Adam Powell has an IQ of 175?

Message

Asthaloth · #31 Post by **Asthaloth** » Mon Jun 04, 2007 11:21 pm

I would assume that is by the old data range, and is the equivalent of about 130 on the modern one.
Still "Vastly superior" (As the test puts it) but not as good as Einstein (146)

Fiddelysquat · #32 Post by **Fiddelysquat** » Mon Jun 04, 2007 11:22 pm

It is kind of funny to think that the same guy who obsesses over asparagus is also smarter than Einstein.

Keakealani · #33 Post by **Keakealani** » Tue Jun 05, 2007 12:08 am

AySz88 wrote:Mr. Powell added that himself (specific edit where it was added). I actually have no idea whether or not the statement is actually true, but with no other sources, I don't see any harm in leaving it in.

According to Wikipedia policy, it's really pretty much a no-go to leave a statement in without any fact check, and self-referential edits are OR. The current revision as a CN template so I guess it's okay, but I would not suggest using that logic on Wikipedia because it's against guideline.

On topic, I don't believe anyone could possibly have an IQ of 175, I just don't think it's possible. The IQ is based on the bell curve, thus making it exponentially harder to score higher as you go higher (if that made any sense). So it would be really, really unlikely that he could score that high. Again, I'll second all those people that online IQ tests stink, because I believe I've gotten all the way up to 165 on those things which I KNOW is definitely not at all true (although I do think I meet the 130 level for MENSA, but I don't believe in that kind of elitism)

Anyway, IQ is pointless and subjective, and we shouldn't base too much on it...

#34 Post by **Siouxper** » Tue Jun 05, 2007 12:11 am

IQ doesn't mean much in real life. So what if I score high on a test? That's just it, it's just a test. What really matters is if you can use those brains to get a good job or do something productive in life. Having a really high IQ and not putting it to use doesn't do you any good.

Fiddelysquat · #35 Post by **Fiddelysquat** » Tue Jun 05, 2007 12:13 am

I'm also not a big fan of acting all serious about IQ tests.

Just for the record, my dad got this quiz book for geniuses thing and did it for fun. He only got one wrong. My Grandma and I make a game of finding unbelievably obscure words and seeing if he knows what they mean, and we haven't found a single one he doesn't know yet. The man's obnoxiously intelligent. When he was given a child's IQ test in 2nd grade, he did very poorly.

Not all that accurate, IMHO.

Asthaloth · #36 Post by **Asthaloth** » Tue Jun 05, 2007 1:04 am

Intelligence grows over time...
and modern IQ tests (Proper ones I mean. Sit down for three hours doing stupid memory tests that trick you with their tricksyness, and utterly obscure piffle on religions of ages past and words no one would use in conversation. Ever, kind of IQ tests) go up to a max of 155 I think it was.

And people over about 130 end to suffer from some kind of mental disorder (Autism, being a good example) so it's not exactly fun and games really.

Morningstar · #37 Post by **Morningstar** » Tue Jun 05, 2007 1:48 am

ahoteinrun wrote:IQs aren't an accurate way of judging peoples intelligence anyways. So i'm not about to put a lot of stock into this. They're biased and innaccurate, so I could care less how high anyones IQ is. True smarts are shown by what you do with your life, not by how you score on some test.

According to the Northwestern University neuropsychologist my husband saw, it is extremely difficult to accurately test an IQ over 135. My husband and daughter are both around 150. And, yet, God forbid, if I died, he wouldn't remember the name of the school she attends nor how to get there, wouldn't be able to find the milk in the fridge if it screamed at him, our dogs would starve because no one would have the sense to feed them, and she'd forever be putting metal in the microwave and burning the house down. Don't get me wrong. They are extremely gifted in those areas in which they care to participate, things that hold their interest, but as far as the rest of life is concerned, nah, why bother. The mom/wife can take care of that.

Like Inrun says, smarts are shown by what you do with your life, not by how you score on some test. Mine isn a little lower than theirs, but thankfully, I was given some common sense to balance that intelligence. Or I suppose I'd be putting metal in the microwave too.

Jocelyn Spicer · #38 Post by **Jocelyn Spicer** » Tue Jun 05, 2007 1:54 am

Adam with 175? Hahahahahahah. Oh my gosh! Hahahaha. *Big breath*

I don't really believe he's that smart. I mean, to create practically an empire on the internet and starting to cross it into the real world, you have to be smart. But I don't believe he's going to be that smart without having some sort of mental problem, no? *Looks at his asparagus obsession* Errr....scratch that last part....

