Hunter wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2007 at 12:43pm:


But, at least you are honest, which is refreshing and a step forward.  Thank-you for your comments.

Nopoly

One can train to defeat polygraph, however, a seasoned examiner in most cases will detect the countermeasure.  I am well aware of the group on this site that constantly repeats the adage that we are unable to detect countermeasures.  Regarding mental counter measures, yes SOME are detectable, others I'm not so sure about.   

Regarding induced reactions, I am speaking about both mental and physical countermeasures.  To what degree do you cause a reaction to occur, is that your normal?  Anything out of the normal range is suspicious to me.  Second part of the answer, I look at the relevant question to see if there is any reaction, should not be any of consequence, so yes it is an overall totality of the charts, not just one place on a chart that I look at.  I am sure other examiners have differing opinions.   

Have I ever missed when someone used countermeasures?  I'm sure I have and I don't have a problem with that, it is a fact of life and I am not perfect, nor is polygraph.

nomegusto wrote on Dec 20^th, 2007 at 5:24pm:


Good points nomegusto.

To clarify or extend a couple of things. Final judgments are always made using the totality of available information. Policies and standards of practice are increasingly clear about that. Also, the adjudicators about someone's job status, filing status, guilty status, are most often not the polygraph examiner. This is a reflection of the use and meaning of test data. In psychological testing, an MMPI result itself is never enough to warrant a clinical diagnosis, nor is an IQ test score enough to pronounce someone retarded. People have criticized polygraphy for both sides of the discussion - basing results on test scores, or using extrapolygraphic information - they simply want to criticize. Tests simply give information. Decisions and diagnostic opinions are made by professionals - who sometimes use test results and other information.

I know that some readers of this site would prefer to oversimplify things and reduce the matter to "squiggly lines." But people will fail to learn anything if we leave it at that. Remember. Tests simply give information. In the case of polygraph, that information pertains to how well an individual's test result fits a known model or models, for deceptive or truthful persons. For another example, take a 7th grade spelling test. What we're interested in is how well each student's test score fits our known model for 7th grade spelling scores. So, while test results are a matter of how well a persons responses fit a known model, final grades are often a matter of a lot more information than a single test.


r

JP
  We know that innocent people have been wrongly accused of deception. It happens. It's not a perfect system. I'll admit to that. My beef is not about using the CM. It's how or why there using it. I've got a big problem with someone lying on there SF-86, and wanting information to deceive the investigator willingly, and knowingly. Again, if I were to take a test, and was accused of being deceptive, and have had the oppurtunity to clear my name during a post test interview, or interrogation. Such person will be relying on alot more then said squiggly lines. The machine is part of the test, I guarantee a compentent examiner is looking at the totality of the situation, before making their final determination. 
Please, someone (preferrably a polygrapher) correct me again if I'm over stepping my bounderies, or if I'm wrong.

Hunter wrote on Dec 20^th, 2007 at 4:19pm:


It appears from your remarks that one can train himself to successfully use countermeasures if they practice on a polygraph.  Is this true?

You also say that "induced reactions have some specific markers".  But isn't that exactly what a polygrapher is doing when he questions, inducing reactions"  Perhaps you meant inducing reactions by physical means, please clarify.

So far though, you have limited yourself to commenting on physical countermeasures.  What about mental countermeasures?  Do these also have "specific markers"?

For example, all it takes for me to raise my pulse rate and blood pressure is to visualize standing on a high bridge (fear of heights) or getting a blood test, (fear of needles).   

Jesper Paten wrote on Dec 20^th, 2007 at 3:20pm:


I would suspect that their might be some extrapolygraphic confirmatory evidence to alert the examiner of the anomaly.

r

Sir Hunter,

You are deceiving us.
Please explain what this specific markers looks like and how is they different to normal markers.

The polygrapf is very basic equipment. It cannot read minds or make determinations. it does not know the differents between data inputs. It can only record from basic electric (digital) signals.

There is not one signal (electric current ) for a fahrt and another for pinching buttocks. There is no differents at all between input signals
for fear or pain. 

There iss no additional Muscle movement of tongue biting when it is done at same time as closing the mouth after speaking.

You will not respond to me because you can not do so. You have shot past the target and missed. 

The polygrapf belongs in a museum to wasted endeavors.

Respectfully,
JP

Why was it necessary, then, to invent and implement the anal sphincter muscle squeeze detection pad?  Seems like it can't get much more artificial than that.

It appears we are looking for more information regarding countermeasures.  Any induced reaction has some specific markers.  Creating pain generally causes an exaggerated response.  For one to gain the ability to use these types of countermeasures would require practice on an actual polygraph.   

The use of a motion sensor "butt pad" confirms without question that you are using the anal contraction counter measure.   

Camera's on the face confirm tongue biting because of muscle movement.   

We could go on and on with this, however it would not be convincing to you IMHO and therefore a waste of time for all reading the posts here.   

I don't respond to JP for a reason, and I do not enjoy baiting. 

[quote author=505F7A7D7B667A7B150 link=1198050218/30#35 date=1198165432I think you have stumbled upon a great research project JP. You should "spear-head" such a project---and start with experiments on yourself.
You impress me more and more with that insight of yours.
E [/quote]

A research project such as this would require peer review, and in order to gain that, he would have to attend a 10 week trade school and purchase a Ph.d on line.  Then the project would have some semblance of validity.

Quote:


I think you have stumbled upon a great research project JP. You should "spear-head" such a project---and start with experiments on yourself.
You impress me more and more with that insight of yours.
E

Don't get me wrong, JP, I was not supporting you., although if my question bolstered your argument, then perhaps that is a benefical result.

