Yes, any functional person in good health could eventually get the same knowledge that the genius had when they took the IQ test. Assuming that they have the interest and motivation for doing so.
No, there's no guarantee that a person can "catch up" to the genius in real-time, but only that they could catch up to a certain benchmark if they live long enough in good health.
I'm not sure why you keep derailing threads with off-topic conversations when you could just send me a private message.
As I've already told you I follow
Karl Popper's work which shows that the classical/Baconian scientific method isn't correct because it's based on using empiricism/induction for the purpose of confirmation. Karl Popper shows that science is a deductive process of
conjecture and refutation where theories are not derived from repeated observations and where it's possible that a scientific test could prove a theory is false with a counter-observation.
An experiment tells you about that experiment but it can't tell you about the future correctness of a scientific theory. If you run an experiment to test Einstein's theory of relativity that only directly tells you about that experiment and it doesn't magically tell you about anything new in the future and it doesn't tell you about whether GTR will remain true into the future. In fact for every scientific theory our assumption should be that it's incomplete in some way and therefor wrong and must be superseded by an improved theory that gives us a better understanding of what is happening.
How does that relate to science? I brush my teeth because my parents and dentist taught me that they will go bad if I don't. You shouldn't make predictions about teeth based on observations and correlations because by that point you would already have seen tooth decay which is undesirable. Instead you should make predictions about them based on a 'causal' understanding of how people and tooth decay works.