Human intellect has the capacity for creativity, empathy, wisdom, self awareness, diplomacy, etc., and those aren't as easily measured on an IQ quiz.
Just my 2c as someone who's not professionally trained to apply IQ tests but have studied them as a side interest, and scored highly on them (probably like many others here). It's just one biased facet of our minds, and we shouldn't give it undue weight or rule people out because their minds work differently.
IQ scores are utterly *worthless* as a measure of intelligence because they only measure one's ability to solve a small set of carefully-chosen puzzles under carefully-controlled conditions. They cannot possibly measure anything realistic about intelligence.
Since you want people who criticise IQ scores to publish theirs, I'll tell you mine. Measured at various points across my education and out of five or six scores, they range from 72 to 160. They can't all possibly be right.
From the article:
>I did try an IQ test in the past a few times. [..] I will not disclose the results, because I do not want this text to be skewed by a number I am criticizing. If the number was low, skeptics would say I am not smart enough to appreciate the value of IQ or that my claim is just sour grapes.
People who criticize IQ scores as a proxy for intelligence should publish their own IQ score, no? If the author did so, I missed it, which is certainly possible. The not-intentionally-snarky point is that perhaps the author is not "smart enough" to assess this reliably.