Libb Thims (genius ranking)

Libb Thims (social piston and cylinder example) 16 Apr 2013
American electrochemical engineer Libb Thims lecturing in 2013 to engineering students, at Northern Illinois University, on an introduction to human chemical thermodynamics, who since the 2000s frequently receives the query: "what is your IQ?", a very difficult to answer question, for some reason.
In genius studies, Libb Thims (genius ranking) is a go-to tentative meta-analysis genius ranking position and or genius ranking credentials page, depending, for the semi-common query on third-party opinion on IQ estimate (or genius level) of American electrochemical engineer and genius studies scholar and hobbyist Libb Thims,

Opinionated estimates of Thims' IQ range, in the derogation end, from: “imbecile” [IQ:35] (Jheald, 2007) (Ѻ), “delusional moron” [IQ:60] (Dominic Anderton, 2015) (Ѻ), to “zero-value crackpot” (Alon Amit, 2017) (Ѻ) — opinions but realizations of Jonathan Swift's idiom that “when a true genius appears in this world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him” — to high end estimates, such as: “walking encyclopedia” (Milivoje Kostic, 2013), “IQ:202+” (Inderjit Singh, 2014), “new Goethe” (KizzMyButt, 2017) (Ѻ), “highest IQ ever” [IQ:225] (AlphaWolf009, 2012), or “smartest person of all time” (SharpCharm, 2017) (Ѻ).

Query | Common
In the early 2000s, people began to commonly probe Thims with the query "what's your IQ?"; the following are examples:

“Every time I get to certain parts in the book, I have to stop and think, like: Who were this guy’s parents?, What kind of kid was he?, How old was he when he started to think this deep? How was he raised to be able to come up with some of this stuff? Still, the more I read… the more I think—this guy is really on to something!”
— Sylvia Santillan (2005), “Review of 22-pg draft of Cessation Thermodynamics” (Ѻ), Feb 25

“Person who made this, what is your own IQ? :)”
frillan93External link icon (c)(2011), forum post (Ѻ) to "IQ 200+ | Smartest person ever (4 of 4)" video

“Though I oppose the theories of Libb Thims, the founder of this wiki, I am aware of the effort expended in arranging this list of those who perhaps possess high IQs. I myself have exceeded the ceilings of several standardized tests, e.g., the WAIS, the Stanford-Binet, and the CCAT (which I took but a few years ago in elementary school).”
— Vestigial Ailurophile (2011), Yahoo best answer (Ѻ) to: “Who really has the world’s highest IQ?”

“Who are you, a professor somewhere? And what is your IQ?
Paul RaelExternal link icon (c)(2013) forum query (Ѻ) at "Human evolution timeline | big bang to present" video; which is based on the evolution timeline; which is based on the molecular evolution table, Aug [3]

“How can someone so poorly versed in such matters [as (Goethe/Euler) name pronunciation] rate himself worthy of creating such a list [IQ: 200+]?”
Gottfried LeibnizExternal link icon (c)(2013), forum post (Ѻ) to "IQ 200+ | Smartest person ever (4 of 4)" video, Nov.

What is your IQ? How did you calculate it? Which college did you graduate from and are you a professor?”
GeniuCity (2014), “Intelligence”, thread post by Turkish student (Ѻ), Jan 31

“My aunt watched your [NIU and UP] university lectures, commenting ‘he must have a very high IQ?’ What’s your IQ?
— Amanda (2014), query to Libb Thims (12 Feb)

Libb Thims IQ 225 (Quora)
A Mar 2017 Quora posting (Ѻ), with 4+ answers, e.g. by Alon Amit, said (Ѻ) to have an “extraordinarily high IQ”, akin to Terrence Tao (IQ:170-230) (Ѻ), David Wyman, former Prometheus High-IQ Society, who claims and IQ of 164/170+, Eusebius Clay, who claims a “profoundly gifted IQ” (180+), and Benjamin Hardisty (Ѻ), among others, with discussion (albeit mostly of the ignorance-is-bliss, forest blind, ships not seen derogation type), on Libb ThimsIQ and the validity of his work (see: IQ:200+ HCT prodigies; compare: catch up effect, posthumous genius, and or crackpot in regard to “this idea”).
“I do think your defunct theory of life is your unconscious mind formulating a rational understanding of our world ...'tis merely basic psychology. It is implied to me, upon reviewing the aberration that is your theory on religion, that you view notions of the afterlife as superstitions, and you dismiss the ideas of the personal god. Thus, you have joined a select group of geniuses with a substantial and remarkable understanding of the universe, who yet decry religion as a theory of life. I am curious as to your IQ ... (upon further exploration of the website, I have satiated my own inquisitiveness in this regard; you yourself calculate your real IQ as both ± 190 and 160-230). As for your Machiavellian and Galilean mind points...hmm...I have my own IQ methodology, and I believe it to be highly accurate, although based somewhat (by necessity, of course) on what the erudite man can logically ascertain. With it, I have calculated Tesla's IQ to be 201, Einstein's to be 211, and my own to be a (comparatively paltry) 160. I have calculated the real IQs of Isaac Newton (IQ=210), Blaise Pascal (IQ=183), and William Sidis (IQ=199).”
Inderjit Singh (user:NikolaTesla) (2014), thread: “The Smartest ‘Living’ Person: Dissemination of Ideas”, Apr 28 (Ѻ)

“Re: "I'll try to dumb this down for you" - I realize that there is an intellectual disparity between the two of us, of at least 40 real IQ points (162 to 202+); conversely, however, we must bear in mind that genius often comes in a cracked pot rather than a whole one.”
Inderjit Singh (user:NikolaTesla) (2014), response comment to Libb Thims, thread: “Curriculum Vitae”, Sep 12 (Ѻ)

“Libb Thims, what is your IQ? It's not a rude question, I just would like to know because you're very intelligent and knowledgeable about a lot of things.”
— Anon (2014), American, Central Time Zone, Hmolpedia thread (post: #29), Nov 7

“What is the IQ of the speaker?”
Joseluis Guinea (2015), post to (Ѻ) “Smartest Person Alive | Existive (2014) (1 of 5)”, Mar

“So, what is your IQ?”
fouried96 (2015), asked by Daniel Fourie (maker of Numericore IQ test); post (Ѻ) to “Smartest Person Alive | Existive (2014) (1 of 5)”, May 4

What’s your IQ Libb?
— Mike Fuller (2018), query (Ѻ) to “Top 100 Geniuses” video, Apr 17

In reference to the above, while some, e.g. Bertrand Russell, who gauged his own IQ as that of what he called an uberman level (IQ:170), or Lev Landau, who ranked himself on his logarithmic physicist genius scale (see: Landau genius scale), have seemingly self-satisfactorily overtly self-estimated their own IQ, for many others existive potential geniuses it is commonly difficult to attempt to fixate one’s IQ position on the genius IQ page. [1]

