Meet Britain's brainiest toddler: Two-year-old Karina has the same IQ as Stephen Hawking

reply to post by dee132423


I agree and have seen two year olds that understand that eyes are for blinking, seeing and shut eye etc.

unimpressed honestly how do they calculate this and imo she is just being used by the government for experiments and medicine implantation protocol type drills.

i have an iq of like 130 maybe and i was tested when i was young for a 160 iq.

Not trying to be rude towards the little girl- good for her. I just don't see what the big deal is. Children are prone to answering questions with imagination.

When my son was three, he was playing with a coat hanger, a rubber band, a pencil and a straw. I was watching him closely when he fastened the rubber band around the hanger, inserted the pencil into the straw, then proceeded to eject the pencil/straw into the air. He made a bow and arrow out of all that.

Then he has a train set that I cannot put together to save my life because it's three different sets we bought him that can all join together. He kept begging my husband and me to put it together for him. I had no idea how and my husband was too busy with work. He said he'd do it himself and I just smiled thinking he'd never be able to. Sure enough, I went into his room and he made a set that took up his entire floor.

Then just today he wrote down all the numbers 1-10. I've never taught him that. And he uses pretty big words for his age. His favorite is 'Entrepreneur.' He'll bring me little cookies on a plate or something and tell me he is a cookie entrepreneur and ask me if I'd like to buy some.

And anytime we buy him a new toy, he saves the fastening wires and crafts little barn scenes with them. He makes cowboys (complete with boots, chaps, cowboy hats) and little cows and horses out of the wires. And the horses will have saddles and stirrups for the wire cowboys.

OK, I'm bragging now but I'm a proud mother and he's a smart cookie. But the point is, ask any little kid what eyes are for or any question, and chances are you'll get a very imaginative answer. I hope that wasn't the extent of this girl's IQ test because I really don't understand the big deal in that.

That's adorable. But wait - Stephen Hawking's IQ is ONLY 160?

Originally posted by tezzajw

Here's an article that strongly suggests that people could be born with an innate number sense. In other words, if the kids aren't born with it, then they're not going to have it. They can work hard to improve it, but they'll never 'get it' like the other kids do.

I would willingly bet that most Maths Teachers will tell you that their anecdotal experience absolutely confirms this article's findings.

I wouldn't be surprised if some time in the future a 'maths gene' or a 'music gene', etc will be identified.

Sorry, but I don't agree with this.

I've noticed that here in the United States, most people tend to really believe the "natural talent = necessity" myth quite heavily. It saddens me because it's a self-defeating philosophy.

If you go to Asia for example, you'll see that they stress hard work over natural intelligence every day of the week. In America, everyone tends to think that if your IQ isn't high enough, or your spatial abilities aren't as developed, etc. then you have no chance at achieving what you want. This is simply untrue.

Take Mathematics for example. Many people believe, as you do, that it is somehow genetic and that you're just born with it. These kind of beliefs are actually a factor behind the US' poor performance on international mathematics assessment, but you are actually sort of correct in this claim. Except that everyone is born with this "math gene". I recommend reading up on current cognitive neuroscience, particularly Brian Butterworth.

You may also want to read these statistics about middle school and high school mathematics.

www.achieve.org...

Of course, I'm not saying that there is no such thing as natural intelligence. For example, take a look at Kim-Ung-Yong. At the age of three, he could read and understand four languages. At the age of four, he solved an advanced stochastic differential equation. By the age of 15, he acquired his PhD in Physics.

Most people may never become as great a Physicist as Albert Einstein was, but if you're telling me that you can't pass your differential equations class because you don't have the natural ability that he has - I'll say you're not working hard enough.

IQ depends on both our genes and our environment. Recent research show that there are no less than 7 types of intelligence, tests like Mensa obviosuly test for only one type, logical. Stephen Hawkins is unique, there can only be one

Charles Murray and Richard Herrnstein said as much in The Bell Curve, as did Steven Pinker in The Blank Slate. Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner drew the same conclusion in Freakonomics: “A child’s academic abilities are far more influenced by the IQs of his biological parents than the IQs of his adoptive parents.”

“Nisbett, a professor of psychology at the University of Michigan, wants to restore to nurture a significant role in the development of intelligence. Raising someone in an upper-middle-class environment versus a lower-class environment is worth 12 to 18 points of IQ – a truly massive effect,” he said.

Edit link: www.timesonline.co.uk...


[edit on 2009/6/12 by reugen]

like i said, talk to me when she is 15 and lets see if she hasn't dyed her hair, waering make up, and more interested in watching paris hiltons my bff and she can't even use a math calculator

Going off topic for a second . . . .

Living most of my life about 15 minutes from Mexico, I always found it absolutely hilarious that the world's smart people club is called MENSA.

Why, you may ask?

Mensa, in Mexico, means a female who is dumb or stupid.

