So this is Sup Forums

So this is Sup Forums

Other urls found in this thread:

bmcevolbiol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2148-11-16
twitter.com/AnonBabble

Sup Forums deserves to be lower

>/sci/

yeah sure

>Sup Forums above average
every time

>lit has high iq
Do you really think that average literature teacher has higher iq than any other person?

>average with 0 sources

You are giving Sup Forums too much credit.
Country role playing and stale memes don't make someone smart.

i don't get it. Sup Forumstards are some of the smartest people on Sup Forums. you can't debate anyone there, everyone is well informed and has good moral.

kek

Brainlets all of you. I'm smart but lazy

I hate this board roleplay shit


>I le goo to a board about science to talk about random clickbait news and to ask help for my math homework, my IQ is le 1200000000!!!!

>I go to a tech board to talk about internet browsers war, i'm so hip and nerdy LOL

>/lit

Trust me, the litfags are smart. But also your assertion is true.

But they are not. I can agree that they have more productive discussion but it's only because the topic they are discussing is very narrow. Moreover literature has pretty much established pantheon of classical works and there is absolutely no discussion about it. They like everyone else. I don't try to denigrate lit but it's just very stupid to consider everyone who have read more than 2 books in his life an intellectual

where is /his/

they fucking ruined Sup Forums

>x
>b
>mlp
Makes sense desu

Sup Forums is lower
/tg/ is not that bad

Everything above 115 is delusions of wisdom.

This survey is outdated.

I believe Sup Forums is that high due to the very high number of bilingual posters here.

and what have you done

I wouldn't say so. /sci/ is probably more intelligent. Discussion of literature is a lot more straightforward than actually difficult things like physics.

What I've noticed is that /lit/fags think higher of themselves because they "sound" smarter without actually communicating much of substance or insight.

Sup Forums used to be far smarter
Then /his/ came around and anyone with an IQ above 40 migrated there

Hitler did nothing wrong

Fugggggggggggggg

Off by 3

It's not even a real "survey", it's just a bait picture.

They have high IQ, but they are all also autistic as fuck.
That's the only way someone can sanely devote their time to a straight math major.

I returned after it became just as bad there.
Sup Forums faggots truly ruin everything they touch.

Judging by this post alone Sup Forums might have an IQ 60

Sup Forums has the highest IQ.

>Sup Forums
>120

>real scientific fact
>OP's picture

Pick one

This, you can actually have an intellectual discussion surprisingly as long as it isnt about Trump and there's always someone looking to debate with an extensive background

How is /tg/ dumb at all?

And /lit/ isn't smart. They're psuedosmart, which is not the same thing.

Sup Forums is borderline retarded

Specific parts of Sup Forums are smart (not the Trumpfags), but Sup Forums diaspora are dumb as rocks

This bait picture still tricks boards? God, I hate neo-Sup Forums.

>Sup Forumstards are some of the smartest people on Sup Forums.
ud be suprise :^)

/lit/ used to be the place for philosophy when that pic was made (pre-/his/). Philosophy is harder and harder to get into than physics, but far less useful.

t. double major in stem and humanities

>look, this shit in a chart so is true

I don't know but i laugh.

>Specific parts of Sup Forums are smart
They believe in pseudo-science like race and conspiracy theories

Seems accurate desu, my iq is 129 and i only browse Sup Forums, /x/, /fa/, and Sup Forums

Yeah the chart is a /lit/ meme. They hate /tg/ because /tg/ likes genre fiction.

I find that the lack of objectivity in philosophy allows too many pretentious twats to get on a soap box without qualification and feel validated in that their statements and claims cannot be falsified

I'm not making a dig against philosophy itself, just the people it attracts and is (today) largely made up of, people scared of math and science but still having the ego to want to appear intellectual

as for my background, I was always a big English person in grade school, and a writer, I won a few large writing competitions so it seemed like my path, but I really detested the people in my lit classes, which was a contributing factor in choosing to go with CS instead in college

I've adopted a larger appreciation for math//science since then and have recognized much of the lit/philosophy crowd for the shams that they are

This.
First few weeks were very informative and interesting. Last time I checked there was multiple hitler dindu nuffin shit and off topic bullshit.

