Re: T.B.D.
Posted: Wed Aug 29, 2018 12:37 am
Some of these posts go beyond that...commonsense wrote: ↑Tue Aug 28, 2018 11:07 pmSome of the posts have gone beyond throwing insults to actual bullying.
Page 9 of 10
Re: T.B.D.
Posted: Wed Aug 29, 2018 12:38 am
It is so easy to draw you in....Sir-Sister-of-Suck wrote: ↑Wed Aug 29, 2018 12:34 am...You realize you just gave me the same source I used earlier to prove that you couldn't get an IQ of 181 as an adult, right? You know, you say you can't get your own work published because it would require you to quote other sources, and yeah, I can see why you'd have an issue with that - you don't read any source before you post it.
You can't just keep doing this shit, you know.
So I'm going to have to say it one more time:
Yes, you can score an IQ as high as '181,' but only when you are estimated to have one that high, or you take the test as a kid.
For god's sake, just show me what IQ test YOU TOOK to get 181, already. Eodnhoj can't fucking do this, because such a test does not actually exist.
My IQ is about average. But again, you're reverting the attention to me; I wasn't the one who claimed to have a super-high IQ and used that as a crux to say 'IQ is bullshit.' I explained this to you back on page 5.By the way...what is your's considering you seem to hold onto it like it is something of importance that defines a person?
Although now, it's more so that I'm pressing you on the excuse you chose to use, because I know you have lied.
Re: T.B.D.
Posted: Wed Aug 29, 2018 12:58 am
The difference is, when I do it for you, there's an actual strategy involved to get a result that I want; I'm hyper-actively aware you were (probably) never going to admit that you constantly lie on this forum. The thing is, I don't need you to, anymore. Especially with what you just said.
You seem to be doing it, as though you were a 4chan troll, who doesn't even care about his own credibility, anymore.
For future reference, though, I'd suggest being careful about telling people when you are trying to manipulate them.
You seem to be doing it, as though you were a 4chan troll, who doesn't even care about his own credibility, anymore.
For future reference, though, I'd suggest being careful about telling people when you are trying to manipulate them.
Re: T.B.D.
Posted: Wed Aug 29, 2018 6:49 pm
Sir-Sister-of-Suck wrote: ↑Wed Aug 29, 2018 12:34 am...You realize you just gave me the same source I used earlier to prove that you couldn't get an IQ of 181 as an adult, right? You know, you say you can't get your own work published because it would require you to quote other sources, and yeah, I can see why you'd have an issue with that - you don't read any source before you post it.
Good then explain this source:
as it contradicts Wikipedia.
Here is an example of an IQ test, actually the one I specifically memorized the answers:
http://www.free-iqtest.net/
If it an extension of the Stanford Binet standard
You can't just keep doing this shit, you know.
So I'm going to have to say it one more time:
Yes, you can score an IQ as high as '181,' but only when you are estimated to have one that high, or you take the test as a kid.
For god's sake, just show me what IQ test YOU TOOK to get 181, already. Eodnhoj can't fucking do this, because such a test does not actually exist.
My IQ is about average. But again, you're reverting the attention to me; I wasn't the one who claimed to have a super-high IQ and used that as a crux to say 'IQ is bullshit.' I explained this to you back on page 5.By the way...what is your's considering you seem to hold onto it like it is something of importance that defines a person?
Although now, it's more so that I'm pressing you on the excuse you chose to use, because I know you have lied.
Re: T.B.D.
Posted: Wed Aug 29, 2018 6:51 pm
Constantly lie about what? The majority of my posts are arguments...Sir-Sister-of-Suck wrote: ↑Wed Aug 29, 2018 12:58 am The difference is, when I do it for you, there's an actual strategy involved to get a result that I want; I'm hyper-actively aware you were (probably) never going to admit that you constantly lie on this forum. The thing is, I don't need you to, anymore. Especially with what you just said.
You seem to be doing it, as though you were a 4chan troll, who doesn't even care about his own credibility, anymore.
For future reference, though, I'd suggest being careful about telling people when you are trying to manipulate them.
Lie about an IQ test when I myself argue against it?
Lie by presenting an argument?
Lie about what exactly?
Manipulate people for what cause exactly when I am presenting arguments for "x" axiom(s)?
Re: T.B.D.
Posted: Wed Aug 29, 2018 8:25 pm
Yeah, we've already seen your unsolicited photoshoot where the big angry man looms over the camera with his most threatening squint. And we've read your incel level mysoginy where you whine about all the women who won't sleep with you because they are discombobulated by your r/iamverysmart, so we already know what your deal is. There's little need to invoke the actual term as well.
Re: T.B.D.
Posted: Wed Aug 29, 2018 10:02 pm
It actually doesn't, just because wikipedia doesn't mention the novelty situations of people scoring higher then the standard highest, doesn't mean it's saying they don't exist. IQ testing a kid is not looked at with as much weight, either, it just seems to mostly be referenced in record books.
So, this is in fact a test where someone can score as high as you proposed you did. Here are all the answers so that people can see for themselves that you can. You have indeed found a site obscure enough which contradicts the highest score given in its own 'Intelligence Interval,' which I do have to give you some credit for. The caveat, is that it's not a Standford-binet.Here is an example of an IQ test, actually the one I specifically memorized the answers:
http://www.free-iqtest.net/
What do you mean, if it is 'an extension'? Either this is the site you used, or it's not. And It's not based off of the Stanford-binet test. The questions aren't at all similar, and the IQ range doesn't match up.If it an extension of the Stanford Binet standard
This wasn't the post where I started making the accusation, you know.Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Wed Aug 29, 2018 6:51 pmLie about what exactlySir-Sister-of-Suck wrote: ↑Wed Aug 29, 2018 12:58 am The difference is, when I do it for you, there's an actual strategy involved to get a result that I want; I'm hyper-actively aware you were (probably) never going to admit that you constantly lie on this forum. The thing is, I don't need you to, anymore. Especially with what you just said.