Hmmm

I would have asked, which came first, the chicken or the egg ?

reply to post by catalyst2466


Just for fun I have asked my 2 year old just shy of 3 what his eyes are for and here is the exact conversation.
Tragen what do you use your eyes for?
You won't be mad mommy.
No I am just curious what you do with them
Don't you know mommy
Yes,but I want to know what you do with them
You won't be mad
No
It's for kidlets to know when mommies are coming so they quit building castles in the kitty box!
Yup which I never had asked that one.It's now time to go bathe him in a strong soap.
Just my point kids will usually always give the most imaginitive,funniest answers to a question.
That's why the show kids say the darndest things were so popular.Now she has labled her daughter a genius and proably believes it and will have unreal expectations from her.

reply to post by dee132423


That was a radical answer you kid gave you...Seriously cool, im always left speechless when children answer you with their own interpretation of reality compared to ours.

P.S. I seriously love the part were he asked you if you were going to get mad..If your child was on ats he just earned himsekf a S&F

reply to post by tristar


I think you hit it right own it's their own interpretation of reality vs. ours.If my child simply stated to see with I would be more then surprised.
It's wonderful they things they come up with everyday is something new.My daughter yesterday made up an elaborate story as to where all the rain was coming from it consisted alot of buckets and sprinkler systems.

reply to post by tristar


Edit:dup post


[edit on 12-6-2009 by dee132423]

Hmm, I have always thought the IQ level thing was flawed anyway but it seems to me this is a case of simply ability of speech.

I have a one year old that can do many things, tries to sing to her childrens shows.
Knowing dance moves and specific parts of songs to do specific reactions. (raising arms, clapping, waving, etc).
Now because she is only just turned 17 months old like most her age she cant speak so the singing is mainly out of tune gibberish.
She understands commands and pretty sure if she could talk she could explain what eyes do too and make up things if she doesnt have an automatic answer ready.
Is she a genius? no, she is just a child and will give child responses to questions if she could speak just like every other kid.

All this sounds like is a kid nearly 3 who can talk, "what do eyes do?" "you close them when you sleep and put contact lenses in them"
This sounds like a natural response, how many parents say "close your eyes" when trying to get their child off to sleep.
As for the contact lenses thing, does she assume everyone wears them as she implied which is clearly stating what she has seen.
I also question if she said it coherently and used the term Contact Lenses as opposed to pointing at her eyes saying "tonkac lems" because her mother uses them and repeats words to her daughter over and over to associate words to things.
Kinda like a pavlovian learning method.

Well done to the kid for being able to talk and her being able to say things relating to something and if she cant just make it up, kinda like any kid does when they grasp speaking.
I hear she knows the alphabet too, now does she know the song lyrics or can she tell you what the funny wiggly lines are called by memory.
It's still quite clever for a 2-3 year old to be able to tell you what things are from memory but I think the IQ level test (questionable method) has gone to her mothers head.
It also remains to be seen if she can increase in intelligence or just an early starter.
Apparantly at around 4 I could name loads of birds by their English name (kingfisher, etc, not the latin names) on my mothers pictures, All I was doing was remembering what they looked like and stating what I was told they was called quite frequently.
Now I didnt go on to be an orthonologist and forgot most of the names over later years when it wasnt being drummed into me.

Obviously a fluff piece written due to lack of dogs barking to a song for that corner of the news this week.

When she is 3 and offering her opinion on string theory then I may have a response that suits the super brainy child worshippers of the world.

[edit on 12-6-2009 by keepithush]

Originally posted by dee132423
reply to post by tristar
My daughter yesterday made up an elaborate story as to where all the rain was coming from it consisted alot of buckets and sprinkler systems.

Now if you drum it into her how it really happens and she repeats that she would look a genius.
Personally I prefer children to be children and leave them to their brilliant innocent imaginations.
I hate people who feel the need to correct a childs false belief.
I live near an old castle (cliche Englishman reference) and told my 4 year old that a princess lives in the castle, I point to ships in the distance and call them pirate ships, Some stuck up spoil sport would say I am lying to my child and how I am teaching her things that will make her look silly if she states them in her school.

Let kids be kids and encourage their imaginations and add a little magic to their world, thats one of the reasons the world is screwed up. Kids are depressed because for every exciting magical thing they believe in or come up with some miserable adult will feel the need to offer their opinion so as to not personally feel embarrassed by their kids not understanding the inner workings of a microwave or them believing in santa clause and the tooth fairy.
Usually its the same spoil sports who feel the need to reveal magic tricks, explain in scientific terms how Big foot cant exist, tell you wrestling is fake like its news, point out cgi effects in films or how you can see clearly it was a dummy falling from the cliff edge.
You know the person I mean, the miserable guy who sucks all the enjoyment out of the atmosphere.

PS: I dont mean debunking things on this website, this site is in many ways for people seeking answers and strangely in a way hoping that something out of the ordinary cant be debunked so that its virtually that childhood magic back into our lives and share the excitement with others.

Keep chasing the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow, both figuratively and literally.