Keep in mind that Sup Forums is the only place on Sup Forums where politics is allowed to be discussed. Not anyone who has an interest in politics believes that.

and I know, historically speaking, there didn't used to be this kind of divide. Philosophers and mathematicians/scientists were oftentimes one and the same, it's the modern separation of institutions and nature of today's college scene that has created a void.

And it's pretty sad. Sup Forums is overwhelmed by fanatics which can't be argued with.

>pseudo-science like race

lol

you can call it anything you like, it still exists and is observable

This is the destiny of all boards. Just look the /his/ in the begin and now.

Lol this is an old fake meant to trigger Sup Forums

If you believe any sizeable amount of people on Sup Forums have 130+ IQs I've got a bridge to sell you

Yep, but no in the ways most people believe it is, and certainly not in things like intelligence or behaviour

Studies that say otherwise are usually very outdated. And books like The Bell Curve have been debunked

Races differences are very small compared to similarities, and they don't make a clear "stop" line, they progress like gradients, making a "white/blacks/asian" line useless

>race is pseudo science
prove it

Now I assume by conspiracy theories you mean Jews, but if anyone that believes in Jewish conspiracies is stupid to you, the you are calling Bobby Fischer stupid.

You're purposefully muddling the system in order to make it appear dubious

There is plenty of evidence to say there are differences between races as they're defined, of course if you try to re-define race according to terms that produce a favorable result for your preconceived bias, it's going to turn out that way

Not really interested in a long-winded argument about it, just be aware that dogma doesn't have a political or social orientation

Is this outdated to you?

>bmcevolbiol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2148-11-16

>then you are calling Bobby Fischer stupid.
And what makes him not stupid, exactly? Being better than others at moving around some chess pieces?

no shit nigger
the numbers are so absurdly high that they're obviously false
I can guarantee you no board breaks 115 and even that is stretching it, a lot
conversely no board (except for /mlp/) is probably below 95

Chess requires intelligence.

I'm going to say it depends on regular users

I think the avg. IQ of a Sup Forums regular is probably at least slightly above 100, when you know how stupid society in general is this makes more sense, and I would claim that /sci/ regulars are > 115

It's basically a prerequisite to be smart in order to even care about half of the shit they talk about

>Darwin
This is outdated, severely.

Almost every serious scientist agree that dividing humanity into races is not adequate, though.

I can't criticise what I don't understand (your link). Just keep in mind that it's easy to twist the words out of people. I think the scientific community is right on the topic of race - there are differences but they are small.

Chess requires logical processing and ability to predict your opponent's moves and act accordingly, and that's a rather mechanical process. If it required some sort of intelligence, a computer wouldn't be able to play it.

>I think the avg. IQ of a Sup Forums regular is probably at least slightly above 100

I agree, definitely
I frequent /sci/ (math major) and there are a lot of smart dudes there but I don't think the average is that high
keep in mind that 115 is already top 15% of people and 130 is top 2.3% so for every average person you need a top 2%-er to even it out
that seems possible but not much higher than that is plausible

it does
and most chess masters are really smart but overall it doesn't go the other way around
IQ and chess ability don't have a strong correlation

>all he can do is change the location of moulded plastic objects on a checkered surface, fucking retard

>he just shifts lumps of atoms across a surface like a grocery store shelf stocker

>he just moves his arms and sits around, holding things occasionally

If person could calculate big numbers in second just like computer, wouldn't that be demonstration of intelligence?

>tfw they aren't white for brazilian channers

>Almost every serious scientist agree that dividing humanity into races is not adequate, though.

...

>absolute statements
>qualifiers like "serious scientist"
>not adequate

See you're just being combative, not objective. You're upset with an unpleasant reality and want to redefine that reality in such a way that things become pleasant.

Racial science is rarely touched upon in academia anymore because everyone is uncomfortable with it and/or taking a default stance of denial, it's impossible to conduct objective science in that kind of atmosphere. People see statements regarding intelligence as judgments of their humanity.

In the end you're basically a climate change denier by another name

What?

For brazilian channers, they are to mix too be white. Yeah, they are worse than Sup Forums.

