My favorite part of the whole "polygraph" bull shit...which is exactly what it is..is that the crazier you are..or the bigger liar you are..the better your chances are of passing it..as long as you believe yourself then you will not be nervous enough to fail the test...My biggest questions are..did any of our troops who fought for us ever have to take a poly to enter the military?? NOPE...did our President of the united states ever take one to get into office...NOPE...Do our teachers who work with our young innocent children have to take them...NOPE...so what exactly is the point of making some one willing to put themselves in danger everyday to protect a community have to pass it....a test that isn't even accurate!!  Doesn't make sense to me!!!

polyfool wrote on Nov 30^th, 2005 at 6:11am:


Actually, it more likely means that polygraph use is increasing, and as a result there are more people coming on this website and others like it, where they receive poor advice from self-portrayed "experts" who have never had any practical experience whatsoever in conducting polygraph exams. The "anti-" crew on this website consists of a few people who failed the polygraph and then came on this website where they found like-minded individuals, all of whom also have no experience whatsover. That's the more likely story.

One major point to remember in all of this is this: there has never been any evidence that pre-employment screenings create a better workforce.  The only people these exams can be said to be helping are the polygraphers themselves, vampires on society.

Furthermore, they're not particularly concerned that there's no evidence that they're actually helping others.  All they care about is helping themselves, so who cares if it works?   

[url=-https://antipolygraph.org/cgi-bin/forums/YaBB.pl?num=1233987559]Here[/url] I describe some very simple (and cheap) ways they could demonstrate that they are doing some good.  They won't do it; they're evil.

Quote:

Call the person in the State Police who is handling your background check and ask them about the incident or incidents to which you are referring.

So they don't care if you did stuff when you were 10 and didn't really kno better?

Twoblock wrote on Nov 29^th, 2005 at 8:19pm:


Twoblock,

You noticed the similarity too .... hmmm !!!

Check my earlier posts ......  Only Administrator can tell  us if this is a known TCP/IP address. Unless he comes in under an anonymous domain.

MrAugust wrote on Nov 29^th, 2005 at 4:47pm:



Mr. August,

Another polygraph examiner asked me the very same thing several months ago. I'll tell you the same thing I told him. I do not consider the time I spend on this site a waste. I believe it's time well spent in helping to educate others about the myths surrounding the polygraph. Just in the nine months or so that I have been aware of the site, I've noticed the number of guests and registered users growing--a very good sign, indeed. That means more and more people are becoming aware of the polygraph's shortcomings. I use every chance I get to help spread the word about how polygraphs don't really work and warn others to NEVER, UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES submit to one. I'm satisfied when they tell me how they've passed the message along to others.      

It would be fair to say that prior to taking a polygraph, I had much more faith in them than the average person. The idea of taking one seemed cool to me and I thought the experience would be a neat one. I possessed very little knowledge about polygraphs and had never even heard the word countermeasures before. Those circumstances did very little for me in the way of accuracy as I told the truth and failed like many other posters on this site. 

Your ASSumption that I am bitter couldn't be farther from the truth. My polygraph failure was actually a blessing in disguise and I don't regret that it prevented me from making a mistake. What I do regret is that I foolishly consented to something I knew nothing about. I hate the fact that what happened to me continues to happen to others and that  a test that doesn't work is eliminating skilled, quality employees from the government workforce at taxpayer expense.   

The only person who is bitter and overemotional around here is you.

Twoblock wrote on Nov 29^th, 2005 at 8:19pm:


{sigh} For the umpteenth freaking time, read the findings in TLBTLD from the 1983 Congressional OTA report, and the 2002 NRCC report - read where it talks about accuracy rates in situations where there are no countermeasures attempted.  Then come back and tell me again then I haven't brought anything up for debate.

It's hysterical that now that I've done a little research and have formed some opinions that I'm being branded as a polygraph examiner.  I don't even know what these machines look like for crying out loud.

Listen, I won't take it personally and I appreciate that you were honest with me - but there really is not much debate happening here - just accusations that I'm making this whole story up or that I'm really some user whom I've never heard of.

To be blunt, the reason why I've "...made up (my) mind..." has a LOT to do with the fact that for the most part noone really attempts to debate anything on here except George and Drew.  At least when I disagree with them I can respect the fact that they are making a case, right or wrong, without being overemotional bitter flamers.

mustbaliar

MrAugust writes like Mercible. Not completely condeming, yet, but trolling just enough to draw responses. He mentions debate but he hasn't offered anything about the polygraph to debate. Could be him with a different ISP.

MrAugust wrote on Nov 29^th, 2005 at 4:47pm:



Don't take it too personally.  You have to understand that most of the members of this site have been bitten by the polygraph, in some form or another.

You initially came to this site asking for honest opinions about the polygraph, under the guise of a concerned husband wanting answers about his wife's possible misdeeds.  You said something to the effect of, "I really don't have a clue about the polygraph other than what I've read."  While that may be true, once you started to receive the honest answers and opinions you asked for, you immediately started with the typical pro-polygraph rhetoric that we are all too used to seeing on this site.  You got us hook, line, and sinker.  You sucked us into your debate and now here we are.  If you sense any frustration on our part it's because we would prefer that people just be honest up front about their position and start a dialog without the needless games, and indeed, without wasting our time.   

