Your poor English indicates you probably got poor marks in school. As such, you are not qualified to say the HKCEE was easy. I do not know much about the HKCEE as I have never taken it. But your poor English, indicating a poor ability in learning, means you would not have been able to obtain 9As had you been my stupid friend.

First of all, getting 9As in HKCEE means she did better than 99% of the people of the same class in HK. Whether it's simple or not is irrelevant so long as she did better than 99% of the people in HK. According your logic which I disagree, she should have been smarter than 99% of the people because she did better than 99% of the people. What's relevant is how she did relative to the rest of the people and not how she did in the exam overall.

Second of all, she graduated from a top-tier university on full scholarship meaning she also did better than 99% of the people in the US academically.

Third of all, she went to the best schools all her life and got the best grades all her life.

These three points fulfill your requirements of "good indicators" of one's intelligence.

Yet, she is extremely stupid.

This proves my point of academic results having weak correlation with intelligence.

If going to the best schools available all her life and doing better than 99% of all students all her life mean nothing to your "requirements", the requirements you previously stated were rubbish at best which I agree but you should disagree.

You are supposed to defend your belief and not join me to defend mine. You have been saying everything to my advantage. You are either extremely stupid or extremely irrational / illogical or both.

What part of this logic can your brain not understand?

You are incapable of evaluating anything simply because you are a stupid person. A person of lower intelligence is incapble of telling anything about a person of higher intelligence. You just said that your IQ is 125. Therefore, you are incapable of telling anything about anyone with an IQ of 125 or above. In your thread, you are looking for a smart person. And, you are not a smart person yourself and are unable to tell anything about a person with an IQ of 125 or above. This is why you cannot tell anything abotu who you are looking for.

[ 本帖最後由 coolstorm288 於 2012-4-12 05:16 PM 編輯 ]

firstly.You haven't been in HKCEE before,I shall neglect what you say about this.
then,I think you may want to express that she conquer 99 percent people,
then,from my logic,she is clever.but you think she is stupid...
But, what you say will not lead to a contradiction that use exam as a reference
is wrong. Do you know we will perform not very well in the field we are not good at?
let me once again say:she may be quite stupid in working,
but she is clever in examination.Because she perform so well,
then she must be talented in some part of thinking.
I think she may not find the field she is good at.
I am not a friend of her...I don't know accurately.
Clever can be divided to lots of part,so, we only use it as a
reference only.I think your friend is clever at some part.
May be your english is better than me,I can get your meaning yet not approve it.
討論的時候,對著過份自我的人,我想,稍為令自己在某些方面處下風給那自我的人一
點自尊也是一種美德吧!

可以介紹你的朋友給我嗎?

She's not that pretty. The last time I saw her, she looked 10 years older than I even though she's actually a year younger.

Being street smart is way more important than being book smart. Anyone with average intelligence can do well in school if s/he works hard.

wow~~~seems that you are clam now.
But I am tired now... I need to sleep,
chat tomorrow~~~

聰明人 ~~ 你有冇聽過 高分低能 呀 !!! :smile_38:

遮係未有囉:smile_04::smile_04::smile_04::smile_04:

高分？好似抬舉咗:smile_04::smile_04::smile_04::smile_04:

...看看上面那段討論吧!
正在討論..
看你的指責,看來我的用詞不太好了!

[ 本帖最後由 easemonarch 於 2012-4-13 07:21 PM 編輯 ]

I like pretty,but my logic telling me that pretty is not necessary important when love exist.
.Given that one is pretty,it is difficult to know if I really love her.Or,only because of the desire fore sex.
I don't know your average...
But,for me, I think the ability of a human can be divided into four part:logic,creativity,memoriability   and industriousness.
When one get a good result in exam,it is proved that she is good at memorizing and she's very hardworking.
But,only via chat can I know her ability in other aspect.
About the nature of smart,I define the ability to try,think and work to be smart.
But, I think it is hard to get a mutual agreement in defining "smart".But we might feel it in a quite similar way.

[ 本帖最後由 easemonarch 於 2012-4-13 08:37 PM 編輯 ]