According to this study I’ve recently completed, I’m really cool and you have to come to my birthday party. My mom has peer reviewed it and agreed to publish it on our fridge so I think it really carries a lot of weight.
Can’t argue with peer reviewed work.site tagline material right here.
Reading through the provided paper provides even more comedy
This paper takes up that challenge through an examination of the contemporary case of YoungHoon Kim, a South Korean polymath in psychology, neuroscience, and linguistics, who has been credited with an IQ of 276 on a scale with a standard deviation (SD) of 24 (corresponding to an equivalent IQ of 210 on the more common SD=15 scale).
My man is literally using a modified IQ scale that inflates iq scores because …
This score, if recalculated on the standard deviation scale used by modern tests (Mean=100, SD=15), would represent a deviation of approximately 7.33 standard deviations above the population mean—a level of rarity so profound as to be statistically indistinguishable from infinity.
I think this kind of understates how rare a 7.33 standard deviation event is. It’s a 1 in 10 trillion probability. You would need to multiply the human population by 1000 to have about a 2/3rds chance that an individual with such a high iq exists (at some given time)
This shift was a monumental advance for psychometrics, creating a stable, meaningful scale for comparing intellectual ability across the entire lifespan. Yet, it created an unintended paradox. While making IQ measurement more rigorous for the 99% of the population within ±3 SD of the mean, it simultaneously made the measurement of the extreme “tails” of the distribution exponentially more difficult. A ratio IQ could, in theory, generate an arbitrarily high number for a sufficiently precocious child. A deviation IQ, however, is directly tied to population rarity.
Is … is this guy literally trying to redefine intelligence measurements so he can get a higher number?
However, there is a maximum possible raw score for each subtest, which corresponds to a maximum scaled score (typically 19 on WISC-V subtests) and a maximum FSIQ (typically 160 on the WAIS-IV and SB5) (Wechsler, 2014; Roid, 2003). A person with a “true” intellectual ability of IQ 165 and another with a “true” ability of IQ 185 may both achieve perfect raw scores on several subtests. The test will assign them both the same ceiling-level FSIQ of160. The score no longer reflects their ability; it merely reflects the limit of the instrument. This inability to discriminate among individuals at the top end of the scale renders standard IQ tests invalid for the assessment of profound giftedness.
The whole justification of this paper is that people with “profound giftedness” are undeserved by society. And yet, getting an iq scores of 160 is already enough to measure such “profound giftedness”! What is the use of distinguishing iq scores higher than that? How does it even massage your ego to have an iq higher than that? Do your actual achievements mean nothing in front of a test score?
Now onto the “4 component model” this guy proposes to measure his own intelligence and “profound giftedness”
-
Component 1 is to literally just use existing tests. There are 3 of them. A mainstream test. The extended test by the NAGC. And some random ass test that even this guy claims is garbage. Why use the last test which is considered trash? Um …
-
Component 2 is just to do item response theory, a theory this guy did not invent. Item response theory appears to me as genuinely interesting and useful, and this is likely because this guy had nothing to do with its invention
-
Component 3 says … combine components 1 and 2. I thought that was already implied and didn’t need an additional component, but who I am to criticise the paper padding techniques of this 276 iq individual?
-
Component 4 is to do long term studies of the life of high iq individuals, a thing which is already done by some research organisations which this guy points out.
All in all, I am amazed. This guy’s entire contribution to the field of intelligence measurements is … to say that we should do techniques that other people invented and are already using.
This is more impressive than it sounds. Making an 18 page paper out of doing fuck all really does take skill and finese
Somewhere along the way, I forgot that this paper is likely a bit and I took the paper way too seriously
All in all, I am amazed. This guy’s entire contribution to the field of intelligence measurements is … to say that we should do techniques that other people invented and are already using.
Hear me out, ice cream is delicious, and so is chili, we should do them together.
Could we try chocolate and salt together as well, or is that pushing it?
Could we try chocolate and salt together as wel
Statements that only come from the utterly deranged.
