1 edit
Originally posted by MISTER CHESSThat just shows how uninformed you are. Your IQ doesn't change throughout your life; it is your natural intelligence. The reason they are age adjusted is because a five year old who gets the same score as a twenty-five year old is obviously way more intelligent and it would unfair to give them the same results.
Now, don't go overboard. He is 14, these tests are age adjusted so by the time he hits 25 his IQ might really end up being just above average.
Originally posted by SwissGambitFAIL... You are getting very confused. In a conspiracy, it doesn't matter how many people the conspirators are plotting against, what matters is how many people are plotting.
The 'theory' was that he (Tygert) realized the thread was bombing and tried to spin his way out. A theory about just one person cannot be a 'conspiracy'. (I can't believe I actually have to explain this, but...) obviously the responders weren't conspirators because they were working against Tygert.
Originally posted by MISTER CHESSTell that to the regular, normal, nice people who post nice things on this forum regularly. He is always being pleasant and nice unlike you, who is new to this forum, is a non-sub and quite obviously a troll.
When this guy Grampy Bobby, whom noone seems to like, starts defending you then you must be doing something wrong.
1 edit
Originally posted by TygertSome pages claim that adult IQs are lower, Savant's IQ was 228 when very young and 185 when older.
That just shows how uninformed you are. Your IQ doesn't change throughout your life; it is your natural intelligence. The reason they are age adjusted is because a five year old who gets the same score as a twenty-five year old is obviously way more intelligent and it would unfair to give them the same results.
1 edit
Originally posted by TygertBut the other people weren't plotting at all. Just you.
FAIL... You are getting very confused. In a conspiracy, it doesn't matter how many people the conspirators are plotting [b]against, what matters is how many people are plotting.[/b]
(Crickey, some people just can't follow a discussion...)
And yes, it does matter if the plotters are working together...
Originally posted by TygertIndeed I did! and then noticing the error of my ways, I sought to reduce my embarrassment by just acknowledging my mistake 🙂
Ha ha that is funny. You think you're so clever by adding a dictionary link to the word "complement" not realising it has a completely different meaning! You realise your embarrassing mistake and quickly edit it out.
I didn't think I was being clever.
2 edits
The chess ability and IQ has been discussed a few times here over the years. Chess ability is not just "smarts." It is spatial perception, problem solving ability and abstract thought. Experience and memory also play a part. It isn't just a one dimensional "thing" this chess. 🙂 One of the strongest players I know is maybe 120 IQ.
Originally posted by ChessPraxisThat is the definition of an IQ test. They test all those abilities and then give you the score, if you do a good one like the Stanford-Binet. You don't necessarily have to have a good IQ to be a good chess player because maybe one factor will throw your score out a bit.
The chess ability and IQ has been discussed a few times here over the years. Chess ability is not just "smarts." It is spatial perception, problem solving ability and abstract thought. Experience and memory also play a part. It isn't just a one dimensional "thing" this chess. 🙂 One of the strongest players I know is maybe 120 IQ.