I got 116 on that BBC thingie, and I ran out of time a few times also. And the questions using British money really threw me. I missed a least one because of that.
138 and yet another visonary philosopher.
Too bad the market demand for visonary philosopher is low and that depresses our wages for doing that for which we are most suited.
I took that test three times in the past year, and the first time I was 144, then I was 120, THEN I was 117. For the heck of it, I did it again, and I am at 144 again. Sigh.
Ok, Lucy. 'Splain the logic here.
By the way, 138, but if I got this one right, it was a lucky guess.
Wouldn’t trust the validity of most IQ tests as far as I could throw 'em, but this isn’t about science; it’s about defining ourselves according to an arbitrary numerical system. It’s fun!
So, in the spirit of self-quantification, here’re my results:
135, according to the OP’s Emode test.
The BBC gives me a more conservative 118. I didn’t know what to do about the money questions, not being familiar with British currency, and all, so I probably got those wrong. Plus, I lied about where I live to take the test. Said I lived near Belfast. I’m so sneaky.
kabbes- 
insomnia4am - I know what you mean. According to the tests, either I’m a drooling idiot or the next Socrates. I believe I too have taken the same test more than once, with a wide score difference.
waddamaroon - I think it is that John likes numbers whose square roots are whole numbers. The square root of 400 is 20, 100 is 10 and 2,500 is 50. So the correct answer would be 900.
And I said I was a Glasgow girl, despite having been born and raised in Virginia. 
I’m wondering if the number of pints of stout you down each day is figured into your IQ. Anyway, that was fun. I didn’t find the questions too challenging but the time constraint really puts some pressure on. 137 BTW
Woo-hoo for Visionary Philosopher. That means so much to me 
BBC Test -> 118.
I posted my score and opinion of this test in this thread.
Just for the hell of it, I did the less reliable emode one.
142, Visionary Philosopher.
“The first thing we can tell you about that is you’re equally good at mathematical and verbal tasks, and learn best through experience.”
But with only 40 questions and no time limit, I’m unconvinced. And I think the posts here show the emode one to be heavily skewed to the right. In true IQ terms, only a tiny, tiny tiny fraction of the population should get over 140 and yet we have umpteen in this thread alone. :dubious:
The BBC site is interesting. Padeye, you asked about pints of stout. Well, on the site they say that one claim is that higher IQ is linked with consuming a moderate amount of alcohol. They’re not claiming that their survey testing these claims (and others) is scientific, but they are seeking to test the claims in some form or other.
IIRC from the site, the average IQ for moderate and heavy drinkers was the same (about 108 or so) but the average IQ for the non-drinkers was 99. Make of that what you will.
pan
psst, kabbes, the BBC test is NOT a real true bona fide IQ test. They might be saying it is but it’s a helluva lot different to sitting in a room with a psychologist for 3+ hours.
I think the emode IQ test is the one where I scored a truly magnificent 90. Oh how Mr P laughed. Turd. Esp as those sites massively overstate IQ as they are trying to sell you something.
[History Of The World]
Clerk: Occupation?
Comicus: Stand up philosopher.
Clerk: What?
Comicus: Stand up philosopher. I coalesce the vapors of human existence into a viable and meaningful comprehension.
Clerk: Oh, a BULLSHIT artist!
[/History of the World]
But they saaaay it is and everything! It’s in their FAQ - “Is this a real IQ test?” “Yes, yes it is”.
Oh alright then. It’s still better than the ones that are trying to sell you stuff. At least the BBC are trying to get it right!
I got 130, too, kabbes. Panicked when asked to add up some numbers.
So I’m a Visual Mathematician. (Score was 135)
…so that means I need to take my shoes off to count to 12?
I got messed up with the Brit references (money wasn’t bad, but ‘which of these is the same back to front’ really messed with my mind, and apparently the expressions we use here in the USA mean differently in the UK … go figure;)). Only a 106, but considering the huge randomnosity of “stare at this picture for half a minute. Now, tell me, did the lad have spinach or brocolli in his teeth?” questions, I think I’ll chalk that one up to “damn testers were sloshed when they wrote that.”
142 for Emode…
120 for the BBC test (and the same as my estimate – interesting, that).
The metric and monetrary questions didn’t throw me, because it was almost all proportional stuff. I think you had to know that there were 1000 grams in a kilogram, but that was about it. (Of course, I did go to school in Canada for four years … but that doesn’t affect the money!)
I thought too much about two questions. Oh well.
[added in preview: ditto what iampunha said. That “back to front” question was weird,]
138 Visual Mathematician checking in. (120 from the BBC test)
John appears to like numbers that are divisible 100 unless they’re divisible by 3, which leaves 1000 and 1100. Although 99 is divisible by three, and isn’t divisible by 100, which might be the only reasons he doesn’t like it, it kind of implies he doesn’t like numbers divisible by 11, leaving 1000 as the answer.
The question was poorly written.
135 Visual Mathematician on Emode
120 on BBC
Actually, given that 400, 100 and 2500 are all square numbers, I’d say that the solution was a touch simpler than that…
pan