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: mkl654321Jerry's just mad at high school teachers
As well he should be, see my post above.
I suspect he's used to getting laughed at gang-style by now.
Quote: JerryLoganI think even in the face of all MKL's ramblings and denials, one scientific piece of evidence solidifies his public downfall and subsequent humiliation....to the delight of the masses, I might add. Check out the number of votes for "Backs Out" & "Gives Lame Excuse"! Man, that has got to be a zinger to someone who thinks it was impressive to announce "I'm a Mensa Genius with an out-of-sight IQ!" to a crowd that immediately saw right through it.
I suspect he's used to getting laughed at gang-style by now.
edit: remarks deleted
...Ah, screw it. I don't have the energy for this any more tonight, it's irrelevant. I got other stuff to do that's more fun, this is boring now.
As the test is also age-related, Mensa will not test anyone below the age of 10 1/2. I think that most extreme high scores have been recorded by child geniuses.
I seem to remember reading that Carol Vordeman (of UK 'Countdown' fame) has an IQ of 162.
The tests, along with their different qualifying Mensa scores are:-
* Cattell III B - 148
* Culture Fair - 132
* Ravens Advanced Matrices - 135
* Ravens Standard Matrices - 131
* Wechsler Scales - 132
(The above scores would relate to the 98th percentile).
As Weaselman noted, Cattell III B (used by Mensa) has a maximum score of 161. I knew (from a previous post) that 148 rang a bell and that is the score needed on Cattell to be eligible for Mensa. Mensa also use Culture Fair as their 2nd test to get an overall score. The age is taken into account and the scores are compared against corresponding percentiles in that age group - from there, I am assuming that an IQ rating is given (although Mike states that it may not be the case, certainly in the US).
From all this, it would seem that the top 1% percentile would be a high achievement. However, a resulting IQ of 190 would be far more difficult to achieve and may be limited to younger age groups.
Mensa's cutoff point of top 2% worldwide in IQ is a very generous one, and translates to something closer to top 10% of people who even know what Mensa or IQ testing is. Finally, IQ testing puts a heavy emphasis on logical and mathematical aptitude, essentially the NT section of MBTI distribution, which has a considerable overlap with the selection of people who even care about math. Which in turn overlaps with the selection of people who would be discussing it on the internet. All things considered, I would be surprised if more than half this forum's members, Betting Systems section visitors excluded, aren't in that percentile.
Quote: P90All things considered, I would be surprised if more than half this forum's members, Betting Systems section visitors excluded, aren't in that percentile.
Now I feel personally insulted, because I already admitted that I failed mensa's test.
You know, MKL, I could sit here and pontificate on whether your IQ is whatever it is. Who cares? My point is, when you make a post that basically says, "I'm smarter than everyone else and therefore you should listen to me", it basically means that you're not.
I think that alot of people on this forum (myself included) don't enjoy your posts (anymore) because you appear to know everything about everything. You don't, despite your claimed IQ. You're even willing to take a dumb IQ test to prove everyone else wrong, as if that if you take the IQ test and score 150, then you indeed do know everything.... you omniscient beast you! You've become (in my opinion) just as annoying as JL (Jerry, you know you're annoying, right), and I'm starting to believe that you enjoy the attention just as much as JL does.
Quote: WizardNow I feel personally insulted, because I already admitted that I failed mensa's test.
How many times have you tried? Practice makes perfect. 2% is 120 million people, and one can push himself into that category by training if he's just in the top billion.
And still, it doesn't say anything about IQ testing other that it is only a measure of a number of specific aspects of one's abilities. Worse even, IQ tests usually include questions that are a matter of knowledge alone, not ability. Your failing that test is only further testament to its low correlation with practical ability and performance.
Quote: boymimboSigh....
You know, MKL, I could sit here and pontificate on whether your IQ is whatever it is. Who cares? My point is, when you make a post that basically says, "I'm smarter than everyone else and therefore you should listen to me", it basically means that you're not.