That is the best explanation I can give.  It would seem you already had your mind made up, even while posting your initial message to this board.  This is our perception, just as your perception is we are all "dealing with some false positive bitterness."  This is an emotional issue for many of us here, so when you come here asking us for our opinions, especially when it concerns the possible future of someone's marriage, you better believe we are going to give it to you hard and straight.  If you think we are bitter, wait and see what happens with your wife if she becomes a false-positive victim.

Regards and good luck

The last 2 responses are just typical of how a lot of you folks think (and debate).

I just answered the question and explained why I believe it's accurate, and since there's no valid response the best thing to do is flame.

Polyfool why do YOU waste YOUR time on this site ?  That's the real question.  I'm dealing with a real time issue here while you are apparently dealing with some false positive bitterness that you're going to take out on every single person who dares to show you the truth.

Mr.August

I agree with polyfool. 

You talk like God in AMOS. "For three transgressions and for four, I will not turn away the punishment of my wife". Is it in you to forgive?

Your mind is already made up. So go ahead and do it and destroy your wife's life then try to live with that the rest of your life. The "flip" of the polygraph is NOT going  to prove or disprove her guilt. OH sorry, you have the misguided belief that it's 90% or better. On the other hand, what if she is in the 10%?

Mr August,

Why are you wasting time going back and forth with the posters on this site? Don't you have a polygraph to schedule for your wife? Once you get the results, you'll have the rest of your life to wonder whether she cheated on you. According to your research, polygraphs are 80-90% accurate. That leaves a 10-20% doubt in your mind forever.

EosJupiter wrote on Nov 27^th, 2005 at 1:33am:


What if you thought she may have cheated on you and have no other way of knowing the truth.  Perhaps you should sit in the chair I'm sitting in, sir, believe me - it's less comfortable.

polyfool wrote on Nov 28^th, 2005 at 4:48am:


Because in TLBTLD, for starters, it discusses this exact issue with the NRCC's conclusions during its 2002 report.

Mr. August,

You obviously did some research on posters accused of being polygraph examiners on this site, which might I add, has turned out to be the case in just about every instance. I'm just curious as to why in all your research on this site, you've walked away with the impression that  being an uninformed examinee results in accuracy? This site exists for the very reason that people who know virtually nothing about the process are failing their polygraphs despite being truthful.

MrAugust wrote on Nov 27^th, 2005 at 12:27am:


MrAugust,

Naive subjects pass and fail the polygraph all the time.  How does naivete make the polygraph accurate?  I failed the polygraph twice as a naive subject, despite telling the truth each time.  Would I fail a third one knowing what I know now?  Absolutely not--because I would not participate in another polygraph.  Naive subjects also pass the polygraph, but they are the lucky ones.

Perhaps you meant to say that a naive subject might be more likely to admit to something during a polygraph if she believed that whatever she was hooked up to (polygraph, car battery, copier machine, toaster) was indeed a "lie detector."  Of course, if this subject has nothing to admit or calls the polygrapher's bluff, then it makes the whole procedure more of a farce than it already is, and innocent, honest individuals often face ridiculous accusations.  Hopefully your wife will not suffer that humiliation.  Hopefully she will be a lucky one.

Regards and good luck

Mr August,

Yes, I am very robust in my opinions and actions in regards to polygraphy. And sometimes get taken to task for it. But until your the one sitting in the chair getting grilled, there is no way you can understand the situation. And my feelings are for your wife, in  that you are going to make her suffer mental torture. Not something I would do to someone I cherish in my life.

EosJupiter wrote on Nov 26^th, 2005 at 10:53am:


Dude I've never even seen a polygraph machine before - I'm just telling you what I've learned from information gathered.  And after speaking/writing with many people on both sides, it seems conclusive to me that as long as my wife is naive about the process (likely) then we should get an accurate result.

Yes, it is obviously a horrible way to resolve an issue - but if you were in my shoes and had to deal with what I've been through then you might understand.  Yes, we are also going to counseling.

Sorry to taint the board with my personal issues, but despite your apology I think you and some of the other folks, who unfortunately were in the bad 10-20%, are showing a bad side when you constantly accuse everyone who dares to challenge your assertions as polygraph examiners with agendas.

Even though I'm obviously skeptical of George's theories, I respectfully give him props for the tone of his last post.

Ok George Point well taken, I will restrain myself.   

Its this wolverine personnality I have.   

And MrAugust I do apologize for the accusation. And I do hope you resolve this trust issue with your wife without the use the of a polygraph exam.

