IQ is too narrowly focused. Everything is aptitude and IQ only presents a sliver of the aptitudes of a person/

>>16958185
nobody who mentions iq without cringing is an intelligent person

>>16958185
The exact numbers presented seem quite sus, though I'm certain the results are directionally correct.

>>16958185
Depends on "who" is presenting it as "science"
Its data science which is not the same as natural science, and natural science is the only science there is. Inferring from data isnt a demonstration of cause
I dont care how many biologists agree with race realism there simply isnt any science for it. BUT THAT DOESNT MEAN IT ISNT TRUE
There have been claims such as "the IQ of X group is higher than Y group thus explains why X outperforms Y" theyre simply inferences from data and not sciences

>>16958185
I took a YouTube ad IQ test; after 40 questions, they asked for my email and said they wouldn't give me the crappy results without paying for a sub. I want my time back. I wasn't going to take the chance anyway, just for fun (I probably have an above-average IQ then)

>>16958185
Depends on the study.
>lehehehehe, so only outcomes you like?
No, depends on the methodology of the study, not the outcomes. Using text analysis to determine IQ is little more than voodoo. That someone calls it an IQ test doesn't make it so nor does it invalidate the actual rigorously designed tests that are given under controlled conditions.

>>16958185
Correlation is not causation, so it's not really science,
more like social-sciences like Economy, Psychology or Sociology.
But it's definitely /sci/ related.

>>16958185
No they're entirely valid, it's just that it invalidates much of letfist theories (like everything else).

>>16958185
Yes, it's astrology for incels.

>>16958255
that's a binary iq test

>>16958490
why are leftoids so anti-science
it's almost like their ideology is entirely about lies

>>16958185
>I put boards I don't like on the left
>and boards I read on the right
>put a couple of le widely considered """smart""" boards on the right and vice versa for plausible deniability
>THIS IS LE OBJECTIVE LE TRUTH YOU CHUDS

>>16958185
all of sci cheated on the icar years ago i remember

I scored 107 on it raw after 2 hours of taking it and that correlates heavily with GAI