Langan (1999 Esquire)
The 1999 Esquire magazine "genius issue", where Christopher Langan, a theist who uses Boolean algebra logic to attempt to prove the existence of god, was dubbed the "smartest man in America"; in 2015, people began to request that Thims debate Langan.
Langan | Debate
In 2014, people requesting for a debate to occur between Thims and Christopher Langan (CIR:31), the 1999 Esquire magazine ranked "smartest person" in the world, who thinks his own IQ is 190 to 210, to debate:

“Read up on how Langan defines god. I guarantee it's nothing at all like you, or anyone you know. There is also good reason to dispute Langan's claims about his level of intelligence. He claims to have an IQ of 195-210, but IQ tests can't measure that high. IQs of that level are determined by works created by the individual. For instance, Christopher Hirata is estimated to have an IQ of 225 because of his independent arrival at ‘human chemical thermodynamics, also independently arrived at by Libb Thims and Johann Goethe. Langan's only work of note is his ‘cognitive-theoretic model of the universe’, which is widely agreed to be a bunch bollocks.”
— MuzeBreak (2014), “All Christians are Smart and Atheists are Dumb” (Ѻ),, Jul 17

“I would actually pay Libb $200 USD to debate Chris Langan — the 1999 dubbed “Smartest Man in the World” (Esquire, Nov) — on a talk-back radio program, in the near future.”
— Biff Tannen (2015), forum (Ѻ)(Ѻ) commentary on the extreme atheism views of Libb Thims, Jan 25

“Chris Langan has a Quora account and I was wondering if it would be possible for you to ask him to debate you? It would be the debate to end all debates as two gladiators enter the arena.”
— David Johnson (2017), YouTube thread (Ѻ) to Libb Thims, Oct 25

In 2017, Thims, per request, posted the debate idea on Langan’s Quora page (Ѻ)(Ѻ); there, however, has been no response.

Categories | Mean IQs
Thims, to get a gauge on IQ estimation, is an aware “unlearn expositors” (see: unlearn), as the following quote exemplifies:

“In regards to the above ‘reduction’ arguments, you must always keep in mind that all you are, nothing more nothing less, are the following 26 elements: hmolscience periodic table – aggregated into a dynamic geometric mass called a bound state, that ‘exists’ for a certain period of time, within the framework of the universe. This is a step above Cartesian ‘I think, therefore I am’ philosophy of existence. A great deal of unlearning must be done to accept this.”
Libb Thims (2012), “Reply #12 to Mahesh Deva” (Ѻ); dialogue on the HT principles (Ѻ) + Wikipedia “human thermodynamics” AFD (Ѻ) comment: “[...] is human life a chemical reaction or not?”, Oct 25

Two multi-decade+ long deeply implanted "unlearns" Thims has "consciously", i.e. at the forefront of awareness, had to disentangle from his mind are the untruths that (a) life exists (see: life does not exist), worked on 2007-present, and (b) that Abraham was a real person (see: Abraham and Brahma), worked on 2003-present.

The mean IQ of the rare breed of aware unlearn expositors, as cited via quoted statement above, based on the established genius rankings of: Hypatia (IQ:190|#44) [RGM:145|1,245+], Desiderius Erasmus (IQ:185|#89) [RGM:212|#1,245+], Thomas Jefferson (IQ:190|45) [RGM:29|1,245+], and Jonathan Swift (IQ:180|#160) [RGM:170|1,246+] is IQ:186|#64 and RGM:139.

Thims is also among the rare breed of anti-chance philosophers. In modern terms, free energy-based models of existence replace chance-based models of existence. The mean IQ of “anti-chance” based philosophers, based on those above with established IQ citations, namely: Spinoza (185|#53), Holbach (185|#57), Goethe (225|#1), Schiller (185|#69), Einstein (215|#3), Lotka (185|#79), and Henderson (180|#105), as of Jan 2018), is: 194|#52.

This, in crude guesstimation terms, would Thims in the IQ of 186± to 194± range, based on these two factors alone, as a first-draft interpolation.

Libb Thims (IS profile)
A 2015 profile (Ѻ) of Libb Thims by American philosopher Inderjit Singh who estimates Thims' IQ at 200.
Thims IQ
In 2013, Libb Thims gave he following public response to the overly-common "what is your IQ" query:

“My IQ is somewhere between Dr. Seuss, who in 1931 claimed (Ѻ) an IQ of H2SO4, and Dr. Faustus, who in 1514 sold his soul to the devil for truth, knowledge, and power; the embodiment of the latter found in the mind of Goethe, who in 1809 professed that he and his wife were like CaCO3 (limestone), who when put into contact with H2SO4 (Captain) have no “choice” but to debond, and who in 1926 [Cox] became the first ever person ranked with an IQ of 225.”
Libb Thims (2013), reply to query by Paul Rael, Aug [3]

The above answer, a mixture of humor and reality, is the only response that has been able to stick, being that if one desires to know the deeper, darker, and or brighter, depending, secrets of the universe one must become a Faust, as Goethe did so avail himself towards throughout his 82 years of reaction existence (extent of reaction).

Prior to this, previous attempts had been failingly made (Ѻ) by Thims in an effort to provide a stock answer to this common query, namely to self-estimate or gauge his own IQ, e.g. at one point, at or above the Henry Adams level, tentatively below but aiming to surpass the Gilbert Lewis level, generally aiming at the Goethe level, in the context of the genius IQs table, but attempts to situate a fixed position is vexing to the mind. The issue seems to have something to do with the fact that the mind, if one is proactive in autodidactic knowledge acquisition and problem prying, the mind grows, or conversely atrophies daily, according to which existive ranking becomes difficult, and whereby fallback to the tried and true logic that only via historical century plus retrospect posthumous ranking can one gauge true IQ.

In Mar 2016, Thims' attempted to self-estimated his so-called "IQ state", i.e. IQ of an existive person on a given day (or period), gauged from a "sensed intuitive ranking" of his position, amid his personal work-in-progress ranking (by IQ) of top 500 geniuses of all time (similar to what Lev Landau did in ranking himself in his Landau genius scale):

Thims IQ state (Mar 2016) 3

This 2016 guesstimate can be compared to how Bertrand Russell ranked his own IQ at 180.

Thims Genius | Polymath
The following bullet point opinions may give some guidance:


Epoch initiatorQuote: “Thims' brilliant book [Human Chemistry] symbolizes the beginning of a new era (epoch) in human history.” (Georgi Gladyshev, 2006)

Ranking: Gladyshev ranking (2007)Shown adjacent is a 2007 profile of Thims in (in Russian) in science journal Becthиk article: “Hierarchical Thermodynamics: a General Theory of Existence” (Ѻ), by Russian physical chemist Georgi Gladyshev, which ranks Thims pictorially alongside the following geniuses: [4]

Leonhard Euler (IQ:195)
Joseph Lagrange (IQ:190)
Sadi Carnot (IQ:190)
Rudolf Clausius (IQ:205)
Willard Gibbs (IQ:210)
Henri Poincare (IQ:195)
Nikolay Bogolyubov
Libb Thims (IQ:?)

