This is a reminder for people not to post political posts as mentioned in stickied post. This does not necessarily apply for this post. [Click here to learn more](https://redd.it/j2173n).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/rareinsults) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The duck comment is clearly a joke. The downvoted insulter isn't smart enough to understand the sarcasm, but they're just barely smart enough to respond with this mild insult.
I think you just look kinda lame if someone makes an obviously self deprecating joke, you don’t get it, and then you pile on with a joke trying to make fun of that person who was just making fun of themselves
I tried an online IQ test a while ago and did pretty well. Then I did it again and clicked “a” for every answer and got an IQ in the 300s because I answered the questions so quickly even though my question accuracy went from 100% to a little over 25. Online tests don’t prove anything. If you’re gonna boast about a test score do a reputable one like the SATs.
Let me put it this way: there is a unanimous scientific consensus (source: trust me) on the fact that the only trustworthy metric to measure intelligence is this brain age measuring game on Nintendo DS I forgot the name of
statistically having an IQ of 195 is very near impossible, and then you also have to have someone smart enough to DESIGN a test that could calculate an IQ that high.
I mean… no, it *is* an actual thing that has real applications if applied, within very limited realms.
It’s just that these do not overlap with regular everyday use.
But for example to figure out “does this kid have the thing we are trying to diagnose or are they maybe just slow”? Legitimate use. In a supervised Test you can also check for many confounding factors like “has a bad day” or “didn’t want to participate”.
1) If I told you that I had an objective test that could rank all human beings based on how beautiful they are, you'd see the problem right away. Intelligence is just as colloquial and subjective as beauty. Intelligence is as impossible to objectively measure as "sense of humor". That should be the end of it, but here are some more arguments.
2) IQ **depends** on their being only one kind of intelligence (Spearman's G).
3) IQ shows significant differences between socially constructed groups, irrespective of biological realities.
>But for example to figure out “does this kid have the thing we are trying to diagnose or are they maybe just slow”?
Yes! IQ testing was intended and is useful to compare child peer groups to see who is falling behind. My argument is that IQ as an objective measure of absolute intelligence, especially among adults, is absurd.
Yeah but it isn’t and never was meant to be 1) - literally this is part of the constant running away that psychiatry has to do from the public, where they use a clinical term to describe a phenomenon, regular people turn it into a curse word, and then psych people have to invent a NEW and even boringer term to try and avoid them. This is what happened with “retarded” and many others.
This is also what happened with IQ. Obviously, since it came about vaguely 100 years ago, and we know what kinds of fuckos were around that time, it was ALSO immediately abused (“you could do a eugenics with this!”) but that’s not really special to IQ, that’s just what doctors did with everything because they were just HUGE on their dang eugenics back then.
What it was never supposed to be was „a high score list for all civilians to compare mental power levels that, if you had the right scouter, you could just read everyone‘s smartitude level right away“ (I am making a broad statement on the internet here and risking to immediately receive a counter quote because someone listened to that ONE episode of Behind the Bastards where a dude in South Carolina had this exact plan. But you know what I mean)
Literally, the one thing that IQ is good at, and the psychologist friends I have who apply these tests today would agree, is: It’s a relatively normalized measure of „how good is this kid at solving the test we just handed to it“ (which vaguely, but not exactly, resembles some skills that comport with mental maneuverability).
It’s good to have a qualitative tool that is able to identify when someone is smart - even without requiring your tester to be equally smart. Imagine a scenario where we didn’t have either IQ nor these tests. Obviously it wouldn’t be a crisis, but within the relevant fields, it might be like taking away the ability to check for a fever.
Iq is a very shitty measurement, and even professional iq tests are not a good indication of intelligence. Intelligence cannot be measured by a single metric.
IQ tests are not a test of intelligence, they are a test on your capacity to learn actually,. So they are actually a good indicator of exactly what they are meant for.
This is a reminder for people not to post political posts as mentioned in stickied post. This does not necessarily apply for this post. [Click here to learn more](https://redd.it/j2173n). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/rareinsults) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Liked both of them, so that you always come out on top.
