None taken.
But, as I understand it based on personal experience and various sources, anecdotal and otherwise, IQ is very much not static. We may wish to try to measure the 'innate' cognitive function of brains. This would be a measure of the brains ability to absorb and categorize information. This could only be done over the course of years. And perhaps if we were to undergo IQ testing as it is over the course of years, we could derive a rough estimate of a 'core' intelligence innate to the subject. However what we are actually measuring is logic and reasoning abilities. The ability to use logic and reason to extrapolate and infer unknown information. Both logic and reasoning can be and are learned over the course of time. For some it comes more 'naturally' but it is still not a measure of an inborn cognitive ability that doesn't change.

A huge part of the reason for the fluctuation in IQ scores, aside from testing bias(which is inevitable) is because as we grow, we have the capacity to improve our logic and reasoning skills(and let them degrade).

By no means am I saying that intelligence is inextricably linked to education(of the modern day, formal variety). What I am saying is that being 'well-educated' is NOT indicative of being intelligent, ie, logical and reasoned. That is something we are no longer teaching and have long been reducing the teaching of. I am 33 and I was fortunate enough to have been able to go to a private school for my elementary years(thanks to school funded grants) and so I was taught to problem solve, extrapolate and infer, ie, to use logic and reason to fill in blanks. I was also taught to verify what I extrapolated when I could. I was taught that often this verification is meeting a challenge to my assertions and seeing if it stands up to scrutiny. Granted, these things weren't taught to me in such vernacular or even in such a methodical way that I can say I took class 'a' and 'b' but that we were taught something akin to the Trivium method. Nearly anyone can learn via this method and if properly learned and applied, it can make the difference between average and 'intelligent' in the context that we think of such.

My whole point is that, the article's author's bias aside, he is very much right. Being 'well-educated' today does NOT mean you are logical and reasoned or rational. Those things can be improved and had through 'proper education' but that is not what we have today. Today it is memorization and accepting what you are told to think about topics lest you 'fail'.

Education today fails all the tests of 'intelligence'.
It teaches you that having good grades means you can be sure of your knowledge and intelligence(intelligence doubts itself).
It teaches you to accept the data you are fed from 'trusted' sources(intelligence casts a critical eye on all sources).
It teaches you to attack and loathe any opposition to what you 'know'(intelligence relishes the opportunity to be proven wrong or to validate itself).
It teaches you to fear even the consideration of what is counter to what you 'know'(intelligence often tests itself by considering other points of view).

It also teaches you to fear being wrong. Another feature of successful intelligence(to mean flexible enough to correct itself but rigid enough to retain what hasn't yet been refuted) is to embrace being wrong. Finding the wrong answer means having one less wrong answer to worry about. It means that the previous 'knowledge' was wrong but now that knowledge is abandoned in favor of more consistent, logical and reasoned knowledge.

But I agree with you about how bad things have gotten and I firmly believe this goes back to 'education'. But I am speaking of today's version of that. Honest education is simply truth seeking. Learning how to seek answers, find them, test them, and even how to abandon them when they are proven wrong.
None of these are features of what is considered 'education' today.