I think that alot of people on this forum (myself included) don't enjoy your posts (anymore) because you appear to know everything about everything. You don't, despite your claimed IQ. You're even willing to take a dumb IQ test to prove everyone else wrong, as if that if you take the IQ test and score 150, then you indeed do know everything.... you omniscient beast you! You've become (in my opinion) just as annoying as JL (Jerry, you know you're annoying, right), and I'm starting to believe that you enjoy the attention just as much as JL does.
Your statements are ridiculous. I never said any such thing.
You don't like me. That's clear. That's your privilege. I don't particularly like you. That is my privilege. You can make any speculations you want about my motivations or attitudes--and yes, my intelligence--but all they will be is speculations. You criticize me for claiming knowledge I don't have, and right afterwards you claim knowledge that you couldn't possibly have, including, with your mindreading powers, what "a lot" of other people think.
Do you see the inherent contradiction, and if so, do you admit it?
I didn't think so.
Quote: P90How many times have you tried? Practice makes perfect. 2% is 120 million people, and one can push himself into that category by training if he's just in the top billion.
And still, it doesn't say anything about IQ testing other that it is only a measure of a number of specific aspects of one's abilities. Worse even, IQ tests usually include questions that are a matter of knowledge alone, not ability. Your failing that test is only further testament to its low correlation with practical ability and performance.
Once. My test was heavy on vocabulary and reading comprehension, two weak areas of mine. I wish I could find an IQ test based only on math and solving puzzles.
Quote: mkl654321Your statements are ridiculous. I never said any such thing.
Sure you did! How do you think the 190 IQ thing came up in the first place? You had painted yourself into one of your usual corners and used it as a defense: }You better listen to me cause I'm really REALLY smart!{ We haven't stopped laughing.
If you're IQ was truly 190 (or today's 150), you would see that I was paraphrasing. Note also that my sentences "thereafter" were prefaced with "I think", "appear", and "in my opinion". It doesn't mean that I'm right. I think I am. I think = I speculate.
And if you're truly as smart as you think you are, why lower yourself to EvenBob's, JL's, or my own, level? Intelligent people (myself obviously not included) would stay out of it. What do you have to prove?
You don't know how I feel about you, MKL. I genuinely like what you write, when you know what you're talking about. What are your motivations and attitudes? Tell us, oh smart one.
Quote: boymimboThis is one big game to you, isn't it Jerry.
And played by someone who doesn't even know the difference between "who's" and "whose".......yet, claims he's "the smartest one here"...
Quote: WizardOnce. My test was heavy on vocabulary and reading comprehension, two weak areas of mine. I wish I could find an IQ test based only on math and solving puzzles.
IDK if I've seen any advertised specifically as IQ tests. But there is one used by the Belgian Mensa chapter, on mensa.be. It isn't, strictly speaking, an IQ test, but it is a Mensa pretest, which suggests it is about IQ, and it is all math and puzzles, though it's pretty basic.
I took it some time ago, though it appears to have changed since then. The response said "Vous avez répondu correctement à 32 questions sur 33. Avec ce résultat, vos chances de réussir le test final d'admission à Mensa s'élèvent à 76%.", i.e. promising a 76% chance of admission.
The next step though would be to take a paid live admission test, and after that, if passed, pay membership dues. Seeing as I know a number of more exciting ways to spend time than Mensa conventions, like touring around Southeast Asia, it seemed like a heavily -EU move at any rate.
Now, if it was Mensa who rewarded their members or at least remained free (you would think at least some of its members are bound to make it big enough at stock trading to make sponsoring it but pocket change), it would be different... but, of course, the cutoff point would be set a lot higher then as well.
Quote: boymimboMKL,
If you're IQ was truly 190 (or today's 150), you would see that I was paraphrasing.
