Without the SD, "160" is meaningless
Modern Wechsler and Stanford-Binet 5 scale to SD 15. Some older Cattell-style tests, still accepted by Mensa through certain routes, use SD 24. The same printed number describes a completely different person.
Extreme scores regress toward the mean
Any extreme result contains some luck on the day. Take a second, different test and the luck does not repeat, so the expected retest sits somewhat lower, by an amount that depends on the test's reliability. None of that erases real ability. It means the defensible claim is "profoundly gifted range" rather than "exactly 160".
You'd need to gather several towns to expect one
A satisfying round number, not a record
Almost every celebrity 160 is an estimate, a publicity figure, or a conversion off an old ratio scale. Unsourced genius IQs are entertainment.
Starting from 7, each term is the smallest number greater than the previous one whose digits sum to a multiple of 4. The sequence runs 7, 8, 13, 17, … What comes next?
Percentiles, rarities and the retest estimate are computed from a normal distribution (mean 100, SD 15) and classical test theory. Wechsler range, Hollingworth, SMPY, Wai, Terman and celebrity points summarise published accounts, not this site's data.