There was a researcher back in the early 1900s that conducted tests on millions of elementary students and made a list of the ones he considered geniuses. His goal was to prove that IQ was the single biggest predictor of success. He then followed them throughout their adult life and kept track of their achievements and successes in life. By his own hand, he wrote that his hypothesis was wrong. At first, if one opened any newspaper and looked at winners of science fairs and contests, there would always be at least one of his “geniuses” on the list. But as life went on, they did not become the biggest successes, and the higher the IQ went didn’t necessarily correlate to an increase in success. A theory proposed by a different researcher, and generally endorsed, said that there is an IQ threshold that is “good enough” and as long as one was above that threshold (which was 120, although it may have been 130), they had an equal chance of winning a Nobel Prize (the example given, and results of the study) as anyone else. So a person with an IQ of 180 had an equal chance of winning a Nobel Prize as one with an IQ of 140.