Thims, in 2007, in short was being profiled alongside a grouping of elite genius with a mean IQ of 197.5. The grouping is a listing of great mathematicians and thermodynamicists involved in or related to supramolecular thermodynamics and or hierarchical thermodynamics, i.e. a macro-systems (from above) energy and entropy view of organisms.

PolymathyQuote: “Thims’ edits are far and wide. Unless Physchem is an incredible polymath, I doubt he would be able to pick up on all the BS a Thims-type editor introduces. That’s not knocking Physchem, I don’t think there is anyone who could deal with the range.” (Keith HensonExternal link icon (c), 2007);

GeniusPierce Ranking (2009) 2The following is a 2009 ranking on Thims by Canadian mathematical physicist, realism philosopher, and human entropy theorist Steven Pierce:

“I stumbled onto your website by accident but I have to confess this might be one of the most stunning undiscovered intellectual achievements of the 21st century. I have browsed through your wiki and I cannot express how tragic it must be to a man in your position—to be a pioneering thinker yet to be rejected by an uptight academic community with neither the depth nor will to understand your unique work, defending their own turf like dogs. I can only compare [Thims] to the many other pioneering heroes of science, Newton, Einstein, Tesla, men who like you blazed their own paths but were too victims of their own genius, only to be validated years after their death. Perhaps one day historians will look back and have a chuckle—that the pioneer of enthropology published by a vanity press in a book resembling a third rate romance.”
Steven Pierce (2009), comment on discovery of Hmolpedia

CommonalitiesEuler (eyes)Fact: a product of early parental death and genius:

Early parental death and genius (examples)

Fact: Thims, like Euler (who in 1735, age 28, lost sight in one eye, supposedly, by overexerting himself to solve a problem in three days that normally took months; and in 1766, age 59, he lost sight in the other eye, supposedly owing to the same reasons), has frequently come close to blowing his right eye out after prolonged multi-day periods of intense study, and has to massage the muscles around his right eye, and some times to stop studying (and go to sleep or to the gym), to remedy the situation.

Fact: Thims, similar to similar to Nietzsche (who in 1899 at age 44 had a mental brake down, from which he never recovered, after seeing a horse being beating by police) and Sidis (who cracked at age 11, after giving a lecture to the Harvard mathematics club, on four dimensional bodies, and dereacted at age 44, from cerebral hemorrhage, following social-pressured stress, from a 7-year public lawsuit with The New Yorker for its slanderous “The April Fool” article on him), and brain blew out [i.e. he blacked out, amid running one mile at 15 percent incline at 7.8 mph at X-sport gym, coming to in hospital, three hours later] nearing the end completion of high-speed editing of the 4,050 articles of the 10-volume Hmolpedia print set,

CommonalitiesGenius and exercise (Einstein, Turing, Thims) 2Fact: a product of genius and exercise habits; similar to Einstein and Turing:

“I thought up relativity while riding my bicycle.”
Albert Einstein (c.1930), response to query about relativity [12]

“I have such a stressful job that the only way I can get it out of my mind is by running hard; it’s the only way I can get some release.”
Alan Turing (c.1947), reply to J.F. (Peter) Harding on why he punished himself so much in training [13]

Thims, similar to Turing, as a youth, would often run (30-miles) or bicycle (60-miles) from towing to town for fun; his electrical engineering degree, e.g., was completed via a 20-mile daily bicycle ride back and forth from one of his two jobs, he worked at, 6-days a week (47-hours per week) and school, the two located 10 miles apart; likewise, throughout the 2000s and 2010s, Thims used daily running as the primary way to process information and problem solve, e.g. amid writing volume two of Human Chemistry, at about the chapter 10 point, Thims ran every single day, no days off, for six-months straight, six-miles per day, on a treadmill, at 7.8 mph, at 15 percent incline, for a total of 1,080-miles, so to be absolutely certain that he kept up his mental resolve to finish the second half of the textbook, through Goethe’s elective affinities theories, specifically, chapters 10-11 exactly, being that the a paused thought resided in his mind at the chapter 10 point that he might stop at chapter 9 (human molecular orbital theory), wherein the theory of the human chemical bond was finished. Thims eventually, to note, blew his tendon out, in the Achilles heel region, when he jumped, on one specific day, from his daily 6-mile run to a 12-mile, at the six-month point, during a week when someone was flying out to Chicago to visit. Whatever the case, the two-volume textbook was finished, in the course of a process which took 18-months and 14-days, exactly, being completed in Sep of 2007 through the aimed at 16-chapters. To a good approximation, nearly all of the textbook was written in Thims’ mind while running on the treadmill. After each run, he would come home and write in the computer file what he had already written in his mind.

CommonalitiesGoethe marriage (1806)Fact: a product, similar to top geniuses , e.g. Newton (#2), Gibbs (#4), Tesla (#19), and Nietzsche (#90), among others, who never married, and Goethe (#1), who didn’t marry until age 56, of bachelorhood and genius. Goethe, in fact, didn't marry until he had worked out the nature of marriage, in his mind, from a physico-chemical bond point of view (as shown adjacent).

Fact: a product, similar to Goethe, of having done the "love thought experiment", Goethe in his 4-girlfriend The Renouncers (1808) turned "human affinity table" (1809) and Thims in his 19-girlfriend Excel spread sheet (c.1993) mate selection formula turned "human free energy table" (1995).

Epicenter genius Thims (epicenter genius)Thims has been posited, by David Bossens, who published a book on his learning experience at Hmolpedia, to be an epicenter genius: [2]

“Perhaps we could make an epicenter genius page for Thims, putting photos other Hmolpedians around him?”
David Bossens (2012), Hmolpedia thread dialogue

The adjacent photo is from UPESW 2013, showing the late Mircea Gligor to the left of Thims, who notably did his PhD on Prigogine-thermodynamics based economics.

OracleNietzsche quote (1888)Thims is has been classified as a posthumous genius:

“Something 60-80 years ahead of its time. Thims, in the future, will be someone who’s talked about in classrooms as this guy who had this idea. However, now, yes the book will sell, but its premise will not be accepted by people of this generation.”
— Monzer Ettawil (2005), American law student

In the future, one day, instead of (or in addition to) regular math, chemistry, physics, etc., kids in school will be learning something like one human molecule + another human molecule = [dihumanide molecule]? ... it's just a crazy thought, but hey, we'll see or somebody will.”
— Natalia Roubanenko (2006), Russian-born American language studies scholar [N3]

“Thims: the great oracle and developer of human thermodynamics—the philosophical revolution of the 21st century. A genius of outstanding stature and originator of many concepts in human chemistry.”
Mark Janes (2011), English human free energy theorist

“You were right your videos are decades if not a century in front of its time.”
Benjamin CresdeeExternal link icon (c)(2011), circa age 17 student, interested in chemistry

This phenomena, to note, is related to the catch up effect.

