What exercise gets me IQ gains, Veeky Forums?

Lad, that's some serious food for thought

Man I wished someone would take that child away from the mother and put it in a home.

Then we could watch that "mother" of 18 just rot away. If she doesnt do the same mistake again, then I would wish the cycle to repeat.

I saw this on /pol/ while casually skimming it for barcelona autism news.

why do they assume its a black baby? its clearly in a shadow. regardless bitch is probably a complete loser no actual smart guy would consider dating since smart/rich people find people of status.

t. good friends with rich and successful people (not one myself)

...

The nose never lies user

?what?

>you can only be as strong as the guy who put the plates on the barbell

>make your main dating profile picture a photo of you with your baby
>request very high standards with that in mind

I can't see this not being satire/fake.

>very high standards
>"must be above 5'3"

so what does that bitch want to do beside taking bad life choices?

>your pc can only be as smart as the one who invented it
nah

Coast through life using her pussy to hold doors open as long as she can.

>you're a fucking inanimate object!

>your cheeseburger can only taste as good as the guy who made it

wait what fucking analogies

A more fair comparison would be:
>you can only be as tall as the guy who touched the ceiling

Completely backwards. In your scenario the computer is the problem solver so it would be the person taking the test. The person who made the IQ test didn't make the tester.

...

Nah, cause IQ tests are timed, and they could take years to make it.

It's a wide nose. Black people have wider noses.

lol no

lol yes you fucking retard

>my weight will only be as my genetics allows me to

single mothers are so fucking delusional
>thinking they have any sexual market value whatsoever

I have a 'friend' on kikebook who is so salty that she "only attracts fuckboys" when she has a permanent living reminder of past thottery. And she keeps posting shit like this.
It's hilarious.

I see you are low IQ.

Sometimes people hold children that aren't theirs.

>What exercise gets me IQ gains, Veeky Forums?
mostly genetic but you can increase your IQ test results (sligthly) by:
>reading a lot. A LOT. different topics and try to think deeply about what you've read. Try to connect the knowledge of different fields in your mind
>discuss various topics with other people of different oppionons. Refine your arguments
>solve a lot of mathematical equations and topological problems
>Do a lot of IQ tests

Its all about tinder.
They think they get a lot of matched and their hot.
But the reality they are just a quick fuck for the most guys. Nobody wants a date those whores.

jej

>you can only be as Veeky Forums as the guy who touches your dick

no homo

You can only be as smart as the results of a test, created by the accumulative effort of multiple people over a course of multiple years, determine you to be according to that criteria

I 100% understand why girls do this though

>be unattractive single mom
>only guys who want to date you are fucking losers
>complain to one of your Stacey friends
>Stacey doesn't have the heart to tell you it's because you're fat, ugly, don't bathe and have a kid
>tells you 'girl you just gotta set some standards for yourself'
>believe her because externalizing the blame feels good
>proceed to post bullshit from OP in your tinder profile

It's the female version of 'just b confident bro'

what kind of poison do you have inside you to think something like this would even be remotely attractive?
my condolences anyway, seems you got in a bad situation but realized it after all

How the fuck do you conclude that from my post?

This is tinder culture.

I meet most of those but she will still swipe left because I'm not chad. Fuckkin roastiesssssss

Because he's been on Veeky Forums too long and assumed every green text is a personal story. Or maybe he's dumb. Or drunk. I wish I was drunk.

"must be straight"

How retarded do people have to be to take her bio seriously?

Maybe she hates bisexuals.

>tinder
>culture
is this what people call american culture?

Read a lot and realise that IQ is a measure of how good you are at IQ tests, not a measure of intelligence

>t. brainlet

>tfw i fit all her requirements
>tfw my only requirement for chicks i date is that they aren't single moms

lmao

Depends on how you define intelligence, but if you eliminate everything that doesn't fall under the purview of 'IQ' you end up with a pretty reliable predictor of certain metrics in life. There's a lot of bullshit in psychology but IQ is a rare instance where it is actually well-researched and conclusive

>tfw 5'3
ONE
MORE
INCH

My IQ is pretty high and I know plenty of people with lower ones who are obviously more intelligent than me. If you have talent for simple maths and spacial reasoning you'll smash IQ tests regardless of how intelligent you are.

