Look, I’ve been following this “genius IQ” stuff for years, buying all the books and documentaries. It’s a total mess. That 325 IQ for Michael Kearney? Pure marketing hype. It’s based on a ridiculously inflated extrapolation from a child’s test score.
Here’s the deal: The Stanford-Binet test, even the version for older children, isn’t designed to measure IQs that high. It’s like trying to weigh a whale on a bathroom scale; you’ll get a number, but it’s meaningless.
- Kearney scored 168 on a test for kids aged 6+. That’s incredibly high, sure.
- But extrapolating that to 325 is statistical nonsense. The scoring system simply doesn’t work that way at those extreme levels.
- Think of it like leveling up in a video game: you get diminishing returns. The difference between 100 and 168 is HUGE, but the jump from 168 to 325 is pure speculation.
Why does this misinformation spread? It’s clickbait. Sensational numbers sell. People love to read about prodigies, and the higher the IQ, the more amazing it seems.
Bottom line: While Kearney is undoubtedly brilliant, claiming a 325 IQ is misleading and inaccurate. IQ scores, especially at the high end, are inherently imprecise. They should be interpreted with caution, not as definitive measures of genius.
- Real intelligence is far more complex than a single number.
- Focus on achievements, not just scores.
- Be wary of sensationalized claims.