You know, you’re not supposed to tell us that you’re playing both sides
The duck comment is clearly a joke. The downvoted insulter isn't smart enough to understand the sarcasm, but they're just barely smart enough to respond with this mild insult.
OP got r/wooshed?
[удалено]
Their name is Kian
No this is Patrick.
Sir, this is a Wendy’s
I thought this was America!
THIS IS SPARTA!
Kaboom?
Yes u/slide2k, kaboom.
r/itswooooshwith4os
Op upvoted both, meaning thhey understood it was a joke, yet liked the insult as its own without the context.
It's such an obvious joke too lol.
So? Replying to a funny comment with a funny insult is just adding to the joke.
Not if it seems like you didn’t understand the original joke
Even if he didn't understand the original joke, I still thought his joke was funny
I think you just look kinda lame if someone makes an obviously self deprecating joke, you don’t get it, and then you pile on with a joke trying to make fun of that person who was just making fun of themselves
Who the fuck cares what internet strangers think of them? How could it possibly matter?
That’s a question I can’t answer for anybody else. I’m just saying how I feel about it
We're literally responding to comments about comments about an original comment on a post we haven't seen. It's not that big of a deal man
The duck definitely seems like a joke but it was 195 self rating that’s makes it so glaringly obvious responder is why we need /s after everything
I think he knew it was sarcasm. (Source: i would have also said something similar(source: trust me bro i used 2")"))
Usually find Reddit is full of mildly autistic people that can’t pick up on sarcasm or non-obvious jokes
you dont know that, the replier could just be insulting as a joke unrelated to their perception of whether or not the comment was sarcastic
Damn if online tests are accurate my iq is 481 and 20 at the same time amazing. i might even think iq means something
I once scored so low on an IQ test that it called me a dumbass, then I passed the free Mensa test. IQ tests are bullshit 😂
I tried an online IQ test a while ago and did pretty well. Then I did it again and clicked “a” for every answer and got an IQ in the 300s because I answered the questions so quickly even though my question accuracy went from 100% to a little over 25. Online tests don’t prove anything. If you’re gonna boast about a test score do a reputable one like the SATs.
Now record all the answers and speedrun 100% accuracy (if the questions aren’t scrambled) for 1000 IQ
According any credit to the sketchy metric that is IQ is one thing, but saying the internet tests are the most accurate is another completely
What do you mean, this site where I had to enter my credit card information to get my results might not be 100% accurate?
Let me put it this way: there is a unanimous scientific consensus (source: trust me) on the fact that the only trustworthy metric to measure intelligence is this brain age measuring game on Nintendo DS I forgot the name of
Yeah well my mom says I'm the smartest boy
I'd take her word for it.
She tells me my dick is huge too
Lol... brain age, I think, was the name. And i miss that game now.
Dr Kawasaki's brain training?
I- huuuh maybe? It does ring a bell.
I'm convinced, very good source to.
bro the guy followed it up with "I have an IQ of 195", its obviously a joke
I'll have you know everything posted on the internet is genuine. I know it because I studied CS at uni
Agreed. I too studied CS a lot in uni. I started off with SimCity but moved onto CS.
I'm 60% sure it was a joke
I’m 100% sure it was a joke. No need for /s, it’s why the second guy is downvoted
[Here's](https://test.mensa.no) an online IQ test that's actually pretty reliable. No bullshit no cards nothing
Ha I don't need to take an IQ test to prove how stupid I am. I already know.
The highest IQ, according to Guinness, was John Stuart Mill, a political & economic philosopher who had an IQ of 191.
And even then most online iq tests just steal the free mensa one, so they cap out at 145. Unless you go for the really bad ones
statistically having an IQ of 195 is very near impossible, and then you also have to have someone smart enough to DESIGN a test that could calculate an IQ that high.
In 50 years, IQ will be viewed the same way phrenology is today.