You seem to be doing it, as though you were a 4chan troll, who doesn't even care about his own credibility, anymore.
For future reference, though, I'd suggest being careful about telling people when you are trying to manipulate them.
Re: T.B.D.
Posted: Wed Aug 29, 2018 10:03 pm
...You know, when he says he has 'christian greyed' all of his dates, I picture him tying his dates up in bondage. I mean, that part, I definitely would believe; I just don't imagine it would be in the fun, consensual way.FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Wed Aug 29, 2018 8:25 pmYeah, we've already seen your unsolicited photoshoot where the big angry man looms over the camera with his most threatening squint. And we've read your incel level mysoginy where you whine about all the women who won't sleep with you because they are discombobulated by your r/iamverysmart, so we already know what your deal is. There's little need to invoke the actual term as well.
Re: T.B.D.
Posted: Wed Aug 29, 2018 10:33 pm
Did he really write that?Sir-Sister-of-Suck wrote: ↑Wed Aug 29, 2018 10:03 pm ..You know, when he says he has 'christian greyed' all of his dates
Re: T.B.D.
Posted: Wed Aug 29, 2018 10:40 pm
Actually more of a "tired long day of work" look...but "anger"....interesting view point.FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Wed Aug 29, 2018 8:25 pmYeah, we've already seen your unsolicited photoshoot where the big angry man looms over the camera with his most threatening squint. And we've read your incel level mysoginy where you whine about all the women who won't sleep with you because they are discombobulated by your r/iamverysmart, so we already know what your deal is. There's little need to invoke the actual term as well.
Regardless...at least I am not hiding behind a keyboard....
Re: T.B.D.
Posted: Wed Aug 29, 2018 10:47 pm
Sir-Sister-of-Suck wrote: ↑Wed Aug 29, 2018 10:02 pmIt actually doesn't, just because wikipedia doesn't mention the novelty situations of people scoring higher then the standard highest, doesn't mean it's saying they don't exist. IQ testing a kid is not looked at with as much weight, either, it just seems to mostly be referenced in record books.
So, this is in fact a test where someone can score as high as you proposed you did. Here are all the answers so that people can see for themselves that you can. You have indeed found a site obscure enough which contradicts the highest score given in its own 'Intelligence Interval,' which I do have to give you some credit for. The caveat, is that it's not a Standford-binet.Here is an example of an IQ test, actually the one I specifically memorized the answers:
http://www.free-iqtest.net/
What do you mean, if it is 'an extension'? Either this is the site you used, or it's not. And It's not based off of the Stanford-binet test. The questions aren't at all similar, and the IQ range doesn't match up.If it an extension of the Stanford Binet standard
This wasn't the post where I started making the accusation, you know.Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Wed Aug 29, 2018 6:51 pmLie about what exactlySir-Sister-of-Suck wrote: ↑Wed Aug 29, 2018 12:58 am The difference is, when I do it for you, there's an actual strategy involved to get a result that I want; I'm hyper-actively aware you were (probably) never going to admit that you constantly lie on this forum. The thing is, I don't need you to, anymore. Especially with what you just said.
You seem to be doing it, as though you were a 4chan troll, who doesn't even care about his own credibility, anymore.
For future reference, though, I'd suggest being careful about telling people when you are trying to manipulate them.
This is what I see...
1) I make the claim the IQ standard is false. I make the statement at multiple times and places the IQ standard does not work. I claim from testing my IQ is in the 160 range. Effectively stating this, I am saying the IQ test is worthless.
2) You claim the IQ test is valid and my test score is made up...over the internet to a stranger...while not providing even a hint of what your's is. Then you continue on with ad-hominums saying I am liar, fat, etc. Okay so I show proof that your statements are wrong (picture, the IQ test I used to achieve a false score of 181, etc.)
3) You claim I am manipulating people on these forums and lying to them...however the majority of my statements are arguments. You even spent your own personal time trying to find out about me on the internet only to find some old garbage physics forum I was on for a few weeks.
And I can go on with the points...and I will get to the point..."What exactly is the point of all this?"
Seriously...what is the end game you are shooting for so I can provide it for you?
Re: T.B.D.
Posted: Wed Aug 29, 2018 10:48 pm
I didn't want a meme of "flash" "dangering" his "pants" during his period.....FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Wed Aug 29, 2018 10:33 pmDid he really write that?Sir-Sister-of-Suck wrote: ↑Wed Aug 29, 2018 10:03 pm ..You know, when he says he has 'christian greyed' all of his dates
Re: T.B.D.
Posted: Wed Aug 29, 2018 11:02 pm
Re: T.B.D.
Posted: Wed Aug 29, 2018 11:05 pm
Here I will post your pic up for you....considering we are getting to "know" eachother so well...now it is flashes turn....FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Wed Aug 29, 2018 11:02 pmI gave you this wonderful name to mock, but all you've done is meddle with the punctuation. This substandard work is not worthy of a genius IQ Eggnog Handjob Hedgenob7.
Re: T.B.D.
Posted: Wed Aug 29, 2018 11:22 pm
The fuck you on about? I never signed up for a game of I'll show you mine if you show me yours with an obvious psychopath.
You use the name John Doe spelled backwards and a 7 on the end. We all know John Doe is the name given to unidentified male corpses, and 7 is probably your kill streak for all the rent boys you've sliced up. Some underage male prostitute will probably go missing the greater Cincinnati area next month, and you'll have to increment your name when the NYPD find his parts drifting down the Hudson while you drive away in your murder van.