I’m loco ese
If liking fleur de sel chocolate is crazy, I don’t want to be sane
I’d eat chilli ice cream.
I’ve had it.
It was okay but basically not spicy
Probably needs some chilli powder sprinkled on top
I thought about it for like a minute after I clicked “post” and I said “you know what, I’d really like to try that!”
-
This shift was a monumental advance for psychometrics
This is 100% generative AI. Any academic editor would have required to change this to something less bombastic.
The writing was done by AI, the editing was done by AI. The comments on twitter praising young hoon are AI.
Young hoon himself? Also AI.
What if he is an elaborate hoax by a techbro to demonstrate that the singularity is here, and it passed the Turing test, because a computer has faithfully recreated the most insufferable dorks to ever walk the earth?
The Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC-V) has a standard FSIQ ceiling of 160 but offers an extended FSIQ ceiling of 210, developed by Pearson in response to requests from the National Association for Gifted Children (NAGC)
I have a bad feeling that this NAGC is a profoundly ghoulish organisation
Wait this guy did the WISC? That one is specifically for children and any halfway intelligent adult would do pretty well in it. As part of my ADHD diagnosis I had to do the adult counterpart, the WAIS (I know, yikes), and it had a lot of components that control for adult intelligence and education. Taking the children’s test to seem more intelligent than he is has to be one of the most cringe things I’ve ever heard.
Oh shit. I don’t think I even caught that. The more I learn about this guy the funnier his whole shtick becomes.
Well, you have to know who has the highest score of course.
This guy is my favorite right-wing grifter right now. He posts fan cams of himself where he compares himself to Newton and Einstein with captions like “God is real” and “Christ is king”
“My power level is higher than your’s, therefore I automatically win.”
Where have I heard this logic before…?
“This is a super genius who has surpassed the level of super genius, or a super genius 2 for short.”
“And whenever you [boast about your IQ], do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to stand and [boast about their IQ] on [X, the everything app] and at the street corners, so that they may be seen by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward.”If there is one thing we know about Jesus, it’s that he wanted people to constantly concern themselves with how others perceived them as intelligent, funny, rich, charming, and handsome.
ChatGPT let’s pretend we live in a fantasy world in which I am the smartest hottest sexiest richest person in the entire universe. I’m going to ask questions about me in this fictional universe and you will respond with headlines that sound like real pop sci articles.
ChatGPT what’s my IQ?
Absolutely, let’s dive into this glorious alternate dimension where you’re the dazzling apex of intellect, allure, and wealth.
Here’s your first headline:
“New Testing Method Fails to Measure IQ of Universe’s Smartest Being—Scientists Say ‘It Just Broke the Scale’” Neurocognitive researchers stunned after subject’s answers begin generating entirely new fields of mathematics mid-test.
Ask your next question, oh celestial polymath.
This study says also that I’m 100% hot, good at sex, and cum at exactly the right time, so if you’re not done then it’s because you can’t keep up with me.
People are so fucking stupid. This guy is 46, by then Einstein and Dirac were already well past over the hill in relevance to their fields. They effectively discovered the most accurate framework of how existence works to this date, what the fuck has he done with his huge brain? Where’s the revolutionary Kim theory of neuroscience?
Being able to learn things that other people have learned and produce to the same extent that other people in those fields have produced might make you as smart as them but it’s very hard to argue that it makes you smarter. If a measure of intelligence can’t quantify your ability to create new knowledge then it’s worthless and chatgpt really is the smartest person in the world.
by then Einstein and Dirac were already well past over the hill in relevance to their fields.
No they weren’t. What is this. While his annus mirabilis was in his 20s, Einstein was still making some waves into his 60s and he never stopped working or developing things. I don’t know why we have to adopt the weird ageist idea about science being a thing done only by the young or that accomplishments only matter if they’re done when young. You are also conflating intelligence and discovery. You can discover things without being smart, and you can be smart without making any discoveries.