>muh anecdote trumps over a century of research

>150 iq
>60k
she has no idea what she's doing. but yeah best way to get IQ gains is to believe in reincarnation and reroll

>IQ of 150 or over

Anyone with an IQ of 140-145 or higher is considered a genius, and this bitch expects you to have a 150 or higher? I'm guessing hers is about an 86.

>pretending there are no studies that show IQ tests aren't valid because you scored 125 once and have nothing else to be proud of

IQ tests are a meme. The online ones are especially dumb because there's no accreditation process and any dumbfuck can make one and tell you you have an IQ of 160 to make you feel good about yourself.

Intelligence isn't something that can be measured by a number anyways. People who are good at IQ tests could be retarded in real life, it just so happens they're good at recognizing patterns.

I've never taken an IQ test, but there is a tremendous amount of research backing up its validity as a predictor of various "success" metrics. The correlation isn't 1:1; people who have a low IQ can still be successful, and people who have a high IQ can still be failures.

Anyone who say shit like this
Has no idea what they're talking about. IQ is probably the most well-researched phenomenon in modern psychology.

>Intelligence isn't something that can be measured by a number anyways.
Why not? And IQ doesn't profess to "measure intelligence", it's an estimate of certain factors that contribute to intelligence. Obviously intelligence is a nebulous concept but that doesn't mean that we can't devise a means to quantify some aspect of it (and indeed we have, with IQ).

The correlation is less than .5 for anything related to success and IQ, and there is so much criticism surrounding IQ in general. You have no idea what you're talking about

>user doesn't know that in social sciences ~5% of studies produce results opposite of the truth due to the nature of randomness and probability
not gonna make it

>The correlation is less than .5 for anything related to success and IQ
...you realize that's quite high, right?

I am a psychologist and I give IQ tests quite often (especially the Wechsler tests). In all honesty IQ tests are not so useful in detecting and measuring genius/intelligence as they are in finding problems. I mean they are much more useful when dealing with the left side of the bell curve, if you know what I mean.

Short term memory, reasoning skill, verbal ability, creative intelligence, emotional and social intelligence (rapport, eye and speech tells), or specific skills in specialized knowledge.. are some of the problems with it.

iq tests were created empirically. social scientists first looked at answers to questions only successful people got right and continued to refine it to the iq tests you see today.

>Elisabeth
>s instead of a z
White trash

>there is so much criticism surrounding IQ in general
In certain contexts, like racial differences in IQ and research methodology. There are very, very few respected people in the field who would disown the concept of IQ entirely.

This argument is the equivalent of saying "there is so much criticism surrounding climate change, therefore it is bullshit".

Creative, social and emotional "intelligence" are deliberately excluded from IQ assessments, so I'm not sure what your point is here. IQ isn't trying to assess those metrics, and psychologists are not saying that being skilled in other areas is not important or relevant. You're basically complaining that a math exam doesn't test your knowledge of history; no shit, it isn't intended to. Researchers do not profess IQ to be the ultimate and sole determinant of every single variable in human intelligence. You're just arguing a nonsense strawman.

Some tests are much easier to create then to solve.

You are right, the only thing to add is that we are not even sure of what the IQ tests measure, for example we have yet to provide a solid explanation for things like the Flynn effect!

Yes there are flaws with it obviously; the Flynn effect is indeed bizarre and there has definitely been some shoddy research in the field over the years (like The Bell Curve, even though /pol/ doesn't want to hear it). People who rally against IQ misinterpret what it is suppose to measure and what it is correlated against and think that it represents some type of biological determinism.

That's the best it shows, and I think that's only for success in school or something.

.5 is not high enough to say there's a direct link.

Another problem we have in the EU is that our determinant for benefits from the state (for the mentally handicapped) is so arbitrarily decided that I see colleagues, and even myself, sometimes putting the score of a patient one or two points lower so that he/she can qualify for benefits. The meaning of that number is absurdly misunderstood even from the government.

>solve a lot of mathematical equations and topological problems
Kek, ask me how I know you don't know shit about math.

> science
> admits 5% of studies are inherently wrong
Kek, glad I went with math.

I think we finally agree, IQ measures aptitude for some kinds of intelligence, but people, like the op pic, who try to use IQ numbers as a straight up metric of intelligence are dumb.