The UNESCO agrees that the Species Homo Sapiens is to be divided into several races. They also say the differencies are only physical and not psicological if this makes you feel better

How are they too mixed?
because some of them have brown eyes?

Jesus fucking Christ, I wrote it like a complete retard. Sorry

No, not necessarily, I'd say. In my opinion, real intelligence is being able to develop new concepts and/or technologies, make scientific breakthroughs, and actually do something to improve our understanding of ourselves and the world around us.
A person who can deal with big numbers really fast might come in handy at some point and be somewhat surprising to some, but still, just like a computer, it's nothing more than a tool.

Are you not happy with this definition?
Wouldn't it be more appropriate to call what you describing creativity?

>brown eyes
>brown hair
>wrong type noose
>too "tan" skin
>etc

>120

AYO WE WUZ EINSTEINS N SHIET

Einstein had an iq of over 160.

Einstein's IQ is estimation.

/his/ is an awful board, discussion is impossible there.

>"I happen to have read every study on the matter and know for a fact that all those that disagree with me are outdated"
ishygddt
>race differences are very small compared to similarities
We share 98.8% of our DNA with Chimpanzees, what's your point?
>Almost every serious scientist agree that dividing humanity into races is not adequate, though.
>'scientists agree that'
You're not some clickbait article.

Of course the borders between the different 'races' are fluid, but we see clear differences between humans from different parts of the world.
Almost nothing in genetics can be clearly placed in one box, but when we measure the IQ for example of people from different countries, we can see the clear differences.
We can then argue over whether or not those countries have populations of a certain ethnic group, but judge for yourself.

Source of pic:
Lynn, R. and Vanhanen, T. (2002). IQ and the wealth of nations. Westport, CT: Praeger. ISBN 0-275-97510-X

da iq tests is skewed to favor kikes n shiet, dey keeping us down mane

He never took an IQ test.

How would you ascertain the I.Q. of /ck/? Why are they so high? Is it the joey posting, reviewbrah threads or the general 5 threads going on about fast food burgers?

I see man. Them kike keeping us goyim done. We wuz the original people of God n shiet!!

>/x/
>Sup Forums
>/mlp/
>Sup Forums
>Sup Forums

The problem with your definition is that it's way too broad and doesn't really reflect qualities that are specifically intrinsic to humans.
Would you call a computer or a calculator intelligent? Probably not

Pattern recognition is the hallmark of human intelligence in particular

You do realizes that this is bait?

>/wg/
>139
I don't get the joke.

This part is possible truth.

Yeah, underage fags are the worst.

/his/ is nice, but too slow. And I miss the flags.

Nope, the oldfags are the worst.

It's already refereed to as Artificial Intelligence. so yes, I would call it intelligent and people already doing it.

Have you been to /his/ recently? The first ew weeks were great but now it's devolved in having most posts being "was X black", "WE WUZ KANGS" and "Prove to me Hitler did anything wrong". All the people who knew anything about history fled quite quickly.

few*

It was actually worse than that actually when it first was made.

Any mention of anything right was a bannable or reportable offense. It turned into lefty/pol/ with anti-religion threads spammed to hell and back.

Now it's a crappy Sup Forumslite. I really hoped it was like a Sup Forumslite with only a few memes and mostly philosophical and pre industrial revolution topics.

i.e autistic people aren't smart?

If that was real it would have a reference that would explain the when, the who and the how of how that study was conducted and it would tell you what the standard distribution of this distribution is (15, 22 or something else). Therefore it is fake and quite possibly a rework of some other distribution chart that has nothing to do with Sup Forums.

T. 89 iq bernd

>Sup Forums use to be smarter.
There has never been a point at any time in which Sup Forums was smart. Sup Forums just use to be not as dumb as Sup Forums or Sup Forums.

Most of the Sup Forums is Atheist or Kekholds.

>implying /w/ or /wg/ is anyone's main board

I'd like the data for this

There is no data, it's just a meme.

IQ is a fucking fraud.

(and no, I didn't get a low score)

Maybe this is not such an easy concept to define. Still, I don't see how succeeding in reproducing previously conceived knowledge and notions could be taken as a sign or proof of intelligence.