What kind of job can I get realistically? Thinking about applying for waste management company that is union.
you could probably visualize whole waste pickup routes in your mind before its even complete. youd be like a wizard with the bins
>>62007370Source? Looks fun
>>62007376https://openpsychometrics.org/tests/FSIQ/
>>62007370You wouldn't be good at any normie job and most union jobs are filled with 80iq boomers that talk about sportsball and who is cheating with who all day.
>>62007370No job wants you you are retardedNext question
>>62007370can I take the test multiple times to study it so I can get higher scores?
>>62007370Feel like this test too heavily relies on short term memory.
>>62007381Holy shit, what a piece of shit test. I dropped it in the part where you're supposed to place dots between green squares. It was already bad before then, with a lot of questions that seemed up to rng or interpretation (eg what counts as a word). Just asking the test-taker the meaning of obscure words is retarded as well, that's a matter of how many books you read, not a matter of brain power. It should be something like word relations instead.
>>62007370How did I score 3 higher on memory, and 10 on the spatial yet only 1 full scale point higher
Too smart to be a tradie too dumb to be a proper genius. You will languish on 4chan trying to get good at trading while working for 25 an hour as some kind of document filer or meme analyst, believing your stack of crypto will eventually pop off and make you rich.
>>62008035>Feel likeYour score is total normie pleb level, are you even trying?
>>62008180To be honest I didn't really understand that stupid circle distance thing.I got every single one of those wrong by a long shot. I can't be 97 IQ. Literally impossible with the achievements that I've had.I have product lines that I engineered from scratch. All the 3D modeling, the manufacturing, and the semi-automated processes that I've set up. There's no way someone who's 97 IQ could do that.I'll retake the test again.
>>62007370Water treatment tech
>>62007370IQ is just a baselineThe impact of a moderate amount knowledge/experience on your work competency dwarfs the impact IQ has on your work competency
Pretty sure this test is bs
>>62007374
>>62008426>Pretty sure this test is bsGive it to some normies or retards and report back with expected results.
>>62007370Profile of a Jamboy.
The stereotype burns pretty bad
>>62007370If you couldn't get 150 on this joke of a test it's over for you.
>>62008035Sometimes I am afraid to take these tests. What if, one day, suddenly you score under 115.Anon, how do you even solve the captcha, or did you have to pay for a pass?
OP is freaking me the fuck out. I took this test 4 days ago and see my results almost point-for-point posted in the catalog.Just wtf dude.
>>62010063>captchaI can solve that in 3 or 4 seconds easily.I recently programmed a semi-automated polishing system for my business.Then designed a 3d modeled a custom part for my race car.Then ran it through CFD to determine if the flow rate was sufficient.There's no way 97iq could do that So I blame the test as cope
>>62008271I'm sorry anon, if you think internet IQ tests have any significance and are not totally random bullshit you might be indeed 97 IQ. Just like every other test taker in this thread.
>>62011749I retook the test.The stupid point distance one is where I fucked up.I thought it meant the distance between the dots not the for you picked.114 seems to be a reasonable score
Got this result after 2am, while taking a shit after gym workout. If you didnt get at least 120, it's over for you.Also, the verbal part as a ESL is kind of bullshit.
>>62007383trvke
>>62007370Econ major, cpa, hitler did nothing wrong.
>>62008038vocab is a very good metric actually and is a core part of many iq tests>>62008035there's a lot of ways to do iq tests>>62010063don't feel bad even the best tests are not even at 90% accuracy. lots of people get bad(or good) test results>>62011749there are some real ones. they are decent ish
>>62012445Generally speaking, IQ tests can be split into 5 different categories, each have their own g factor. g factor being being how strongly any understood metric of intelligence correlates with one another. vocab has a relatively low g factor compared with the other categories of IQ tests (The lowest by far being processing speed, turns out being quick shouldn't be so strongly be associated with being smart.). It's also the case that vocab is the only one that continues to improve well after the brain has fully developed.Frankly I don't respect vocab as a strong measure of intelligence and I think it's only included to give women a fighting chance against men in IQ tests. I believe it's far more g loaded than it should be due to a confounder bias, because conscientious is also g loaded and therefore the apparent correlation is simply due to intelligent people tending to be more diligent in their practice of literacy. This is unlike other g loaded attributes such as reasoning and spatial ability which reduce with age (after 25) and are much more heavily g loaded, suggesting the abilities are more innate than learned.I don't see why we don't just have IQ tests which include reasoning and spatial ability questions only, considering these are the most g loaded attributes and would therefore deliver a more accurate result. Oh yeah, it's because white men would absolutely dominate and we can't have that, better change it so that they underperform and not make the rest of us look bad. There are some which do meet this criteria, but frankly not enough.Also I don't think these online tests are as inaccurate as people seem to believe. IQ is still established via proper statistical methods according to the user base and as someone else in this thread pointed out, give these tests to people in the general public and you will get predictable results. They're not perfect, but not entirely inaccurate either.
im not posting my IQ score on this mongolian basketweaving forum hosted by darpa&the cia
>>62007370Neeting or research. I'm afraid you are too smart for the wagie or corporate life.