Where is this from, I've been looking for the source for years

>.5 is not high enough to say there's a direct link.
You can't say if there's a link based on correlation alone, retard. Jesus christ. Learn what a p-value is and come back.

It's WAY more than 5% due to experiments lacking statistical power, publication bias, an academic focus on quantity and p-hacking.

journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124

i'm with this guy

Also this

>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis

>The replication crisis (or replicability crisis) refers to a methodological crisis in science in which scientists have found that the results of many scientific studies are difficult or impossible to replicate on subsequent investigation, either by independent researchers or by the original researchers themselves.

>tfw Diederik Stapel was a full professor at my university
Glad I did econometrics and not some psychology meme degree

Internet IQ tests have totally warped the public's perception about IQ. The only thing internet IQ tests are good for is determining whether or not somebody is dumb enough to take internet IQ tests seriously.

An actual IQ of 150 puts a person in the top 0.01% of the population.

It's not really their fault half the time; professors are pressured to publish so frequently that it's inevitable that at least half of it is total bullshit. I went to CU-Boulder for undergrad, and I had a younger professor who was going for tenure and had to publish something absurd like three books in eight years. Obviously that's completely impossible without "cheating" in some way.

Psych isn't really a "meme degree" but there is a lot of bad science in the field unfourtunately

>It's not really their fault half the time
In most cases I agree but Stapel blatantly fabricated data for decades.

Oh yea, that was a particularly egregious case. I was just referring to blaming researchers for the "crisis" as a whole, when really it's a problem with the entire system. Universities need to get the research cock out of their collective asses and start welcoming professors who would rather focus on teaching as opposed to publishing useless nonsense. Students would be a lot better served if the schools could handle the hit to their prestige.

if you went to boulder and didnt do MCDB, physics or engineering you got ripped off

>muh STEM
It's a great school otherwise, beautiful campus, good staff, lots of resources, and a fun city. No one gives a fuck where you went to undergrad unless you went to a top ten school. Fuck off with your elitist horseshit

its a beautiful campus full of entitled californian shits, profs who got their job by sucking departmental cock, and a city full of homeless philosophy majors. and i graduated last year, so i'm not so much an elitist as a realist. only at boulder could you get a fucking BA in neuroscience while the journalism jagoffs get BS's

>getting ripped off at a large public state school
It's like ~$16k if you live off campus retard

I make over six figures
A professional but has social issues in any other setting than work related
>Where's my gf
>Also over 6ft
>I don't know my own IQ but most IQ tests are BS and probably only good to find out how dumb a person is with an IQ under 100...

>18 years old
>has a child
>probably no job or education
pass

>i'm not so much an elitist
I mean, you literally said that the school is worthless for anything other than three fields. Also who the fuck cares about the difference between a BA and a BS you autist, jesus christ. Sounds like you just had a shitty time at school because you're an arrogant faggot

Since it seems no one else is answering you OP, I'll give it a shot.
>meditate
>read, preferrably philosophy
>a challenging hobby, something like art or learning an instrument
>keep exercising
These may or may not increase IQ, but they'll give you definite brain gains

its worthless to go to cal arts for astronomy, its worthless to go to hopkins for graphic design, and its worthless in general to get a degree in the humanities. not sure how any of that makes me an elitist

>profs who got their job by sucking departmental cock
wtf does this even mean. you're mad because your school had shitty professors? welcome to life

>comparing specialized privated schools with 1k-5k undergrads to a huge public research university
Yep, you're retarded.

>its worthless in general to get a degree in the humanities
>MUH STEM
I'd love to live in your glorious utopia of exclusively engineers and doctors user. Nice job checking every box from elitist prick to dipshit philistine. Btw, no one cares where you went to undergrad or what you majored in.

>watch films and television, listen to music, read literature, speak language, live by the rule of law, and participate in conflicts heavily influenced by history and religion
>heh art is gay lmao

butthurt social "scientist" detected

i'm just saying that outside the 3 or 4 good departments, there's nothing you can do at boulder that you can't get the same for cheaper out of CSU. boulder has shit name recognition because it was a party school until 4 years ago, so you can't even bank on that. if you want to waste your cash on a stupid degree thats on you, and thank you and the rest of the humanities for subsidizing lab expenses.

Compared to a degree in "physics", which virtually guarantees a job in academia the same as bullshit like gender studies.