IQLibb Thims IQ (2012)Thims has been commonly opinionated to have a ceiling-range IQ and or popularly-voted as having the highest IQ ever:

“What are you [Thims], like the grand poohbah [of the IQ:194+ Giga Society]?”
— Greg (c.2002), “Comment to Thims”, by higher IQ Mensa society lawyer friend (of Thims), when told, by Thims, about the newly-discovered, humorous, albeit mathematically delusional (see: Gibbs on sanity), 1996-formed ‘Giga Society’ of Paul Cooijmans, which asserts, per the so-called statistical probability IQ rarity argument”, that an IQ score of 194 corresponds to a rarity occurrence of about 1 in 5,422,132,484 people (Ѻ) and that accordingly amid a 1996 world population of 5,777,395,600 (Ѻ) there should theoretically be about five people with this IQ who, if they were to take the appropriate IQ test, should send it to Cooijmans, so to become part of this elite society, and therein find intellectual solitude, or something along these humorous lines of reasoning.

“I think [Thims] has the highest IQ [ever].
alphawolf099 (2012), “IQ:200+ | Smartest Person Ever (4 of 4)” [N2]

“Here follow my IQ estimates of various prominent geniuses, as I endeavor to research their lives and works. My goal is to evaluate 100 members of the greatest clerisy known to man: Goethe (IQ:215), Einstein (IQ:215), Newton (IQ:210), Tesla (IQ:201), Sidis (IQ:197), Da Vinci (IQ:192), Gauss (IQ:193), Mill (IQ:185), Majorana (IQ:185), Pascal (IQ:185), Hawking IQ:168), Hitler (IQ:160), Washington (IQ:154), myself (IQ:160), and Thims (IQ:190-230). If he is willing to give me the necessary information, I shall use my IQ methodology to calculate his IQ. Otherwise, I will leave it at these vague estimates ... I do not, however, see Thims' IQ being below 190.”
Inderjit Singh (2014), “Calculating the Real IQ of Geniuses” [10]

“The question I posed to you ["I have watched your videos for years and was wondering if you might let me know what you consider to be the single most important thing you have learned throughout your studies?"], I ask to the smartest people I encounter. You, by far, had the most in-depth and thought provoking answer I have ever received and thank you for it.”
— John Gaetano (2016), “Email turned thread dialogue with Thims” (Ѻ), Mar 6-9

(add discussion)

IQ testGenius Test (1999)Thims, in 1999, for fun, was lured into taking the Esquire magazine “Gεπ1us Tεst” (max score of IQ = 160), scoring in the 140-150 IQ range, without too much effort. [5]

Encyclopedic Walking encyclopediaThims has been characterized as a walking encyclopedia:

Thims is [a walking] encyclopedia of human thermodynamics.”
Milivoje Kostic (2013) [9]

Thims is also frequently requested, by friends, to be the “phone a friend” person to the 1999-launched Who Wants to be a Millionaire game show.

Like rankingsLike ranking (top 3) 2013The following are the 9 Dec 2013 like rankings of top thinkers, via Facebook likes, in Hmolpedia, shown with true IQ and known highest estimated IQ, respectively, of the 1,000+ biographical thinkers having Hmolpedia articles:

1. Christopher Hirata (46 likes) | IQ=190±; 225
2. Johann Goethe (26 likes) | IQ=230; 225
3. Libb Thims (20 likes)
4. David Hwang (19 likes)
5. Henry Adams (17 likes) | IQ=195±
6. Mehdi Bazargan (9 likes)
7. Norbert Wiener (5 likes) | IQ=180±

The top six in this list, to note, are all high ranked social Newtons or existive social Newtons.

Madness index Crackpots (or prophets)Thims, since 2005, has mistakenly been classified, owing to public ignorance, akin to the way people in the 1860s viewed Darwin's Origin of Species as a "mad book" or people in the 1810s viewed Goethe's Elective Affinities as "childish" and "immoral", via a number of derogations; the following being one example:

“I note from the "human thermodynamics (objections to)" page, in this Wiki, that Stephen Lower [a theist chemist] has previously (and quite correctly) described Thims’ ‘theories’ as crackpot. I came across a wonderful webpage by John Baez called the Crackpot Index’ (Ѻ). Congratulations, Libb, you've just scored 20 points on the Baez scale for suggesting that you deserve a Nobel Prize [pisstake: Gladyshev (2007) and Jaynes (2011) suggested this]. On your post ‘To quote from social anthropologist Max Gluckman: A science is any discipline in which the fool of this generation can go beyond the point reached by the genius of the last generation’, Libb, you're *really* racking up the points on Baez's crackpot index. You get "40 points for claiming that when your theory is finally appreciated, present-day science will be seen for the sham it truly is." (Point 36 on Baez's list). I'll leave you to tick off the other points on Baez's list.”
Philip Moriarty (2009), “Moriarty-Thims debate (part two)” (Ѻ), post #134-35, Sep 13

: In the true-to-reality words of Aristotle (IQ:195) that “there was never a genius without a tincture of madness”, Thims scores 135 on the Baez crackpot index, give or take, based on previous historical mindsets.

SolutionsPassions like playing cards (Goethe, 1799)Thims has solved and or partially solved the following problems; font size indicates level of difficulty of each problem:

Elective affinities problem | Discerned: Goethe (1796) | Solution: 2001
Human molecular formula problem | Stated: Carey (1911) | Solved: 2002 (Ѻ)
Note: Independently solved by Sterner and Elsner (2000)
Abraham/Brahma problem | Discerned: Volney (1791) | Solved: 2003
Problem of the human chemical bond (Ѻ) | Discerned: Thims (2003) | Solved: 2005
Great problem of natural philosophy | Stated: Hilaire (c.1836) | Solved: 2009
Note: Independently solved by Rogers (2010) and Jabr (2013)
Problem of evil | Stated: Epicurus (c.270BC) | Solved: 2011 [11]
Mind-body problem | Stated: Descartes (c.1620) | Solved: 2013 (Ѻ)
Purposeless universe problem | Stated: Kierkegaard (c.1930) | Solved: 2015 (Ѻ)
Note: Partially solved by Lindsay (1983)
Drive-thru paradox | Discerned: Goethe (1770) (Ѻ) | Solved: 2016 (partially)

The adjacent image shows the famed Goethe to Schiller "passions like playing cards" quote on the writing of Crebillon, the demarcation point for the true last universal genius, aka last person to know everything; only growing two cultures divided global idiocy has prevailed since.

