What's your unofficial IQ score according to the Mensa IQ Challenge Test?

[Physics-Man]

The minimum and maximum scores on this test are 85 and 145, respectively.

• https://www.mensa.org/public/mensa-iq-challenge

85 to 100

101 to 115

116 to 130

131 to 145

[MCheetah]

My IQ score from other more "official and serious" tests, not this one link here, was 145. I took it two or three times to be sure. However, to get into MENSA, you have to be at least 160, not that I care about MENSA. Or IQ tests.

I will admit, I like using IQ as a quantitative measure relative to someone else (like being able to say "I'm 25% smarter than you," or something), but real IQ tests mean nothing to me, and I don't take them seriously, even if a couple claim I'm 145-150. IQ tests are also dumb because it assumes everyone is supposed to think the same way to solve a solution, which is also nonsense. If I'm not good at recognizing patterns, then that means I'm a functional retard? No, I don't buy that.

Based on this one MENSA test, I would be mentally handicapped, as would anyone else who scored below 115. Essentially, 115 would be "average" intelligence based on this test, and anything below that makes you a paste-eating special needs case who wears diapers. So that is why I don't take IQ tests seriously.

By the way, based on this test, I would be a retard. Then again, because bisexuals gross me out and I'm pro-choice on abortion, some people on this site already find me to be retarded anyway. I think if I was that stupid though, I'd be happier than I am and would like people more.

MENSA says I am retarded. And if you get less than 110, so are you.

I scored: A, E, F, F, D, E, E.
B, D, D, A, A, B, A.
F, B, C, C, A.
B, E, E, F, E.
B, C, C, E.
E, E, E, C, E, D, F.
However, the last puzzle I really could not figure out at all.

[Physics-Man]

Average is actually 100, and you'd need a 132 IQ (98th percentile) for acceptance into Mensa.

Number 35 is 'D'. My reasoning was that, in each column and row, there must be one structure per square that has vertical walls of sort (such as the square, or 'W'). So the one missing should be one that has walls.

Second of all, in the first and second rows, there is one structure in each square without a roof and floor (top or bottom horizontal line). From left to right, top to bottom, the first column is without, with, with; second column is also without, with with; but the third is with, without, '?'. So the missing one, following this pattern, is going to probably be the one without a roof and floor.

Then going top to bottom, left to right each column, we have without, without, with; with, with, without; and with, with, '?'. So the next is probably going to be the one without roof and floor. 'D' would be the only one that conforms to these patterns: it has no roof/floor, but it does have walls.

[Physics-Man]

*Switching 'column' with 'row' in the second paragraph*

Second of all, in the first and second rows, there is one structure in each square without a roof and floor (top or bottom horizontal line). From left to right, top to bottom, the first row is without, with, with; second row is also without, with with; but the third row is with, without, '?'. So the missing one, following this pattern, is going to probably be the one without a roof and floor.

[MCheetah]

But the ones in the third column (#7 and #8 boxes) have a roof and don't have a roof. The two lines has a roof and the two X'es have no roof. D is actually what I answered only because it "looks" the most different from the other five, which are all solid shapes (and E is close to being one), while D is just a letter "M." But I figured it can't be that simple.

Like I said, I only like IQ if we use it as a way to compare intelligences with each other, but I don't think of it as a literal measure of one's mental capabilities. When I took IQ tests in the past, the breakdown was basically:

Less than 110 = An everyday idiot. The people who trust politicians and CNN.
110-114 = The "real" middle-ground; someone who meets the bare minimum of not being an idiot.

115-129 = Someone likely to be highly educated but not that smart; doctors, lawyers, engineers, etc.

130-144 = Someone who is smart. Not a genius, but smart.

145-159 = Someone who is smarter than most, but not a genius. (I would fall here, being 145-150 according to the tests I took before that had different categories besides pattern recognition.)

160-174 = An actual genius. Someone who is mentally gifted. I was always told this was the minimum needed to get into MENSA (again, not that I care about MENSA).

175+ = A super-genius and usually said to be the level too hard to measure.

