But just because you have a large sample
doesn't automatically mean it will be normally distributed.
(Bazongaloid, Fri 5 Mar 2010, 12:50, 2 replies, latest was 16 years ago)

Have you been studying the samples he's been leaving on your mum?

(PenguinOfDeath is Scottish, and most likely angry, Fri 5 Mar 2010, 12:52, Reply)

They aren't very large anymore
he's running out of fluids
(Bazongaloid, Fri 5 Mar 2010, 12:54, Reply)

Not necessily, but it's more common than you'd think.
especially with a sample size in the billions.

Plus IQ is based and benchmarked on average intelligence so it's designed to show a normal distribution.
(PsychoChomp, Fri 5 Mar 2010, 12:55, Reply)

It's also a massive load of bollocks
and doesn't test someone's intelligence, merely their ability to undertake IQ tests.
(Bazongaloid, Fri 5 Mar 2010, 12:56, Reply)

I was amused by someone on that Facebook that used the 'IQ Test' application
It said they had an IQ of over 200. The fact that they seemed to believe it proves that they don't in my opinion.
(PenguinOfDeath is Scottish, and most likely angry, Fri 5 Mar 2010, 12:58, Reply)

In the same way
that exams merely test one's ability to pass exams.
( K2k6 has a proper job these days, Fri 5 Mar 2010, 12:59, Reply)

I see what your trying to say there but I'm going to blow a raspberry at you anyway
*RAZZZZZZ*
(Bazongaloid, Fri 5 Mar 2010, 13:02, Reply)

*wipes face of spittle*
*remembers the Two Ronnies*
( K2k6 has a proper job these days, Fri 5 Mar 2010, 13:02, Reply)

But what I'm saying is
there are people who don't speak english, or who aren't literate, but are intelligent, but they couldn't do an IQ test.

Also there are people who can get very high scores in IQ tests, but you wouldn't let them out by themselves as they have no common sense or ability to deal with the world despite being "intelligent"
(Bazongaloid, Fri 5 Mar 2010, 13:03, Reply)

Case in point, last IQ test I took I scored 135. Clearly IQ tests are fixed

( fuck shit up the best you never had, Fri 5 Mar 2010, 13:10, Reply)

fixed as in:
your score = your actual score + 100?
( Vipros. clever got me this far, then tricky got me in, Fri 5 Mar 2010, 13:34, Reply)

Get fucked smugface

( fuck shit up the best you never had, Fri 5 Mar 2010, 13:39, Reply)

*blows kisses*

( Vipros. clever got me this far, then tricky got me in, Fri 5 Mar 2010, 13:44, Reply)

I was actually agreeing with you
I wasn't being sarcastic!
( K2k6 has a proper job these days, Fri 5 Mar 2010, 13:32, Reply)

Yes, it's shit, but it's the best thing we've got.

(PsychoChomp, Fri 5 Mar 2010, 12:59, Reply)

Does that mean
it's weighted then? There's no reason that intelligence (if it's possible to actually define some sort of linear intelligence scale) should necessarily be a normal distribution.
( K2k6 has a proper job these days, Fri 5 Mar 2010, 12:58, Reply)

Would it not be some sort of Bell Curve-based distribution?
With most people towards the middle, and bell-ends on the outsides.
(PenguinOfDeath is Scottish, and most likely angry, Fri 5 Mar 2010, 13:00, Reply)

Actually
that's the best reasoning ever!

*likes*
( K2k6 has a proper job these days, Fri 5 Mar 2010, 13:01, Reply)

*sniggers*
Bell Curve. Hu Huhuh Huhhhu.
( Monty Boyce, My cheese game is strong, Fri 5 Mar 2010, 13:05, Reply)

I was going to say pretty much exactly that

( Vipros. clever got me this far, then tricky got me in, Fri 5 Mar 2010, 13:09, Reply)

Yep, IQ tests are weighted every so often to keep the average at 100
As in general people are getting more literate and intelligent, that means an IQ test now is harder than it was 20 years ago.

There are a few reasons/explanations for intelligence being normaly distributed but they're all based in evolutionary psychology, which I dropped as soon as I could.
(PsychoChomp, Fri 5 Mar 2010, 13:02, Reply)