Genius ranking scholarLibb Thims (Business Insider) 3Interviewed, by telephone, by Business Insider, for genius IQ ranking methods on people with IQs 200 or over and IQs of presidents: [11]

“American electrochemical engineer Libb Thims took an unorthodox approach when he set out to rank the smartest people of all time. Thims first compiled a list of people with IQ scores over 200 as a matter of curiosity. Anything over 130 is extremely high, though it should be noted that IQ tests are a highly imprecise and controversial measure. Later, Thims ranked everybody who had a strong aptitude, marked capacity, or heightened inclination in some area that coupled with their IQ would make them worthy of the title genius. Not wanting to exclude any geniuses who existed before IQ tests were invented, Thims referred to IQ ratings based on the Cox methodology, which predicts IQ based on how much people accomplished every 10 years of their lives. Thims then adjusted the IQ scores he thought were inaccurate by reading through many of the individuals' works to check for errors. Thims evaluated both IQ and accomplishments to rank the smartest people in history. Of course, this list is highly subjective and at times seemingly random. Still, we found it thoughtful enough to warrant a second look.”
— Natasha Bertrand (2015), “The 40 Smartest People of All Time”

In 2016, a mention of a draft book, entitled 500 Greatest Geniuses: Ranked by IQ, based on the top 500 geniuses page, was in the wind.

LibrarySPE 2015 (5 of 5) (screen shot)Total: 1,500+ books

thermodynamics: 360+, mate selection: 140+, religio-mythology: 85+, medicine: 100+, neuroscience: 50, general non-fiction (100s), general science (100s), etc.

Photo shown, from the 2014 "25 Smartest People Alive | Existive" (Ѻ) video countdown, depicts some of Thims person library.

“I stack books, like your momma stacks pancakes.”
Libb Thims (2013), response (Ѻ) to YouTuber comment about why Thims considered himself worthy of making a ranked Smartest Person Ever | IQ:200+ list, if he couldn't pronounce Goethe and Euler correctly (see: books read), Dec

PublicationsLibb Thims (publications)Total: 13+ volume collected work set (2016)

→ many articles
→ one journal | JHT
→ one book | The Human Molecule (2008)
→ one 2-volume textbook | Human Chemistry (2007)
→ one 10-volume encyclopedia (over 1,000+ biographies)
→ unfinished manuscripts, drafts, articles, video, lectures, etc.

Mates The majority of women Thims’ has been attracted to as girlfriends have tended to be highly intelligent, e.g. valedictorian, architect, child prodigy, lawyer, pilot, Rhodes scholar, among others.

The following is American child prodigy turned philosopher Inderjit Singh's 2014 classification of Thims' IQ, using his genius IQ calculation formula, from his "100 members of the greatest clerisy known to Man" posting, a subsection of his previously collected 250 favorite geniuses Facebook page listing: [10]

1) Johann Goethe (IQ = 215)
2) Albert Einstein (IQ = 210)
3) Isaac Newton (IQ = 210)
4) Nikola Tesla (IQ = 201)
5) William Sidis (IQ = 197) (re-calculated)
6) Carl Gauss (IQ = 193) (re-calculated)
7) Leonardo da Vinci (IQ = 192)
8) John Mill (IQ = 185)
9) Ettore Majorana (IQ = 185)
10) Blaise Pascal (IQ = 185)
11) Stephen Hawking (IQ = 168) (re-calculated)
12) James Maxwell (?)
13) Willard Gibbs (?)
14) Hugo Grotius (?)
15) Rudolf Clausius (?)
16) Thomas Young (?)
17) Leonhard Euler (?)
18) Hiletyogard don ImBangin (?)
19) Thomas Jefferson (?)
20) James Madison (?)
21) Henry Adams (?)
22) Pierre Laplace (?)
23) Plato (?)
24) Enrico Fermi (?)
25) Aristotle (?)
26) Cicero (?)
27) Rene Descartes (?)
28) Immanuel Kant (?)
29) David Hume (?)
30) George Berkeley (?)
31) Voltaire (?)
32) Edward de Vere (?)
33) Gottfried Leibniz (?)
34) Francis Bacon (?)
35) Johannes Kepler (?)
36) Benedict Spinoza (?)
37) Thomas Wolsey (?)
38) Friedrich Schelling (?)
39) Paolo Sarpi (?)
40) Galileo (?)
41) Alexander Humboldt (?)
42) Hermann Helmholtz (?)
43) Adolf Hitler (IQ=160)
44) Robert Hooke (?)
45) Emanuel Swedenborg (?)
46) George Washington (IQ=154)
47) Gilbert Lewis (?)
48) Ludwig Boltzmann (?)
49) Henri Poincare (?)
50) J.R.R. Tolkien (IQ=140)
51) Karl Marx (?)
52) Sadi Carnot (?)
53) Alexander Pope (?)
54) Thomas Hobbes (?)
55) Niccolo Machiavelli (?)
56) Pierre Gassendi (?)
57) Edwin Hubble (?)
58) Charles Babbage (?)
59) Bertrand Russell (?)
60) William Roentgen (?)
61) Edward Jenner (?)
62) Werner Heisenberg (?)
63) Erwin Schrodinger (?)
64) William Harvey (?)
65) Antonie van Leeuwenhoek (?)
66) Alexander Fleming (?)
67) Alfred Nobel (?)
68) Max Weber (?)
69) Ernest Rutherford (?)
70) Michael Faraday (?)
71) Niels Bohr (?)
72) Marie Curie (?)
73) Alexander the Great (?)
74) James Watt (?)
75) Edmund Burke (?)
76) John Dalton (?)
77) Woodrow Wilson (?)
78) Alexander Hamilton (?)
79) Thomas Edison (?)
80) Carolus Linnaeus (?)
81) Benjamin Franklin (?)
82) Christopher Columbus (?)
83) Louis Pasteur (?)
84) Charles Darwin (?)
85) Marcus Aurelius (?)
86) Petrarch (?)
87) John Neumann (?)
88) Roger Bacon (?)
89) Jean Sales (?)
88) William Thomson (?)
89) Gregor Mendel (?)
90) John D. Rockefeller (?)
91) William Herschel (?)
92) Otto von Bismarck (?)
93) Thomas Aquinas (?)
94) Claude Bernard (?)
95) Adam Smith (?)
96) Sigmund Freud (?)
97) Constantine the Great (?)
98) Themistocles (?)
99) Demosthenes (?)
100) Pythagoras (?)
101) Euclid (?)
102) Solon (?)
103) Muhammad (?)
104) Spinoza (?)
105) Octavian (?)

