Science?

http://www.thephysicsforum.com/trash-can/121-ctmu-b-s-brilliant.html
This is a thread on a grand theory of reality by Chris Langan, purported IQ 180+, which Langan claims is based on pure logic. Yet, I rather suspect some lapses in logic. Plus, it's deliberately written in a manner contrived to exhaust the reader. Nevertheless, the last post on the thread above quite annoys me: a debate on science is here ended because it is not based on "current scientific understanding." Does the moderator not realize that this understanding is always evolving when it is not revolutionizing? Science that stands still is dead. Also, the thread contains no substantive criticisms of the grand theory--that is, no indication that the theory is even out of the bound of current understanding. But, it's not PC--he claims to prove God's existence, and the big no-no that tends to follow, intelligent design. Also, he favors eugenics.

Chess Testing

http://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/hypothesis-iq-and-chess
I am surprised at this result, if accurate. Probably Kasparov, one of the all time greats, has a highly imbalanced intellect in terms of his natural talents. I expected a 150 (1 in 3000) or higher with significant imbalance. That he's only about 135 indicates much more imbalance than I'd expected. A genius, though, is by definition imbalanced--though typically even their weaknesses exceed the average.