Sorry. With that kind of statement, that dog don't hunt. You can't put words in someone's mouth and then, when they object, say that you were "paraphrasing" (which you weren't doing, in any case; you were making it up out of whole cloth). Don't admit that you were doing that, if you want, but don't pretend those words were mine. Those words were what you IMAGINED I was saying.
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.
Ok, I think we can work with this. Here are the rules as I see them and if accepted by mkl we can begin.
1. The bet is in the amount of $100 USD.
2. The Wizard chooses the test from 5 options I submit. All will be standardized intelligence tests for adults. The test chosen must be administered in a controlled environment (one which I and the Wizard agree is sufficient to prevent possible deception or fraudulence), authenticated and notarized.
3. If you achieve a score corresponding to or greater than a measured IQ of 150 you win the bet. If you score below 150, I win the bet.
4. The loser of the bet pays for any costs incurred in mkl taking the test.
Pretty simple.
Quote: TheNightflyOk, I think we can work with this. Here are the rules as I see them and if accepted by mkl we can begin.
1. The bet is in the amount of $100 USD.
2. The Wizard chooses the test from 5 options I submit. All will be standardized intelligence tests for adults. The test chosen must be administered in a controlled environment (one which I and the Wizard agree is sufficient to prevent possible deception or fraudulence), authenticated and notarized.
3. If you achieve a score corresponding to or greater than a measured IQ of 150 you win the bet. If you score below 150, I win the bet.
4. The loser of the bet pays for any costs incurred in mkl taking the test.
Pretty simple.
Fine with me. Though if you insist on it being in a "controlled environment", as you put it, and if that environment is in Vegas, i may not be there until March, if then.
Quote: mkl654321and if that environment is in Vegas, i may not be there until March, if then.
Of course. Why don't you do it in your living room and tell us the results, then.
Told ya........
Quote: EvenBobOf course. Why don't you do it in your living room and tell us the results, then.
Told ya........
Don't be a jerk, Bob. All parties would want the test to be taken in a controlled environment. How else would you suggest we do this--fly the Wizard up to Oregon?
I could possibly take the test at the University of Oregon, if that was acceptable to Nightfly. They have a testing center, and the test would be given under conditions that I think would satisfy Nightfly. But that's up to him. What you think or say, Bob, doesn't matter.
Quote: mkl654321
I could possibly take the test at the University of Oregon, if that was acceptable to Nightfly. .
Gosh, that would be convincing. Why not just say you took it and I can get back to calling you Will Hunting.
Reward is to Drawer as Pool is to:-
a) Water
b) Dive
c) Loop
d) Board
Mike, the UK MENSA test, from what I remember, has a whole section based on spatial awareness and lots of logic-based questions.
Quote: SwitchHere is one of the MENSA questions that, for some reason, has always stuck in my mind for all these years:-
Reward is to Drawer as Pool is to:-
a) Water
b) Dive
c) Loop
d) Board
Mike, the UK MENSA test, from what I remember, has a whole section based on spatial awareness and lots of logic-based questions.
Loop is the answer, duh. Drawer is reward spelled backwards.
Quote: SwitchHere is one of the MENSA questions that, for some reason, has always stuck in my mind for all these years:-
Reward is to Drawer as Pool is to:-
a) Water
b) Dive
c) Loop
d) Board
Mike, the UK MENSA test, from what I remember, has a whole section based on spatial awareness and lots of logic-based questions.
Boy, that question doesn't belong on a Mensa test. The answer, of course, is e) Pomegranate.
I agree that some tests are more heavily weighted towards verbal and mathematical skills, and some are more biased toward abstract reasoning and spatial awareness. It's probably unfair/inaccurate for an "intelligence test" not to have equal amounts of all categories.
Quote: mkl654321Fine with me. Though if you insist on it being in a "controlled environment", as you put it, and if that environment is in Vegas, i may not be there until March, if then.
