>>14281731nah not really, there are only so many questions to get right, if you get all of them right you get 160, they don't bother to discriminate past 160 (yes they are initially modelled using the bell curve, but it is actually scored using raw data translated into a score, that's my point). Also because of something called spearman's law of diminishing returns (look at the Wikipedia page, essentially two things, general intelligence and predictive outcome in mental tasks correlate less in higher IQ groups then lower iq groups, also high IQ people tend to specialise in particular domains IE exceptionally good at math, only decent with verbal skills, compared to stupid people who are stupid across the board) it makes general intelligence increasingly harder to measure at higher levels.
>tiny kid.could be indicative of faster rate of maturation, not just intelligence, also look up wilson effect (essentially Heritability of IQ is lower when you are young, and higher when you are older, children are impressionable and you can essentially environmentally and temporarily boost their IQ higher then it would be. You can't do the same for adults.
My point being, Im sure mr smarty pants is really smart, but not 210 (or the corresponding percentile score that would be 210),
