So I guess you aren’t very satisfied with your score? 
Numbers are just a very convenient and precise way of representing the hierarchies in your head.
Usually the people who attempt to escape evaluation and invalidate all attempts at clarifying hierarchies are ones who aren’t satisfied with how they are being evaluated and thus their place in the hierarchy.
Yeah, there are so many more important factors in life.
Iq tests are like handing someone a gun and measuring a couple of their shots on the target. Depends on the gun and what their mood and what time of day it is. People who had a bad breakfast or are tired are going to get a poorer score depending on their mood.
That being said, it is generally accurate after a few groupings, within a range of 20-30 points. So for example, if someone scores a 110 iq on the test, that generally means they have an IQ imbetween 90 or 130, depending on if the test is accurate. This particular test that I mentioned in the OP, isnt terribly accurate though, it seems whoever made it has a bad habit of incorrect labeling of geometric properties (the test maker claims that 2 dimensional triangles have 3 planes.)
The test only seems to be a predictor of dumbness, and not smartness. For example, if someone consistently scores a 90 IQ, they are pretty much gauranteed to be dumb. But if someone scores a 150 IQ, the have an equal chance of being as clever as someone with a 180 IQ, and the !80 IQ has more or less an equal chance of overall being dumber than someone with a 150 IQ.
They are not precise at all. And often very misleading.
As I have stated before, intelligence comes in a variety of “flavors”, types, and speeds. To test intelligence, one must test:
) Memory
) Communication
) Algorithms
Each involves speed, precision, direction (in vs out), and variety (and duration in the case of memory). The variety of intelligence provide for “types”. The different types handle varied situations differently and thus do better within their own favored situation. What is normally thought of as a stupid person, often can handle a specific situation better than the average and even than geniuses. How many “geniuses” are socially well adapted and capable? Not very many at all. A “good politician” is a genius at politics, but usually not anything else. It all depends upon very specific algorithms, neurology (at that time - changes more than you think), and preceding or “setup” situations that can either enable or disable specific mental functions without interfering greatly with others.
It is all much like trying to gauge the best computer. Which computer best fits your needs (discounting cost) has the “higher IQ” than the others. And your needs are not a constant. Sometimes a slower computer better serves than a fast one (especially if the faster one has been updated by Microsoft). Some computers are made for playing games with special graphics cards. Some are made more for math and scientific usage. Some merely for search and display. Each has its own specialty. They cannot be gauged merely by saying that one has a rating of 95 and the other has a rating of 110.
And it takes a pretty low IQ to think that one can assess IQ in such simple minded ways as a simple scalar. They become suckers misled into believing what others wish them to believe.
No such thing as a good politician.
Hmm…which computer is better, the 99 dollar windows basic or the one that can play games?
People who are good at social skills aren’t geniuses, they just happen to be beautiful and born with vaginas. They are selfish idiots that don’t contribute to MIJOT, they just make the world a worse place with their existence. They are boring and stupid. People who do conspicuous consumption are idiots.