Re: OT: Artificial?

bogart.lloy@xxxxxxxxx wrote: news:1147976810.820862.311080@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Doug Weller wrote:
Peter Alaca wrote:
[SNIP]
quoting Inger:

Neither for those
who aren't, as many of us have, among those with above
130 IQ and thus are used to draw conclusion without
having to spell out every single step, sorry nothing personal
to anyone. For the rest it might seem confusing.

Is there something about IQs so that when someone like Inger has a
middling one (given that she mentions 130, not literally middling
but not what I would call really high) they confuse people, whereas
those of us with high IQs don't? :-)
[snip]

I think you just confused me.

That is because an IQ of above 130 in almost
all cases is (far) less then 130.
There is nothing above 100.
http://www.brainworker.ch/Bildung/iq_distribution1.gif

--
p.a.

.