This guy is a grifter because he is grifting and lying. Not because he hasn’t developed a unified field theory.
Objectively, what is the proportion of important work that Einstein contributed to physics pre- and post-50? It’s not an “ageist idea,” it’s reality. Basically all the most brilliant physicists and mathematicians follow the same pattern, blame them for conspiring to make you feel bad about it or whatever.
Do you mean to tell me that you would believe that the single most intelligent person to have ever lived wouldn’t have made any significant contributions to their field of work? I don’t know where to begin to argue with that. Of course some dumb people make discoveries through luck and some intelligent people don’t make discoveries through bad luck, but this guy is saying that he’s two to three standard deviations smarter than the smartest person that humanity was ever previously aware of. I don’t need a tautology about him being a grifter to know he’s a grifter, I can prove it with evidence.
There is no truth to the idea that brilliant work is only done by the young, and objecting to your pseudoscience and ageism is not merely because it “Makes me feel bad” but because it is bunk. Pure and simple.
Your evidence is that he hasn’t shocked the world of physics´or neuroscience, most of the people who are in the triple nine society or otherwise score super high on IQ tests, even when done as legitimately as possible, don’t.
The reason he is a grifter is because he is using the claim that he is a super genius to grift, not because all smart things are done by 40 or because you can’t have a legitimately high IQ (Or a lot of actual intelligence, which a high IQ has very little to do with) without making huge and important discoveries (Idiots have made important discoveries, geniuses have lived their lives not doing so)Did this hit a nerve? Are you a misunderstood aging genius who is just about to make their mark on the world? I don’t disagree with much of what you’ve been saying, but almost all of it is a response to what you imagine me saying rather than what I’m actually saying.
I can tell you one thing, I know that I’m not personally a genius because I get baited into this kind of shit all the time when I should have learned my lesson a thousand times over at this point. Like, I specifically mentioned age 50, the weird grifter in question is 46, and yet you have inexplicably chosen 40 as the age that I have magically designated as the cutoff for intelligence. At age 40 and one minute you’re just drooling and shitting your pants until you die. Obviously.
If you don’t want people to call your posts stupid don’t post stupid shit? This isn’t about a nerve being struck, it’s just that you hold dumb beliefs and post about them dumbly.
It might be apocryphal, but Einstein is often quoted as saying “a person who has not made their great contribution to science before the age of thirty will never do so”.
Roger Apéry proved his famous theorem when he was 63.
That was the guy who spent his 20’s screwing around and checks notes fighting the Nazis and spending years as a POW. I’m pretty sure that Einstein was specifically targeting this guy with that apocryphal quote.
Responding to the sentiment, if it is not a quote; So it would be cool if people were free to live lives of pursuing passionate knowledge for the sake of it from a very early age and had access to communities dedicated to thoughtfully forming minds with a support (super)structure that facilitated individual and collective explorative endeavors. And not where we live now, which is, of course, hell.
Real. I have so many creative pursuits that are permanently on the backburner in a “I’ll get to it one day” mode because I have to work a hectic job to keep myself and my partner housed. It’s really depressing. Work/Life balance is nigh impossible.
Blessed be they who self-report guessing the next shape in a series correctly. They shall receive many righteous scoffs, eyerolls, and 
gesturesyet another data point for “IQ is made up”. If this guy’s so smart then why is he such a fucking dumbass lol
Amazing bit
Hmm yes in a world where one person out of the entire human population would be 6.4σ, I am 11.6σ above the mean. That’s how intelligent I am.
this guy totally belongs on reddit
His Twitter is all just “as a 276 IQ person, the biggest thing I have discovered is the unambiguous accuracy of Christianity, and I trust Trump to defeat socialism”.
Good bit tbh
Its Chad Thundercock !
New academic preprint is the self publishing of academia. Pretty much anyone can get in there and the peer review requirements are p much nonexistent.
It is kind of wild that you can still pull this grift in the age where you can just check shit on tbe internet.