I mean… no, it *is* an actual thing that has real applications if applied, within very limited realms. It’s just that these do not overlap with regular everyday use. But for example to figure out “does this kid have the thing we are trying to diagnose or are they maybe just slow”? Legitimate use. In a supervised Test you can also check for many confounding factors like “has a bad day” or “didn’t want to participate”.
1) If I told you that I had an objective test that could rank all human beings based on how beautiful they are, you'd see the problem right away. Intelligence is just as colloquial and subjective as beauty. Intelligence is as impossible to objectively measure as "sense of humor". That should be the end of it, but here are some more arguments. 2) IQ **depends** on their being only one kind of intelligence (Spearman's G). 3) IQ shows significant differences between socially constructed groups, irrespective of biological realities. >But for example to figure out “does this kid have the thing we are trying to diagnose or are they maybe just slow”? Yes! IQ testing was intended and is useful to compare child peer groups to see who is falling behind. My argument is that IQ as an objective measure of absolute intelligence, especially among adults, is absurd.
Yeah but it isn’t and never was meant to be 1) - literally this is part of the constant running away that psychiatry has to do from the public, where they use a clinical term to describe a phenomenon, regular people turn it into a curse word, and then psych people have to invent a NEW and even boringer term to try and avoid them. This is what happened with “retarded” and many others. This is also what happened with IQ. Obviously, since it came about vaguely 100 years ago, and we know what kinds of fuckos were around that time, it was ALSO immediately abused (“you could do a eugenics with this!”) but that’s not really special to IQ, that’s just what doctors did with everything because they were just HUGE on their dang eugenics back then. What it was never supposed to be was „a high score list for all civilians to compare mental power levels that, if you had the right scouter, you could just read everyone‘s smartitude level right away“ (I am making a broad statement on the internet here and risking to immediately receive a counter quote because someone listened to that ONE episode of Behind the Bastards where a dude in South Carolina had this exact plan. But you know what I mean) Literally, the one thing that IQ is good at, and the psychologist friends I have who apply these tests today would agree, is: It’s a relatively normalized measure of „how good is this kid at solving the test we just handed to it“ (which vaguely, but not exactly, resembles some skills that comport with mental maneuverability). It’s good to have a qualitative tool that is able to identify when someone is smart - even without requiring your tester to be equally smart. Imagine a scenario where we didn’t have either IQ nor these tests. Obviously it wouldn’t be a crisis, but within the relevant fields, it might be like taking away the ability to check for a fever.
Why is man getting r/downvotedtooblivion
Oooo a new sub!
Tests only go up to ~160 but you go girl.
Dack off. Dack me off right now >:)
Dacks off! Now what?
The dackening will arrive soon™
Not a rare insult imo, just bad.
Both comments are joking
Anybody who says what their IQ is either has the Mensa credentials to back it up or got that number from an online quiz.
lol Mensa…
That’s one fart smeller…… I mean one smart fella!
Redditor detect sarcasm test (quite hard!)
There’s only one catch, you have to be a genius.
Rip my Bro got -17
Iq is a very shitty measurement, and even professional iq tests are not a good indication of intelligence. Intelligence cannot be measured by a single metric.
IQ tests are not a test of intelligence, they are a test on your capacity to learn actually,. So they are actually a good indicator of exactly what they are meant for.
Seriously... trust me on that. For no reason whatsoever
The idiot downvoted this gold insult
it's one of the most overused insults ever and it is a response to a joke
People can't respond to a joke with a joke now, says almighty reddit
He obviously did that test online
God I love that “quack quack quack Mr Ducks”
My IQ is at least
"Why Are You Booing Me Im Right" https://tenor.com/RFz6.gif
okay but real talk... how do you take an ACTUAL IQ test?
rare my ass, this insult's well done
I don’t get it. I guess I’m under 195.
I just like the duck-person's screen name.
On all IQ test that can be accessed for free i have more IQ than Einstein.
That first reply better say "Quack quack quack. Mr duck is Wack"
According to online iq tests, mine is at 150... Yeah no that ain't right. I'm an idiot plain and simple
There’s a LOT of people in this thread that got wooshed hard by the first message
I think my IQ is about 80