*Does
the Flynn Effect Drop to Zero at a Very High IQ?*

The idea is that the IQ of the average person has risen,
but the IQ's of our topmost minds
haven't. Their IQ's are no
higher than those of the greatest minds of the past. Since the Flynn Effect has
been observed only at the mean IQ of 100, perhaps it doesn't apply at higher
IQ's. This is an attractive Idea, since it would explain why there could
be such sup

Unfortunately, it leads to logical absurdities.

All that is required to measure the Flynn Effect is to
administer IQ tests from the 1916-1920 era to a set of subjects whose *ratio*
IQ's have also been measured on a current IQ test. We would expect that a set of
today's 6-year-olds with IQ's in the neighborhood of 100 and mental ages in the
neighborhood of 6 would score about 133 on the 1916-1920 test(s), corresponding
to a 1916 Stanford Binet mental age of 8.

__Proposition 1__. __The
Range of IQ's Above 100 Over Which the Flynn Effect Is Effective Must Be At
Least As Great As the Magnitude of the Flynn Effect__

It is evident that the Flynn Effect must obtain at
least over a ratio-IQ range equal to the magnitude of the Flynn Effect.
Otherwise, if the Flynn Effect is 33 points of IQ, as measured on the 1916
Stanford Binet Test, and the Flynn Effect went to zero at a present-day IQ of
130, then anyone with a 1916 S-B IQ between 130 and 133 would have the same
103-to-133 IQ in 2002. And that would mean that someone with an IQ of 100 today
could be expected to earn a 133 IQ score on the 1916 S-B, while someone who
earned a Mensa-entry-level score of 132 on an IQ test today would also score a
132 on the 1916 S-B. In other words, they would score one point below someone
who had a present-day IQ of 100! Obviously, that can't be.

**Proposition 2: The Flynn
Effect Can't Decline With Increasing IQ**

*1.* **Assume
That The Flynn Effect Decreases to Zero at IQ 133**:

Let's start with the assumption that the maximum present-day IQ to which the Flynn Effect applies at all is 133, and that the Flynn Effect tapers off linearly as the present-day IQ goes from 100 to 133. In that case, everyone who had a present-day between 100 and 133 would earn the same IQ score of 133 on the 1916 Stanford Binet! In other words, the range of present-day IQ's between 100 and 133 would map into a single huge spike on the 1916 S-B. What we would see would be a present-day distribution that is log-normal, and a 1916 distribution that stretched from 100 to 133 for today's scorers in, perhaps, the 75-IQ to 100-IQ range), soared around 133, and then matched the rest of today's ratio-IQ curve for ratio IQ's above IQ = 133.

Consider the case of an

Next, consider a

Although this changes the age at which Flynn Effect disappears to a mental age of 12 instead of 9, the end result is the same. The Flynn Effect must disappear at a mental age of 12. But the choice of age was arbitrary. We could have picked 5.

__ Conclusion:
__
There can be no reasonable IQ for which the Flynn Effect drops to zero.

There is another, and perhaps clearer way to see into what's going on.

Today's average young adults should score an average IQ of 133 (mental age of 21.67) on the 1916 Stanford Binet IQ Test. Presumably, they will score that same IQ on the 1916 S-B throughout childhood. That means that at age 6, they will have a mental age of 8 on the 1916 S-B. At age 9, they will have a mental age of 12 when measured by the 1916 S-B. When chronologically 12, they will earn a mental age of 16 on the 1916 S-B. Then today's 6-year-old with a ratio IQ of 150 on today's IQ tests (e. g., next year's Fifth Revision of the Stanford Binet) will have a present-day mental age of 9

It should be straightforward to test this assertion. All we have to do is administer the 1916 S-B or a contemporary IQ test, such as the Thorndike CAVD, the Army Alpha, or the National Intelligence Test to children with known IQ's. We need to carry this out over a range of ages and IQ's.