The Flynn Effect proposed by J. R. Flynn is reviewed and evaluated. Even in the presence of a skeptical and critical scrutiny of the effect, it appears that there is more than just methodological artifact to be explained. But the acceptance of the effect has been too quick. The proper explanations for the effect will not be meaningful until the nature of the effect is much better understood than it is now. Six questions are raised that have not been adequately answered. Two criticisms of the logic underlying the Flynn Effect are presented--one showing that even if IQ and SAT are highly correlated, their secular means will not necessarily track one another; the second showing that results by Flynn are as consistent with a changing IQ variance as with a changing mean. The second of these is empirically evaluated with a reanalysis of a subset of the sources of Flynn 1984 data. Finally, 10 research strategies and designs are suggested that would help us better understand the effect. The critique is developed with the goal of clarifying the nature, meaning and causes of the Flynn Effect. The author hopes that the critique will stimulate both healthy skepticism about the Flynn Effect and careful research into its actual causes.