One final thought before we square this away with the Wizard. I offered to make the bet $500 and you declined. Perhaps you'd like to make a little extra money in the bargain. I propose that for every point above 150 you score (should you achieve a score of 150 or higher) I pay you an extra $20. For every point below 150 you score (should you fail to achieve a score of 150) you pay me an extra $10. 2-1 odds for a mathematically inclined gambler such as yourself on what you seem to think is a sure thing... how can you say no?
Quote: TheNightflyOne final thought before we square this away with the Wizard. I offered to make the bet $500 and you declined. Perhaps you'd like to make a little extra money in the bargain. I propose that for every point above 150 you score (should you achieve a score of 150 or higher) I pay you an extra $20. For every point below 150 you score (should you fail to achieve a score of 150) you pay me an extra $10. 2-1 odds for a mathematically inclined gambler such as yourself on what you seem to think is a sure thing... how can you say no?
Depends on the scoring rubric of the test. It might be VERY hard to get even up to 151, but very easy to drop to 149. In fact, that's the way I would structure such a test--the last few incremental steps upward should be the hardest. So the 2-1 odds might not even be enough.
Quote: mkl654321And played by someone who doesn't even know the difference between "who's" and "whose".......yet, claims he's "the smartest one here"...
I recall only 4 hours earlier you railing on someone as being "stupid for picking on your grammar & spelling mistakes"!
You just can't win mkl.
Quote: mkl654321Depends on the scoring rubric of the test. It might be VERY hard to get even up to 151, but very easy to drop to 149. In fact, that's the way I would structure such a test--the last few incremental steps upward should be the hardest. So the 2-1 odds might not even be enough.
So funny! As reality gets nearer and theory begins to fade into the distance, the excuses begin to pile up. First, the guy might not get to LV until March "if that"....and this, from a guy who acts like he's in LV 24/7 when anyone pops a question on anything Vegas. Then, he sweats a bet of anything over $100 after blabbing about his "exceptional teacher's salary of $55k" in Oregon, and finally, he makes up excuses about the $20/point above/below 150.
Looks likes the "Backs Out" is gonna win! But how could so many people have known that? I mean, the guy just seems to be SO go-gitem' oriented!
Quote: JerryLogan
Looks likes the "Backs Out" is gonna win!
Was there ever any doubt? This has gotten so predictable its getting boring as hell..
Quote: WizardOnce. My test was heavy on vocabulary and reading comprehension, two weak areas of mine. I wish I could find an IQ test based only on math and solving puzzles.
You are are looking for Raven's matrices test (there are two of them - one called Raven's progressive matrices, and the other one is Raven's advanced matrices. Despite the name, the latter isn't harder :)). You don't even need to be able to read to take it.
Quote: mkl654321Boy, that question doesn't belong on a Mensa test. The answer, of course, is e) Pomegranate.
Huh. I thought it was Netflix.
Quote: EvenBobWas there ever any doubt? This has gotten so predictable its getting boring as hell..Quote: JerryLoganLooks likes the "Backs Out" is gonna win!
I think it would be quite interesting if JerryLogan and EvenBob took the test along with mkl, just so we have a clear picture as to were the combative folks would stand in a true battle of intellect. I realize that neither of those two have made overt claims that need backup here, but would either of them be willing to have such information known about them?
I have rather suspected that, based on the wager, the result of mkl's test would eventually be posted here. Did I assume correctly? Would either of the above care to participate, too? The "getting boring as hell" characteristic could suddenly change to "quite intriguing."
Quote: DocI think it would be quite interesting if JerryLogan and EvenBob took the test along with mkl, just so we have a clear picture as to were the combative folks would stand in a true battle of intellect. I realize that neither of those two have made overt claims that need backup here, but would either of them be willing to have such information known about them?
I have rather suspected that, based on the wager, the result of mkl's test would eventually be posted here. Did I assume correctly? Would either of the above care to participate, too? The "getting boring as hell" characteristic could suddenly change to "quite intriguing."