Regards

EosJupiter,

I see little basis for accusing MrAugust of being a polygraph examiner. I think it's perfectly understandable that someone who suspects his wife has been unfaithful might be eager for something -- anything -- that would offer some degree of confidence in the matter. Polygraphers profess to offer a high degree of confidence in situations where ascertaining the truth is difficult or even impossible. (After all who can truly prove that s/he has not been unfaithful to his/her spouse? One cannot prove the negative.) I don't find it surprising that someone in MrAugust's difficult situation might look to polygraphy or some other pseudoscience (such as voice stress "testing") for answers. Such wishful thinking ensures polygraphers a steady stream of customers.

MrAugust wrote on Nov 25^th, 2005 at 5:46am:


MrAugust

Well just by your response your most likely a polygrapher yourself. As someone without  a truly vested interest wouldn't know as much as you.  Why not just come on out and debate us without the hidden agenda. Its not as if we haven't had them before. But again your welcome to post and debate. And even at 80-90% (which is garbage) your still failing 10-20 innocent people for every 100 polygraph interrogations.
Just 1 failure of a truthful person, is one too many, and is not acceptable collateral damange. Especially if it destroys someones name and integrity because of a false positive. I get in trouble by George and other senior posters on this web site because of my opinions from time to time. But unless you have 100% accuracy in deception detection, then the whole premise of what the APA and polygraphy community represents is BS and nothing more than a sham. Believe what you want, but the fact is as another message thread rightly proves. Countermeasures can't be detected and polygraphs have no valid scientific basis in reality.  And the reason most of the polygraph community is so upset with this website is, it blows out  their little secrets to the general public. ( But lets not forget that it is the abuse of a polygrapher to Geroge, that made this website possible), Much to their dissatisfaction. And now in any polygraph  interrogation the Control question, " Have you researched anything on polygraphs", is now a standard question, or some derivation of the question. The best part is knowing that, no matter how much you may wish to catch those who know countermeasures, it isn't possible unless the examinee is weak and coughs up the information. As far as drugs are concerned, drug users get what they deserve unless they are under a doctors care. And if they are under a doctors care, the drugs in question, make them ineligible to take a polygraph anyways. 

Regards 

[quote author=MrAugust link=board=Policy;num=1068278826;start=0#11 date=11/24/05 at 08:29:21]Perhaps it is foolhardy if the person takes the time to viligantly study polygraph procedure and work hard on countermeasures, but the impression I get from reading all of the stuff you pointed out is that it is pretty accurate if you only tested unknowing folks who wouldn't understand how to beat it.

In the first quote, where you showed what I excluded, all I can think of while reading it is those drug commercials where they say "... Some users report side effects like nausea, fever, etc....".  It's a disclaimer - just because the drug doesn't work properly on a few people doesn't mean it is useless.

Mr. August,

Your analogy about drug side effects and the accuracy of the polygraph is an interesting one and brings a memory to mind. I never paid much attention to  adverse side effects of prescription drugs until I experienced a frightening situation some years ago when I suffered a severe reaction to a drug given to me by a doctor. The reaction is quite rare, in fact, only one of the doctors in the facility where I was treated had even seen it before. That experience enlightened me  and gave me a new respect for the power of  prescription drugs and what they can do to some people. To this day, I always research possible drug reactions and side effects, however rare, and dread taking a drug I've never had before.

Years later, when I was failed on an FBI polygraph that I thought to be nearly 100% accurate, after telling the truth, I believed that I must have been part of a small percentage of the population--just as I had been when I suffered that severe drug reaction. I thought a re-test would clear up the mistake, but I was wrong. I was also wrong to think that false polygraph positives were rare. If polygraphs were reliable and accurate, their use would not be so controversial. I had just never paid attention before, the same as before I suffered that horrible drug reaction. Some things that seem harmless and innocent at first, can turn out to be dangerously  destructive.         

Several posters have given you sound advice about your situation, but it seems you have already made up your mind. It's terribly sad that you would leave the fate of your marriage to a piece of worthless trash. What's even sadder, is that if you really knew your wife, you wouldn't need a machine to tell you whether she'd been unfaithful.

EosJupiter wrote on Nov 24^th, 2005 at 10:56pm:



They don't claim 98% accuracy - well most of them don't anyway.  The ones that do are possibly some of the bad apples that are responsible for some of the false positives / negatives.

General consensus I've heard is 80-90% - and that's probably assuming no countermeasures or drugs.

MrAugust,

From reading your previous posts, I detect a pro-polygraph bias. Not that this is a problem, as all opinions are welcome on this website, (unlike the pro-polygrapher website. where you get thrown out if you dare to preach blasphemy to the great polygraph demigods),  But you are correct in assuming that the ill informed and naieve will significantly fail the polygraph at a higher rate. By being informed and well read you remove the fear, doubt, and anxiety, that the polygrapher needs to make his voodoo work. That is why that community tries to keep its secret rituals to themselves. But go on over to the pro site and get another opinion if you like. Best part is, I do believe that their answers will always tow the company line, that they are 98% accurate at detecting deception, caveat ---it only works if the examinee buys in to the BS that is being slung at them. Once you know it doesn't work and is a load of crap, it never again is a problem. 
good luck