Recent thinkers | IQs

1) Myself (IQ = 160)
2) Libb Thims (IQ = 190-230) [N1]
3) Herbert Salzer (?)
4) Terrence Tao (?)
5) Barack Obama (?)
6) Mark Zuckerberg (?)
7) William Gates (?)
8) Peter Higgs (?)
9) Ludwig Wittgenstein (?)
10) Gandalf (IQ = 231)

Beyond these snippets, a near complete existographical of Thims would be required, but one as such at the present is beyond the scope of the current objective, which is the past time of ranking geniuses, learning something along the way, and possibly teaching others something in the process.

Libb Thims (genius IQs blog)
Australian philosopher Dominic Anderton's 2015 blog describing Thims as "delusional" and the attempt at high range IQ ranking as "moronic". [6]
Vanity | Insanity | or REALITY?
Of note, in respect to Thims' attempting to gauge his own IQ, such as Bertrand Russell did, estimating his own IQ at 170, in respect to his uberman concept, or as Lev Landau did, in respect to his own genius scale (see: Landau genius scale), e.g. ranking himself 1.5 points below Einstein (0.5), there has been nearly an opposite and equal Newton’s third law slew of reactionary postings, semi-commonly occurring, against such an interjection. [6] On one side of the fence, as Hawking wisely said, people who talk about their IQs are losers:

“People who talk about their IQ are losers.”
Stephen Hawking (c.2005), when asked what his IQ was during New York Times interview

The idea that this genius IQ ranking is impossible is what is called the "Cox delusion", namely the view that only a "test" can adequately gauge a genius range IQ and moreover that estimates of the IQs of geniuses of the past is impossible. It was Lewis Terman, the inventor of the IQ scale, and after him Catherine Cox, who initiated the IQ ranking of famous geniuses.

Thims | IQ 200 range puzzle
See main: IQ 200+ HCT prodigies; See also: IQ 200 or above impossible
Thims, like Terman and Cox, gained an interested in high range IQ ranking, because in his "field of research", i.e. chemical thermodynamics applied to the humanities", aka viewing deeper human philosophical questions through the so-named "thermodynamic lens", people with "cited IQs", i.e. ones that people can read about in newspaper clippings, articles, Google Books, etc., of 200 or above are a common phenomena, as shown below (IQs shown estimated by others, not Thims):

Human Chemical Thermodynamics

Goethe 75 newGoetheIQ:225+ | 1926
Discovered: 10 Oct 2005 (Ѻ)
Theory: Chemical Affinity Model of Relationships (1796 | age 47)

Tesla 75TeslaIQ:200-310 | 2000
Discovered: c.2009
Theory: “Human is Powered Molecular Automaton with Energy of ½mv²” (1915 | age 59)

Sidis 75SidisIQ:250-300 | 1940
Discovered: 24 Mar 2008 (Ѻ)
Theory: Thermodynamics of Animate and Inanimate (1916 | age 18)

John von NeumannNeumannIQ:200 | 2010
Discovered: 11 May 2004 (Ѻ)
Theory: Thermodynamic Free Energy Theory of Cash Value (1934 | age 31)

Libb Thims (2013) 75ThimsIQ:?Theory: Chemical Thermodynamic Model of Relationships (c.1995 | age 23)

Christopher Hirata new 75HirataIQ:225 | 1999
Discovered: 15 Feb 2010 (Ѻ)
Theory: Thermochemical Model of Relationships (2000 | age 18)

Luis Arroyo 75ArroyoIQ:200 | 2006
Discovered: 11 Feb 2016 (Ѻ)
Theory: Thermal Model of Economics (2010 | age 20)

The above infobox shows, seemingly, that if one is a coming of age prodigy in the IQ:200± range intellect, one's mind will "naturally" gravito-electromagnitate towards a chemical thermodynamics model of the existence of things, in one way or another, being that the first law and second law are what define "nature" of things, in modern terms.

Battle of the Prodigies 3
A visual of the so-called “battle of the prodigies”, the finding that modern IQ:200+ and or IQ:225+ range prodigies tend to be attracted to a variant of the “elective affinities problem”, i.e. the "passions" explained chemical thermodynamically, Thims' area of research, in the same way that all classical geniuses, from Aristotle to Einstein, were attracted to the “blue sky problem” before its solution by John Strutt in 1899.
Thims, subsequently, out of "curiosity", in circa 2006, after coming across thinkers such as Goethe, Sidis, Hirata, etc., and their 200+ range IQ citations, began collecting and ranking all known IQs in the 200 range, so to study the collective peculiar phenomena; and thereafter, in circa 2009, began to bring order to a previous-disorganized subject (e.g. Adragon De Mello at age 5, as his parents over-zealously asserted, did not "really" have an "IQ" of 400; William Sidis at age 11 [nor as an adult] did not "really" have an IQ of 300; Marilyn Savant, who faked an age 11 claimed IQ of 228, by fudging her age when she took the Stanford-Binet, to Guinness Book in the 1980s, is not the smartest person ever, etc., as IQ folklore asserts) [7] The following quote seems to capture the mindset of those, such as Dominic Anderton, who would classify Thims as a delusional moron:

“Sadly logic barely has any significance amongst a swarm of imbeciles. Some people are doomed to feel like an alien.”
— Torandrius (2011), commentary on Libb Thims' HumanChemistry101 YouTube channel (Ѻ)

Thus, for those multitudinous individuals, moving around the surface of the earth, in deluded superficial secularity, who seemly to believe that Thims is a “retard” who, over the course of eight years, at a rate of 500-articles per year, wrote a 10-volume encyclopedia (Hmolpedia) online ( for the purposes of being an “elaborate troll” are mentally centuries behind (see: catch up effect) understanding the reinterpretation of “purpose” as a function of the Gibbs energy minimization principle as American physics prodigy Bruce Lindsay so ably discerned several decades ago:

“The concept of purpose is involved in several physical principles, notably Hamilton’s principle and the related but identical principle of least action, Hertz’s principle of the straightest path, Gauss’ principle of least constraint, and Fermat’s principle of least time. They all effectively state that things take place in the physical world, e.g. the motions of systems of particles, in such a way as to make a certain function assume a stationary value under certain boundary conditions, usually a minimum as compared with all possible values satisfying the given conditions. Hamilton’s principle, e.g., says that for a conservative dynamical system the motion between any two instants of time is such that the time integral of the difference between the kinetic and potential energies taken between these two instances has a stationary value. It has as if the system had a certain purpose to satisfy. A rational individual is said to arrange his actions so as to be sure of achieving his fundamental desires, whether it be to accumulate wealth or gain power over his fellow men. In particular, the aim here is almost always to try to attain the given desired end at minimum cost in human effort. This strongly suggests a heuristic connection with the minimum principles of physics.”
Bruce Lindsay (1983), “Social Exemplifications of Physical Principles”

The above paragraph, written by Lindsay at age 83, was his "after career" retirement philosophy stage "note on the meaning of existence", after previously completing his MS physics (age 20), then after studying under Niels Bohr, then completing his PhD (age 24) at MIT, after which three years later, as a newly-minted Yale physics professor, penned the following preliminary article, written in the "brashness of his youth", as he says in retrospect:

Lindsay | IQ:? | Theory: “Physical Laws and Social Phenomena” (1927 | age 27)

Thims, in short, is NOT letting go the "brashness of his youth", as Lindsay did, only to patter about Gibbs potential "notes on existence" in his 80s, put rather instead has worked to promulgate out the details of what Lindsay "suggests" in replete detail. If there are imbeciles opposed to this venture, or not discerning enough to see forest amid the trees, then so is the wind of the times.
Libb Thims (Goethe's IQ)
A 2016 Yahoo! Answers query (Ѻ) on the method (see: IQ ranking methodology) used by Libb Thims to calculate Goethe’s IQ.