I knew Jerry and Bob would post some comment about how I'm "backing out" or some such crap because I changed the conditions to reflect reality. However, I am indeed taking the test, and Nightfly has agreed to the challenge. I don't know yet what test will be selected, or where the challenge will take place--that's up to Nightfly and the Wizard.
We already have an extremely clear picture of where EvenBob and Jerry stand relative to myself in terms of intellect, by the quality of their posts. If the severe reasoning deficiencies shown in both their posts are truly indicative of their intellects (horrible to contemplate), then they wouldn't be able to find the place where a test would be given, let alone complete it. Also, Jerry wouldn't be interested in taking such a test, because nowhere on a standardized test is the opportunity to insult anybody--it wouldn't be fun for him. Bob would tell you he's already taken such a test recently.
in any event, I'm not interested in what their tested IQs might be; their salient feature is that of being nasty, combative, and abrasive, seasoned with illogic and an inability to argue except with fallacious reasoning like the ad hominem attack, a favorite of Jerry's. Who cares how dumb they are? The only thing that matters is their personalities (and in Jerry's case, his many dual identities, and his refusal to admit to them).
To answer your other question, yes, the results will be posted here.
Quote: mkl654321in any event, I'm not interested in what their tested IQs might be; their salient feature is that of being nasty, combative, and abrasive
Huh. Just like yours.
LOL.
Quote: MoscaHuh. Just like yours.
LOL.
Perhaps, LOL, but how does that, LOL, make them any less, LOL, nasty, combative, and LOL, abrasive?
LOL.
Quote: MoscaSauce for the goose, sauce for the gander. If it's OK for you, then why is it wrong for them? You use it to insult them. It is as if I described you as arrogant, haughty, and rude. Fine, you might answer, but what is wrong about that? And I would reply, nothing. I am simply describing you.
LOL.
I didn't say it was wrong; I merely described them. You can decide for yourself how wrong it is for them to be that way. And calling them "nasty, rude, and abrasive" isn't insulting them, any more than it is insulting to call Kareem Abdul-Jabbar "tall".
And if you can't discern any difference between my posts and theirs, well, then.....all I can say is.....LOL.
Quote: mkl654321I didn't say it was wrong; I merely described them. You can decide for yourself how wrong it is for them to be that way. And calling them "nasty, rude, and abrasive" isn't insulting them, any more than it is insulting to call Kareem Abdul-Jabbar "tall".
And if you can't discern any difference between my posts and theirs, well, then.....all I can say is.....LOL.
And if you can't discern that the only difference between your posts and theirs is the style, then all I have to say to you is that you have no self awareness.
Quote: MoscaAnd if you can't discern that the only difference between your posts and theirs is the style, then all I have to say to you is that you have no self awareness.
"Not viewing myself the same way some guy who calls himself Mosca does" only equates to "having no self-awareness" in the depths of your mind.
Don't exalt your opinions to the status of high truth.
Quote: mkl654321I didn't say it was wrong; I merely described them. You can decide for yourself how wrong it is for them to be that way. And calling them "nasty, rude, and abrasive" isn't insulting them, any more than it is insulting to call Kareem Abdul-Jabbar "tall".
And if you can't discern any difference between my posts and theirs, well, then.....all I can say is.....LOL.
Use of ad hominem attacks : Check.
Use of straw men arguements : Check
Use of reductio ad absurdum : Check
Inability to stay the course when challenged : Half a check.
That would be a behavior vaguely similar to your rating your own opinion on constitutional law higher than that of the majority of the supreme court justices, in the "Guns..." thread. I don't really agree with any members presenting their opinions as warranting such superior status, and certainly not my own.Quote: mkl654321...Don't exalt your opinions to the status of high truth.
Quote: DocThat would be a behavior vaguely similar to your rating your own opinion on constitutional law higher than that of the majority of the supreme court justices, in the "Guns..." thread. I don't really agree with any members presenting their opinions as warranting such superior status, and certainly not my own.
