>>96371426
IQ is a nonsensical meassuring system.
Being an exam is already flawed, exam results vary depending on external factors. You can meassure objective absolute inteligence based on something that can go wrong if you ate poorly, had a discussion before getting there, it was a heat wave, or whatever, and then don't work on second testing because you already know the type of questions and will always get better results.
And if you check the tests they cover some types of intelligence, but not the useful ones. Stuff like pattern recognition could be considered intelligence, but you're not tested for how long you retain information or whether you can deduce/induce new ideas from data which are the types of intelligence that give results.
Even worse, the meassuring criteria has always been fake. 100 is the medium of the results taken at some point. So 100 now is actually much higher than 100 40 years ago, mostly because we now know how the test works going back to the first item of multiple choice tests being a retarded way to check for intelligence. And the initial 100 was based on random information that didn't relate to the tests in any way, they just picked whatever gave them the results they already decided were right.
Believing in IQ should be an example of low IQ. It's unscientific, made up, and clearly flawed with the most basic examination. You just accepted bullshit because at some point it went along with previous shit you accepted without thinking. Absolute caveman vibe based thinking.