If you spent 20 minutes doing the MENSA test that labeled me as being clinically retarded, then how did you do on the Queendom IQ Test, that had super easy problems on it? Only hard one was the damn old ladies and cats one, because the math doesn't add up. (A group of old ladies meet for an afternoon tea party. They bring all their cats. In all, there are 22 heads and 72 feet. How many old ladies and how many cats are in the room?)
www.queendom.com/.../index.htm?idRegTest=3108

[Physics-Man]

Any horizontal top line, including the horizontal top line as part of an upsidedown triangle, constitutes a roof.

I'll check out that Queendom test later. As for the cat and old lady question, this is how I formulated the system of equations:

(A×4) + (B×2) = 72
A+B=22

Where
A & B are the variables representing the number of cat and human heads, respectively; 22 is total number of cat and human heads.
72 is total number of human and cat legs.
4 represents the number of cat legs.
2 represents the number of human legs.

They could be solved the proper way, but I decided to be lazy and make guesses for the variables A & B until they equal a total of 22 heads in a way that, when you add the two parentheses together, they result in 72 legs.

(14×4) + (8×2) = 72

So there are 14 cats and 8 old ladies.

[MCheetah]

I'm a visual problem solver. I drew a diagram with 22 heads and put 2 or 4 feet inside the heads until we got to 72 feet and six or seven old ladies didn't work out for me with the math and I just gave up. Then again, I went to public school and always DESPISED math. I probably eventually could've figured it out, but I didn't want to spend 15-20 minutes counting out each and every possibility that could add up to 72 feet because I suck at algebra.



That's what I mean. Sucking at math (specifically Algebra) doesn't make one an idiot.

[Rangers]

I was hoping for higher because I was quite confident until question 25 and things got pretty difficult for me from there. I agree with the results though because back in 9th grade, I had a much more extensive IQ test when I was struggling in school and then found that I was dead on center of the earth average.

I cruised through school with straight A's in high school afterwards but in college, I've not been consistent due to my somewhat rigid learning ability that some professors teach in a way that fits while others don't. When their teaching style fits the way that I learn, an A or B is all but guaranteed, if it doesn't, then I struggle and will likely end up with a C but never a failing grade.

[ManHater]

For a man of physics you seem to be far in the past using flawed and bad ways to measure ones intelligence. You might not know this but there are more than 2 intelligence's that people can portray. The idea that I. Q. is the gold chalice for measuring to see if one is stupid or not is wrong.

The Nine Types of Intelligence That Should Be Considered in All School Curricular

Logical-Mathematical Intelligence. ...
Linguistic Intelligence. ...
Interpersonal Intelligence. ...
Intrapersonal Intelligence. ...
Musical Intelligence. ...
Visual-Spatial Intelligence. ...
Bodily-Kinaesthetic Intelligence. ...
Naturalist Intelligence.

[Physics-Man]

I disagree, brother. But that's okay. We can agree to disagree.

[ManHater]

Why do you disagree? You don't think there are people out in the world that might be brilliant when it comes to sports? coordination? Emotional intelligence? Do you think being a political scores high on an I. Q. test? No a political person is good with words. There are things the I. Q. test that does not cover. Besides it's an old American flawed test that does not tell you if you are smart.

[Gal67]

Yes, for once I have to agree with ManHater. IQ tests are outdated and horribly flawed as a means whereby a person's intelligence can be measured. It just doesn't do the job.

[Nomoturtle]

Fair enough, Intelligence is a measure of capability of mind and it makes sense for there to be such a thing as specialised intelligences.
However, it is neither as useful nor as impressive for you to tell me what emotion you are experiencing, or guessing what your hamster means when it squeeks, compared to creating a logical argument, or creating mathematical models that allow you to reliably build a structurally sound bridge.

Logic/Mathematic intelligence or whatever you want to call it in the latest fad revision, is what most people think of when you say intelligence. It's what our society is built around. It allows for the establishment of objective foundations that people can contribute to and that are falsifiable against reality. Other abilities as you've put them here, are either not objective, or are only tangentially linked to the mind.

[ManHater]

@Nomoturtle Then poker players can't read emotions?