But honestly, I think he's above average. Just kinda like an average Joe who somehow made a giant website that rivals Google, Yahoo, and other big sites. 0_o. Well, sofar anyways.

Keakealani · #39 Post by **Keakealani** » Tue Jun 05, 2007 3:38 am

Fiddelysquat wrote:I'm also not a big fan of acting all serious about IQ tests.

Just for the record, my dad got this quiz book for geniuses thing and did it for fun. He only got one wrong. My Grandma and I make a game of finding unbelievably obscure words and seeing if he knows what they mean, and we haven't found a single one he doesn't know yet. The man's obnoxiously intelligent. When he was given a child's IQ test in 2nd grade, he did very poorly.

Not all that accurate, IMHO.

VEry cool, and very much agreed.

On the subject of intelligent, the concept is very much subjective - there are people who are considered very intelligent because they have amazing skills in a specialized area like sports, music, art, math, or science. Someone who is very very gifted at one subject may do poorly on a general IQ test, especially if that subject is not tested on said test, but are still gifted nontheless.

In which case, we could say that Adam's marketing skills are pretty ingenious, but not necessarily that his general intelligence is genius level.

#40 Post by **shapu** » Tue Jun 05, 2007 4:00 am

BrunosisShale wrote:That's a pretty amusing concept--a society of smart people. I wonder if there's a society for dumb people? (like me)

Yes. It's called the Cincinnati Bengals.

On-topic, though, I tend not to put too much stock into IQ tests. I've been tested at between 127 and 155, and I can tell you that I'm either well above or well below that range (I haven't decided yet).

DiscordantNote · #41 Post by **DiscordantNote** » Tue Jun 05, 2007 4:22 am

Eh...I really doubt it's really that high. You'd have to be one heckuva child prodigy to pull that off.

I remember taking the official, sit-three-hours test when I was around 8 or 9. I thought it was all a game. Then, a few weeks later, I end up in the gifted program at my school the test said my IQ was 138, just two points shy of the genius level. I've noticed it really doesn't mean much at all...for instance, I'm not very good at math. I do have a knack for being able to learn anything (except math) pretty quickly, memorization, and being able to teach myself, which might be influenced by my IQ a bit. Wouldn't be anywhere in the music world without those knacks...

From what I understand, IQ isn't a measure of intelligence, but a measure of your ability to learn. Still, I wouldn't take them too seriously, but they are fun to do.

Fiddelysquat · #42 Post by **Fiddelysquat** » Tue Jun 05, 2007 4:50 am

Keakealani wrote:VEry cool, and very much agreed.

On the subject of intelligent, the concept is very much subjective - there are people who are considered very intelligent because they have amazing skills in a specialized area like sports, music, art, math, or science. Someone who is very very gifted at one subject may do poorly on a general IQ test, especially if that subject is not tested on said test, but are still gifted nontheless.

It's horrible. The man has common sense and is pretty much perfect at everything. He only does one thing wrong: never pushes his chair in after dinner. I called him on it once and he says that he only does it to give us something to complain about.

I agree that Adam is really very smart about marketing. There are different types of smart. I'm sure there are plenty of high school kids who could own him at Calculus, but I don't see anyone around here who's walked away from what started out as a fun side project with a bajillion dollars and a whole lot of fame.

Oops · #43 Post by **Oops** » Tue Jun 05, 2007 6:07 am

true. Although I don't think he is the sole mastermind behind neopets.

dreamer · #44 Post by **dreamer** » Tue Jun 05, 2007 9:15 pm

Does Adam really get the credit for the marketing behind Neopets? I thought he sold the site back in 2002 to Doug Dohring, and that guy was the one who turned it into a big corporation.

Oops · #45 Post by **Oops** » Tue Jun 05, 2007 9:48 pm

[quote="dreamer"]Does Adam really get the credit for the marketing behind Neopets? I thought he sold the site back in 2002 to Doug Dohring, and that guy was the one who turned it into a big corporation.[/quote]

he gets credited for it, but it was really doug that did alot. pinkpt could turn in a million dollar company :lol:

if some millionaire thought it could make lots of money somehow!