Very vaguely similar, as in, not at all. I said over and over that that was my INTERPRETATION of the amendment. The Supreme Court's opinion is also an INTERPRETATION. Neither my nor their interpretation is definitive.
And if we crushed all dissent with the opinions of the high court, or other government bodies, as being somehow unworthy of expression, then we might as well throw in the towel right now. My reasoning was as valid as that of the five out of nine judges who issued the ruling, and if you don't believe me, then please note that four of the High Exalted Ones held the same dissenting views as I do.
The alternative would be for me to say, "Well, five out of nine Supreme Court justices interpreted the amendment this way, so I guess I'm full of shit, and so were the other four Justices, and so are the millions of people who read the Second Amendment literally." The Supreme Court is hardly the final arbiter of all thought.
Quote: thecesspitUse of ad hominem attacks : Check.
Use of straw men arguements : Check
Use of reductio ad absurdum : Check
Inability to stay the course when challenged : Half a check.
Your opinion: check.
Quote: mkl654321Your opinion: check.
Errr... um, yes? Obviously it's my opinion. I didn't phone up Kofi Annan and ask to borrow his opinion for the weekend. If you have any more statements of the bleeding obvious, please, feel free to send them to your local dead letter office so they can be processed.
Anyways, I could go all cross referencing and show where my opinion has been formed, but I don't really care to, and have better things to do this weekend than put up with yours, or Logans or anyone else's bullshit.
In fact, I have better things to do with my life in general than continue to read the asinine, argumentative torrent of ephemera that makes up for at least 75% of this forum, and I really should ween myself off a steady diet of nothing, and stop giving up fresh fruit for such rotting vegetables.
Quote: thecesspitErrr... um, yes? Obviously it's my opinion. I didn't phone up Kofi Annan and ask to borrow his opinion for the weekend. If you have any more statements of the bleeding obvious, please, feel free to send them to your local dead letter office so they can be processed.
Anyways, I could go all cross referencing and show where my opinion has been formed, but I don't really care to, and have better things to do this weekend than put up with yours, or Logans or anyone else's bullshit.
In fact, I have better things to do with my life in general than continue to read the asinine, argumentative torrent of ephemera that makes up for at least 75% of this forum, and I really should ween myself off a steady diet of nothing, and stop giving up fresh fruit for such rotting vegetables.
In that case, we will miss you.
And I should point out to you the waste of your precious time that it took to compose that eloquent post. I recommend not doing that any longer.
Quote: mkl654321I didn't say it was wrong; I merely described them. You can decide for yourself how wrong it is for them to be that way. And calling them "nasty, rude, and abrasive" isn't insulting them, any more than it is insulting to call Kareem Abdul-Jabbar "tall".
And if you can't discern any difference between my posts and theirs, well, then.....all I can say is.....LOL.
mkl: Dumb people are jealous of smart people
Jerry: Losers (gambling) are jealous of winners
Quote: gogmkl: Dumb people are jealous of smart people
Jerry: Losers (gambling) are jealous of winners
Not equivalent statements, regardless of whether you felt there was any meaning in juxtaposing them.
In my classes, and outside them as well, the dumb kids always give the smart kids grief. Overt bullying is on the wane, thanks to laws and policies aimed at staving that off, but there are a thousand ways one group of high school kids can conspire to make another group miserable. The dumb ones blame anyone but themselves for their lack of effort, and they focus on the achievers with some pretext like "those guys raise the curve". I don't grade on the curve, but even when I tell the kids that, they think that their performance is somehow measured against everyone else's--and therefore, the smart kids make everybody else look bad, or so they think.
Both soliders went to the grave believing the other was incorrect or lying about what had happened that day those years ago. Not realizing the obvious likelyhood that it was simply a case of friendly fire.
So what did this story have in common with this thread?- two older guys who just cant agree arguing forever amungst themselves about something that is trivial to everyone else.