[Nomoturtle]

@ManHater I don't see why you would think I've claimed otherwise.

[Gal67]

Nope, not smart enough for Mensa.

I've never been very good at these things, but what was worse in this instance was that all of the questions required a person to see patterns in shapes, and I'm absolutely hopeless at that.
Anyway, IQ tests aren't to be trusted when it comes to determining anyone's intelligence at any level. The person who first came up with them (Binet) only ever meant for them to be used on children, and he recognised its shortcomings. They're fun to do I suppose, but one must never take them at all seriously, and I don't say that because I got a lousy score in this instance :)

[CurlyGirl42]

Last time I did an unofficial mensa test I got 128.
Last time I did an IQ test which also had questions on language i. a., which I thought was pretty cool, I was in the 98.8 % percentile, putting me in their category 'very gifted/clever' just under the geniuses xP, though with perfect score in their memory tests :D

[purplepoppy]

I would never take an IQ test because it might shatter my delusions.

[AviatorTom]

@purplepoppy You shouldn't worry. Your IQ will be in metric and no one will understand it. :-)

[Jamie05rhs]

@purplepoppy You have nothing to worry about. You're incredibly smart.

[Massageman]

My older daughter and I were both in the high quartile. I didn't really have the time to join and deal with SIGs, but she did join for a year until she went to college and really had to study since she pulled a 6-year, planned double major in 5 years.

[FreyaRed]

I know my official score because I was obliged to do those test few times. I don't share my score because being close to one or other end of the bell curve changes perception about you in a negative way.

[BeenThereLovedIt]

I scored 102 - I had to take a phone call half-way through it and continued anyways.

I took this last year and got a 142.

[SenileOldMan]

I got it. I got the score. The score is 27. and some pepols might think my score is lwo but what urs. i have no erectile dysfunction at all

[goaded]

Just 115, but I'll have another go tomorrow with the browser set up so I can see the whole question from the start! (Or is that part of the test?)

[goaded]

118, but 10 minutes to spare. I'd like the option to just look at the ones I skipped again, not have to go through them all. I couldn't be bothered.

[Edward02]

I agree when Stephen Hawking said that anyone who cares about IQ is an idiot

[Physics-Man]

He said regarding boasting about it, not caring about it.

[Physics-Man]

"People who boast about their I. Q. are losers."

[Physics-Man]

Furthermore, Stephen Hawking took an IQ test himself and scored 160. So does that mean he's an idiot because he cared enough to take one? Nope. What you claimed he said is false.

[Edward02]

I think its something regards to insecure people

[Physics-Man]

I agree with that.

[Nomoturtle]

131

Surprisingly consistent with when I did something like this 10 years ago.

[Likes2drive]

Not sure what this means but this is what it says

[AviatorTom]

I've taken several IQ tests, including MENSA. The numbers are almost always in the 140s.

[Jamie05rhs]

105; damn. ... Well, at least I'm above average.

[anylolone]

around 140, but I was really young when I took it, likely it dropped significantly due to poor habits and age.

[letuswaltzforthedead]

Lol, I got 110 both times that I took it. I'm honestly suprised that I scored that high and also depressed that I scored so low.

[whosnumber1]

I couldn't care less. I know a mensa and he's a complete idiot and has a criminal record for fraud

[notwoke]

We can't depend on IQ and build a participation trophy culture at the same time!

[notwoke]

the whole woke and equity - inclusion movement ceases to make sense

[Anonymous]

133, though my IQ evaluation from school days indicated I was stronger in language areas than mathematics/spatial organization

[Anonymous]

I got 105 on Mensa Norway practice, and 124 on Queendom

[MCheetah]

I was rated as a retard on the MENSA test and I got a 131 on Queendom, but I don't consider that to be accurate for several reasons (not that ANY IQ test is all that "accurate") because 131 implies "somewhat, kinda, sorta smart" but the test questions were very easy problem-solving skills that can be done if you mere draw a diagram, while others are basic math puzzles any 5th grader could do.



I don't take IQ seriously, but I'd say I'd be more like 151 since almost anyone can solve the questions on Queendom. I'm adding in a 20 point buffer.