i'm probably one of the top ten smartest persons in terms of iq on this site

i'm probably one of the top ten smartest persons in terms of iq on this site

http://www.highiqsociety.org...
http://www.testriffic.com...

i got a 142 on the first test, and a 147 on the second test

statistically, whichever iq test you compare to, that means i'm probably in the top 99.9 and given that there's a few over 3000 members, i'm at least probably in the top ten. probably the top five.
http://www.assessmentpsychology.com...

I will attempt to show that probability is in fact not in favor of my opponent being one of the top ten highest-IQ'ed people on this site.

First, let us consider that you are talking about online IQ tests. Online IQ tests are very inaccurate when it comes to representing a person's actual IQ. For an actual IQ, you should get an actual IQ test.

Next, let us consider the population of this site. While there are many who lack intelligence, debate.org mainly appeals to those who have very high intelligence. Not only is the average IQ of debate.org higher than the national average, but there are an especially high number of extremely intelligent individuals here. While you might have an IQ high enough to get you a top ten position in a randomly selected group of 3000, you'll find it much harder to accomplish the same here on debate.org.

And finally, at least for now, let us consider your debates. You rarely capitalize properly, even with words like "I," you rarely add new information to the debate past round 1, and you often forfeit your debates. You almost always bring standard, hackneyed arguments, rather than being innovative and approaching things from different angles. If you were indeed one of the 10 smartest people on the site, you would almost have to be a troll, because your work is nowhere near the top ten.

With just the information I and the voters have, the probability that you have an IQ in the top 10 on this site is far less than 50%. Therefore, your resolution is false.

Please, feel free to argue against my points or bring more of your own.

yes i am sloppy in writing, and post half thoughts many times- that only means i'm sloppy and don't want to take time to do more. yes i even admit i'm a troll, often.
i have conceded one debate when my initial argument didn't look so hot. that doesn't mean i am dumb, it means i'm smart enough to realize when i've been beaten. a wise man knows ambiguity, knows limits to reality etc.

if you read my posts, especially the long ones about God's existance can't be proven and abortion and alternative energy threads etc, you'll see some innovative arguments that i have never seen before. everyone else on this site posts the same old rhetoric.

also, i claimed the top ten is all i had to prove, and given that by the numbers i'm probably better, i've got a cushion there. not sure where i'd be if we started making various assumptions about what the average intelligence is here. i'd note there are a lot of dumb posters if you notice, and many sign up and leave,,, so they too would add to the mix. the smart ones who stay might make it look skewed more to your argument. but, i'll be the first to admit, your speculation and mine is ultimately baseless if we start making assumptions. you have some good points, i have some good points. there's really no way to tell as of now.

First, let me reiterate that those IQ tests are NOT valid IQ tests. I said this last round, and my opponent did not address this point. Real IQ tests are not done over the internet (where users can easily cheat, etc.), and the score is usually given based on how many standard deviations away from the mean the person taking the test was. These tests are conducted altogether differently, and are not a true indicator of actual IQ. Also, many of the questions have nothing to do with a person's IQ. I took the test on the first link you posted, and I was expected to know who won Nobel prizes, what disease Mohammad Ali got, etc. There were many questions that test knowledge, not intelligence.

And the second one you posted is made of fail. Not only did some of the questions have multiple possible answers (the one with Car, glove, clock, sock), but some of the questions simply didn't make sense (see #19, 20). Also, there were only 20 questions. Also, just putting the first answer for each question yields a score of 102. It's obvious the test is skewed upward to make people feel good about themselves.

This point in itself destroys your entire argument. However, I will move on to other arguments.

Let's say your IQ is in fact 142. That's definitely nothing to be ashamed of, but let's consider:

Let's say the test that gave you that score had a standard deviation of 16. 16 is a fairly common standard deviation for an IQ test. If your actual IQ is indeed 142 (which I doubt, though perhaps it is close) and the test was SD-16, then there would likely be 13 (12.98, actually) people out of 3000 with your IQ or higher. This would mean you're probably NOT in the top 10 IQ-wise. And that's a randomly selected group of 3000 people.

This leads me to my next point, which you attempted to dodge. Debate.org is not a randomly selected group of 3000 people. A site like Debate.org attracts people of high intelligence. That's not such a hard point to grasp. It is an intellectual activity, and intellectually gifted people therefore enjoy it. Just as athletically gifted people would be more likely to play sports, intelligent people are more likely to debate. I believe this is fairly obvious, a logical conclusion to make, and true in reality. If you disagree, please give concise reasons why so that I might strike them down as the foolishness they would likely be.

All the assumptions I have made are based on sound reasoning, and I have shown that reasoning. You are assuming that people on debate.org are average or below; that is not only nonsensical, but untrue as well. I am assuming that people on debate.org are above average intelligence-wise. I have provided sound reasoning for this (it is an intellectual activity, therefore intellectually gifted people are more likely to do it).

Also, I'd like to bring everyone's attention to my opponent's last two lines.
"you have some good points, i have some good points. there's really no way to tell as of now."

There's no way to tell? If it's unknown whether you're likely or unlikely to be in the top 10 IQ-wise, then there's no way to justify saying you're "probably one of the top ten smartest persons in terms of iq on this site." Maybe you should have said "The jury's still out on whether I'm one of the top 10 smartest people IQ-wise on this site," since you're so unsure of yourself.

I guess that'll be all for round 2. I'll summarize in round 3.

This round was forfeited because the debater has already thoroughly destroyed his opposition, and all the points from his previous round still stand.