1. No, it only kills the validity of IQ tests for which the examinee has practiced, and only if the amount of practice is unknown and the amount of improvement

1. No, it only kills the validity of IQ tests for which the examinee has practiced, and only if the amount of practice is unknown and the amount of improvement is large and unpredictable. Nevertheless IQ tests correlate with performance on a wide range of cognitive tasks. 2. Environmental factors affect everything. You try to standardise them as much as possible for an operational definition of the thing you're measuring. You will never succeed completely. Nevertheless IQ tests time correlate with performance on a wide range of cognitive tasks. 3. Not sure anybody really understands what's going on with the Flynn effect. Nevertheless IQ tests correlate with performance on a wide range of cognitive tasks. 4. I'm sure it is in fact impossible on some level to create genuinely culture free tests. If we're going to be anal about this, this is a consequence of the various no-free-lunch theorems in statistical inference. For any culture/person/algorithm there are problems where they'll do better relative to others, and problems where they'll do worse. Nevertheless IQ tests correlate with performance on a wide range of cognitive tasks. 5. I'm sure they do, but I haven't read the book and the summary in the Wikipedia article is too vague to tell. None of these objections actually engage with the parent comment's assertion that "Ability to solve these puzzles correlates with ability in a diverse range of cognitive abilities".