On the other hand, once a scale of the top 500 geniuses is cogently arranged, one, if they are a discerning intellect pushing the boundary of established knowledge, he or she should be able to gauge whom they believe they fall above and below and thereby have a relative gauge of their "IQ state", i.e. IQ at in a given time period of intellectual advancement.

Thims’ website [] is [in part] dedicated to the estimations of the IQs of the world’s greatest geniuses, and does have some interesting information, but is riddled with historical inaccuracies. Thims, moreover, is a delusional moron of a man, with far too much spare time, who equates his intellect with that of Goethe and Einstein on almost no basis whatsoever, and who believes he can measure the likes of the IQs of Voltaire, Leibniz or Pascal. He even won an Ig Nobel Prize! (A satirical honour).”
— Dominic Anderton (2015), David Hume + Voltaire political philosopher (Ѻ) [6]

Here, we see an example, in this Anderton statement, of replete and thoroughgoing colloquial ignorance; very common among those not schooled in chemical thermodynamics and imbibed with a Faraday-like puzzlement about the world:

“Let us now consider, for a little while, how wonderfully we stand upon this world. Here it is we are born, bred, and live, and yet we view these things with an almost entire absence of wonder to ourselves respecting the way in which all this happens. So small, indeed, is our wonder, that we are never taken by surprise; and I do think that, to a young person of ten, fifteen or twenty years of age, perhaps the first sight of a cataract or a mountain would occasion him more surprise than he had ever felt concerning the means of his own existence: How he came here; how he lives; by what means he stands upright; and through what means he moves about from place to place. We come into this world, we live, and depart from it, without our thoughts being called specifically to consider how all this takes place; and were it not for the exertions of some few inquiring minds, who have looked into these things, and ascertained the very beautiful laws and conditions by which we do live and stand upon the earth, we should hardly be aware that there was anything wonderful in it. These inquiries, which have occupied philosophers from the earliest days, when they first began to find out the laws by which we grow, and exist, and enjoy ourselves, up to the present time, have shown us that all this was effected in consequence of the existence of certain forces, or abilities to do things, or powers, that are so common that nothing can be more so; for nothing is commoner than the wonderful powers by which we are enabled to stand upright: they are essential to our existence every moment.”
Michael Faraday (1859), On the Various Forces of Matter

Those who do not understand what Faraday is saying here are completely abysmal to reality.

Hmolpedia Google-generated info box (2 Dec 2013)
A Dec 2013 Google-generated search return box for query "Hmolpedia", showing how IQ:200+, IQ:225+, and genius IQs are top visited pages.
Hmolpedia | Geniuses
The above queries result because Hmolpedia, owing to the predominance of IQ: 200+, e.g. Voltaire, and IQ: 225+ thinkers, e.g. Goethe, Sidis, Hirata, common to the subject of explaining human existence and experience via the physical sciences, and its YouTube sister channel HumanChemistry101, have become come a popular genius and IQ site. The adjacent screenshot, to exemplify, is a Dec 2013 Google-generated search return hyperlinked infobox for query "Hmolpedia", indicating—that Hmolpedia, for many, has become a popular go-to cite for genius IQs rankings; hence the IQ and or intellectual credentials or "genius ranking" of site creator Libb Thims is a common query.

Thims professorship
See also: Nightingale chair of social physics
Thims, as of 2013, has professed (see: Thims lectures) at three universities worldwide: University of Pitesti, Pitesti, Romania (2013), Northern Illinois University (2013), and University of Illinois, Chicago (2010-2012), giving a total of five lectures. Thims is currently working to establish a professorship of physicochemical humanities and or physical humanities at one of the top seven universities of the world; for a number reasons, including that since circa 2008 college and gradate students have been contacting Thims about doing graduate and or post-graduate school work, e.g. Turkey mechanical engineer Turkey13 (2009) (Ѻ), interested in MS in Cengel-Boles themed human thermodynamics, Italian theoretical physicist Simone Loreti (2012), interested in a PhD in sociophysics (or at most socio-econo-physics) or human thermodynamics, Iranian economist Behrouz Sadeghi (2014), interested in economic thermodynamics, specifically post-doctoral work in entropy, etc. (see: two cultures calls).

Quotes | Related
The following are related quotes:

“I think [Thims] is a pretty cool guy, he ranks IQ and doesn’t get afraid of anything [or] official IQ rankings. Why do people get so worked up over IQ? Because they’re scared little monkeys.”
— IJustWantToSignIn (2013), comment (Ѻ) on IQ 200+ | Smartest person ever (4 of 4), Nov 10

“I found this site [] run by some Libb Thims that claims to have found the ‘human molecule’ [see: human molecular formula]. He wrote a 824-page book [Human Chemistry] on the subject. The site has some convincing testimonials. I think this stuff is ridiculous, and don't endorse it in any way. Just look at this article he wrote about himself (Ѻ). According to himself, his IQ is comparable to that of Goethe and da Vinci.”
— Anon (2013), “Science & Math” post (Ѻ),, Dec 15.

“Once he’s ventured into IQ territory, Libb Thims is a jive turkey, plain and simple. Here’s his take on psychometrics: If a person agrees with “human thermodynamics” (Libb’s area of study), then he/she has a super-high IQ. If someone disagrees with human thermodynamics, then he/she has a low IQ, and probably is a closet Christian, to boot. He cites Cox’s book, even though Cox’s book presents ratio IQs, which aren’t reliable. He thinks IQs above 150/160 exist, and even believes IQs as high as 230 exist. But Thims’ knowledge within the discipline of chemistry is abysmal. He’s definitely super smart.”
— Stetind (2016), “Einstein’s IQ” (Ѻ), thread post, Feb 20
Genius books (Thims library)
A portion of the "genius studies" books section of American electrochemical engineer Libb Thims' personal home library of circa 1,500 books.

