote: mkl654321Quote: ItsCalledSoccer[X] MKL takes the test, receives some score, and invents a "scale" to say he scored 190, and calls you an idiot if you don't use that "scale."
I know you don't like the fact that I oppose religion.
Q.E.D.
Quote: SOOPOOJL- I try and assess each claim on its own merits. If he said "I had an IQ of 190 20 years ago" that is way different from saying "I have an IQ of 190". The latter takes away his ability to use excuses about change in the test scoring. If he stated the former, then he would be correct in backing off of the initial challenge request of 190, and changing it to 150. I am hoping someone can find the initial post.
I can't find the original post either, but what I recall saying was that I TESTED at an IQ of 190 about 20 years ago.
I don't think I ever said I PRESENTLY HAVE an IQ of 190. But the resident experts here don't seem to recognize the distinction. (They're not terribly skilled in English comprehension.) They also are ignoring the fact that in order to test at IQ X (whatever that may be), it has to be POSSIBLE to get a score that high. The scales for measurement have changed. That's not an excuse--it's a simple fact.
In any case, I have an absolute certainty that even if I DID score high enough on a test to fulfill the terms of the challenge, the experts who have been sneering at me will find some way to sneer at those results, too. To put it another way--can you imagine any of these people admitting they were wrong? Not even remotely possible. And I don't have anything to prove to them, anyway. Dumb people hate smart people, and I can't do anything to change that.
Quote: ItsCalledSoccerQuote: mkl654321Quote: ItsCalledSoccer[X] MKL takes the test, receives some score, and invents a "scale" to say he scored 190, and calls you an idiot if you don't use that "scale."
I know you don't like the fact that I oppose religion.
Q.E.D.
My point was that your anger at my refuting your religious beliefs is the source of your attitude, and of the post you made. I'm used to it.
Quote: mkl654321If you take LeBron James as your role model...well...
And I amended the challenge simply because it isn't POSSIBLE to score 180/190 on an IQ test any more.
Obviously your IQ isn't high enough to realize that was a blast at you.... I'll give you half credit, incase you're not a sports fan and don't realize that LBJ is notorious for recanting absurd statements after the media bashes him and he realizes he made a mistake.. I think the situation is similar here.... but I would think you would be smart enough to realize I was being fictitious, you see Lebron James really doesn't think you recant statements too much, it was a fabricated statement.
And my understanding of the IQ test is there is no maximum score to it, it's not like the SAT with a max score of 1600. So it would be possible to have an IQ of 190.
Quote: mkl654321I can't find the original post either, but what I recall saying was that I TESTED at an IQ of 190 about 20 years ago.
I don't think I ever said I PRESENTLY HAVE an IQ of 190. But the resident experts here don't seem to recognize the distinction. (They're not terribly skilled in English comprehension.) They also are ignoring the fact that in order to test at IQ X (whatever that may be), it has to be POSSIBLE to get a score that high. The scales for measurement have changed. That's not an excuse--it's a simple fact.
In any case, I have an absolute certainty that even if I DID score high enough on a test to fulfill the terms of the challenge, the experts who have been sneering at me will find some way to sneer at those results, too. To put it another way--can you imagine any of these people admitting they were wrong? Not even remotely possible. And I don't have anything to prove to them, anyway. Dumb people hate smart people, and I can't do anything to change that.
That last sentence is another MKL lie. I only hate dumb people.
Quote: mkl654321Quote: ItsCalledSoccerQuote: mkl654321Quote: ItsCalledSoccer[X] MKL takes the test, receives some score, and invents a "scale" to say he scored 190, and calls you an idiot if you don't use that "scale."
I know you don't like the fact that I oppose religion.
Q.E.D.
My point was that your anger at my refuting your religious beliefs is the source of your attitude, and of the post you made. I'm used to it.
My point is you're inventing something. I don't care whether or not you oppose religion.
If you don't believe that, then you're Sarah Palinesque, tiny-brained, closed-minded, and stupid.
