Knowing very well the test (I've it and, both series of 80 questions),
there is nothing extravagant to get 140, the test does not ask and education
or culture, but only a good vocabulary, some logical reasoning and a good
arithmetic.
135 on that test is supposedly the mark of the 5% best, 75 is the absolute
minimum (men) or 70 (women).
The worse of the IQ scientology test is that it has never been calibrated
against a population, so, the "average" 100 is nothing verifiable, and the
other scale allegations are no more valid.
Besides, if you take the same series (A or B) twice, you get a falsified
result, since you've already answered the same questions once some time ago.
Now finally, if you analyze the test, you could very well find that two
answers are wrongly corrected, so, you could'nt get the 150 (women) 155
mark -men - the maxima.
Well, sexism to add the whole short analysis: Once the test is completed
, the evaluator/tester counts the correct answers on the 80 questions, and
adds 75 points for men while ihe adds ONLY 70 points for women: therefore, a
woman has always 5 points lesser than a man for a same number of correct
answers. insane sexism of hubbie.
Moreover, the test is timed, but you get no bonus points if you do it in a
shorter time with almost all the questions correctly answered (by instance,
on could imagine that if someone has 78 of 80 good answers but has completed
in say, 25 minutes, he get 78 + 75 = 153 + something calculated like this:
- Average time for each question: 1800 seconds/80= 22.5 second per question.
- therefore, each 22.5 sec won adds 1 point, after having deducted the
double of each wrong answer, by instance in my exemple: 2x22.5x2= 90 sec.
- if 5 minutes were won, and 2 answers were wrong, 300 sec - 90 sec= 210 sec
/ 22.5= 9,3 points added to the 153 above.
r
I scored in the genius range on the $cientology test, about 30 points
above the stated Miscavige 140 points. Post-cult years later I took a
legit test and got a pretty high school, 148 or something I think.
Their OCA interpretations are bogus bullshit, like the rest of
Hubbard's crap.
<snip>
Geeze, I hadn't heard this before. It's hilarious! Clearly it's a nod to
the superior intelligence of women!
: D
Peach
--
Extra! Extra! Read All About It!
Save some dough, save some grief:
http://www.xenu.net
http://www.scientology-lies.com
> Geeze, I hadn't heard this before. It's hilarious! Clearly it's a nod
to
> the superior intelligence of women!
On raw Intelligence IIRC Men and Women are on average the same, but Men
have a greater spread. Thus there are more male geniuses but also more
males are ESN.
I wouldn't have expected the CoS 'IQ test' to be a real one, another
fraud and easier to prove than the fake 'Personality Test' I should
think as real IQ tests are standardised. Do they also add a bit for each
$100 you spend?
--
69 Ways to spot a Suppressive Person
http://www.newsfrombree.co.uk/stolgy_10.htm
it's a wonder they're so focused on a measurement tool developed by
psychs.
-maggie, human being
What does ESN mean?
> I wouldn't have expected the CoS 'IQ test' to be a real one, another
> fraud and easier to prove than the fake 'Personality Test' I should
> think as real IQ tests are standardised. Do they also add a bit for each
> $100 you spend?
Snort.