“I agree with Gladyshev’s 2012 statement that ‘Goethe's affinity can be interpreted on the basis of supramolecular thermodynamics. Changing of the Gibbs function occurring on the supramolecular structure level in complex systems (organisms). The affinity of Goethe is related to the phenomenon of sensory tropism’, but the reason Libb peddles Goethe and Hirata (although unlike Goethe, Hirata is the real deal) is that he thinks it allows him to peddle his ‘human chemistry’ BS, which in turn, he thinks will make it easier for him to peddle and sell his BS scam books on Human Chemistry. Essentially his entire website [] is a book scam operation to try and sell his book. It’s funny that he goes on to give the illusion that there are other posters that agree with him. He has done the same laughable tactic where he cites some quote from some anon poster on how brilliant he is and that becomes the proof that he supposedly has an IQ in the range of 170-220. For the record NO ONE has an IQ over 200 despite what anyone claims. Having said that I certainly would put Fields medalist Manjul Bhargava (Ѻ) ahead of Goethe any day.”
— Anon (2016), “Goethe is Overrated”, tread (Ѻ) posts (#9-10), made from McMinnville, Oregon, Mar 3

“I love this site. It's pure genius. I have never seen someone rank geniuses [see: top 1000 geniuses] in such a brilliant way. I dedicated a [468+ genius] genealogy project (Ѻ) to your work. You even have a [] profile (Ѻ) … because I feel your work deserves wider recognition. I am fairly intuitive … I feel you are descended from Goethe (or another genius on your list).”
— Alex Bickle (2017), cite [oye777] message to Libb Thims, Feb 22, 25

“Dude, [Thims] is the ‘new Goethe’! He’s capable of literally sensing people’s IQ scores even if they were born long before IQ even existed.”
— KizzMyButt (2017), comment on science thread (Ѻ) on Libb Thims, and related topics, specifically: human molecule, zerotheism for kids, and dihumanide molecule, Mar 11

“Thims is the smartest person of all time.”
— SharpCharm (2017), comment on science thread (Ѻ) on Libb Thims, and related topics, specifically: human molecule, zerotheism for kids, and dihumanide molecule, Mar 11

Libb Thims (Quora, Nov 2019)
A smattering of Quora search returns (Ѻ) for key: Libb Thims (Nov 2019), in attempts to guage Thims in respect to: Matthew Laine, William Sidis, Colleen Farrelly, and Christopher Langan.
Quotes | By
The following are related quotes by Thims:

“Also, to clarify, I read your book in detail, cover to cover, and this reading is inclusive of my standard dissection of books method of pencil noting commenting, boxing in of certain text, stars, checks, boxes, dates, question marks, "what" comments, one or two occasional highlights for exceptional sentences (which in your case amounted to one, namely your statement that Seth Lloyd writes in a "way of telling the story" that "misrepresents the history", which is strikingly true, hence I highlighted it), circles around certain foot notes, etc., etc., etc., which in your case amounted to a total of 1,340 pencil dissection incidences, all the way through your Glossary, Notes, References, Index, up through your second to last page (#601), where I box in all your usages of the term "vitalism", one notation example of which I scanned and will post on the above wiki review page [shown below], namely notation note #1250 your date typo of the Schneider and Kay reference, which you incorrectly put as 1997 (pg. 561), whereas it should correctly be 1994. I then let the book sit for some time, read two other books [Karl Pearson's 1892 The Grammar of Science and Francis Crick's 1996 Of Molecules and Men], as discussed, then came back to it, went through all 1,340 notation and commentary notes AGAIN and wrote this article with my "remarkably poisoned pen" as you call it.”
Libb Thims (2013), response (Ѻ) to Terrence Deacon that “I didn’t read his book”, May 22

See also
IQ ranking methodology

N1. Quote: "If [Thims] is willing to give me the necessary information, I shall use my IQ methodology to calculate his IQ. Otherwise, I will leave it at these vague estimates...I do not see Mr. Thims' IQ being below 190, however." [10]
N2. Note: comment was getting vote-liked up ↑ at a rate of: 1.5 thumbs-up votes / 336 views ∙ day (34+ thumbs up, i.e. agreements, in three weeks, before Thims deleted comment).
N3. See: dihumanide molecule; polyhumanide molecule; human reproduction reaction; zerotheism for kids; commentary after reviewing 100-page manuscript of Thims' Cessation Thermodynamics, Apr 29

1. Two examples being Oxford-Harvard-Yale educated high like rankings figure David Hwang and MIT engineering school triple major valedictorian Alexander Wissner-Gross, both of whom commented via email communication that it was difficult to fixate a position in the genius IQs table; the former commented that, in his humble opinion, did not belong in the list of geniuses.
2. Note: David Bossens quote recalled from memory; a deleted thread lost somewhere in Hmolpedia forums (c. 2012) below possibly IQ: 225+ page or epicenter genius page?
3. Thims, Libb. (2013). Query: “Who are you, a professor somewhere? And what is your IQ?”; asked (Ѻ) by Paul Rael, Aug.
4. Gladyshev, Georgi P. (2007). "Hierarchical Thermodynamics: General Theory of Existence: A Living World Development" (Ѻ), Becthnk, Vol. 1, pgs. 44-48, Herald of the International Academy of Sciences (Russian Section). ISSN: 1819-5733.
5. Ferry, Jim, Lygeros, Nik; McGaug, Bill; Preston, Heather; Rottler, Andreas; Scoville, John; Smith, Tommy; and Wahl, Patrick. (1999). “Gεπ1us Tεst”, Esquire, Nov.
6. (a) Anderton, Dominic. (2015). “Vanity and Insanity in Online High Range IQ Testing” (Ѻ), The Scriblerus Club, Mar 31.
(b) Dominic Anderton (about) – High IQ Society,
7. Comedy and Libb’s so-called IQ (2016) – Hmolpedia threads.
8. Libb Thims IQ (2015) – Science & Math (threads) –
9. Thims, Libb. (2011). Thermodynamic Proof that Good Always Triumphs over Evil”, Journal of Human Thermodynamics, 7: 1-4.
10. Singh, Inderjit. (2014). “Calculating the Real IQ of Geniuses” (Ѻ), Hmolpedia treads (post #13-21), May 18 – Jun 23.
11. (a) Bertrand, Natasha. (2015). “The 15 Smartest Presidents of All Time” (Ѻ), Business Insider, Mar 30.
(b) Bertrand, Natasha. (2015). “The 40 Smartest People of All Time” (Ѻ), Business Insider, Feb 27.
12. Anon. (2014). Keep Calm and Pedal On (pg. #). Random House.
13. Anon. (2014). “Alan Turing the Runner” (Ѻ), The Runner Eclectic, WordPress, Dec 1.

TDics icon ns

More pages