I was asking an honest question.  If it is so easy for a poly examiner to tell the difference between natural reactions and artificially induced reactions, then there was no need to develop this piece of hardware, was there?

Third, you might consider implementing a natural gas emmision butt plug, that is designed to release slowly when a certain amount of pressure builds up.  That way, you would not risk a false positive countermeasure detection opinion. 

Lastly, don't make any assumptions as to my gender, please.

nopolycop wrote on Dec 20^th, 2007 at 3:16pm:


Sir,
Thank you for your support. I was also thinking that if the examinee was over nervous during the test and passed some wind, that would probably activate the detection pad and a truthful person could be accused of cheating because of a natural emission of gas.

Respectfully,
JP

Hunter wrote on Dec 20^th, 2007 at 2:50pm:


Why was it necessary, then, to invent and implement the anal sphincter muscle squeeze detection pad?  Seems like it can't get much more artificial than that.

Hunter wrote on Dec 20^th, 2007 at 2:50pm:


Sir,
If somebody else pricked the examinee, would the examiner be able to tell whether the pain reaction was caused by the examinee or the other person? 

Do you contendt that humans experience different types of pain caused by same stimulus at same site ?

If I bite my tongeu, or prick my tongue, or my friend pricked my tongue - are you sure that you can decide from your chartings which one was the cause of the pain ?

Of course you cannot. This fable that polygrapf witches can tell the difference between psycho-pain and physical-pain reactions is the falsehood of the century. As false as Mr Martins PhD.

Respectfully,
JP

EJohnson wrote on Dec 20^th, 2007 at 2:47pm:


Sir Johnson,

I do believe that more innocent and truthful people will pass the polygrapf test after reading the TLBTLD than if they did not.

It iss distressful that innocents and truthful people need a form of protection from the cursed test.

In Europe, some drivers use the Road Angel gps device. Statistiks prove that drivers using roadangel device are having 70% less accidents. They did not ever start their journeys to have accidents, but with protection like the roadangel they had a 70% better chance of 'passing' or not having an accident.

The TLBTLD is like the roadangel. It will give you a 70% better chance to pass the polygrapf test.

Respectfully,
JP

so can somebody please explain how biting the tongue causes a reation on their graph?  what it does physically to your body to cause such a reaction?

To address your previous question, when you create pain in your body, your body responds by increasing blood pressure, increase in sweat gland activity and there will be a change in breathing.   

The down side to artificial reactions, they are noticeably different from a normal reaction observed on a polygraph chart, therefore detectable as a countermeasure by a seasoned and educated examiner.  We look for those types of false reactions on all charts and in opposition to posters that claim they are not detectable, they are very obvious.

JP,
Of course you are assuming that TLBTLD is an ace. I wholeheartedly disagree. I think it is tragic to mistake a joker for an ace. I wager that far more good candidates with too large of an ego to admit some petty BS from teen years ruin their opportunities by virtue of bad advice---than do these alleged gentle fawns who are victims of error rates. 

Beezy, let me guess----you went a period of time experimenting with a little cocaine and an occasional mushroom. Woopty do. You think good candidates don't have such sf86 adjustments at the 11th hour? Of course they do.

Quote:


Sir Nogustome,

There are too many innocent victims of polygrapf posting on this site.
Innocent and truthful people whose truth was denied and whose freedom and chances were denied. 

People who told the truth were denied.

When one has to play cards against the devil, is it not better to carry an ace up ones sleeve.

Respectfully,
JP

Sir (JP)
Hate to rain on your parade. However, I'm not a polygrapher. You haven't read any of my previous posts. I won't deny the fact the poly's are important. However, I've got issues with members of our armed services who think it's important to lie on a polygraph to receive their clearance. Albeit our friend here probably smoked some weed prior, or other narcotic prior to enlisting into  the military. With that said, he thinks he needs to lie, as not to get caught into a fraudelant enlistment. My question to Beezy is, what are you going to do after you fail your polygraph and the interrogation begins? The UCMJ albeit is similar to the civilian laws, but oh so different. Are you going to handle it? 
Good Luck... Remember the truth will set you free. I'd rather be accused of lying then being accused, or caught cheating. Think wisely, you get one chance at a clearance. Don't lose it... If your not going to pass it without cheating, then whats the point of taking the exam?

nomegusto wrote on Dec 19^th, 2007 at 10:47pm:


Sir,

Thank you for your posting above.
It is the typical venomos spitting of polygrapf examiners.
How can anyone trust another who is so spitful and wishing of hatred to another.

I cant give you blessings.

No Respect,
JP

Sir Beezy,

Reading the TLBTLD will cause you no harm. It worked for me and it can work for you.

The polygrapf examiners try to focuss you on little things you did
in the past and try to make them molehill mountains. Of course to fail you.

Yourself you can see now from the postings that they are angry and flustered when the non believers in polygrapf give you advice to beat the schmutzvanger machine.

Read it well and practise the countermeasures. 
You will pass. You will get that job. You will be a success.

Blessings for you.

Respectfully,
JP

Quote:


My eldest son's name is Ben. Great name---a name of strength and integrity. I would spill the silly beans about my 15 yr old gaffs. Short of killing someone or going on a 10 day LSD bender----what could possibly motivate you to try and cheat? I personally don't trust anyone who didn't screw up as a teen. Part of your test requires you disclose that stuff to evaluate your "emotional intelligence"----which helps your employer determine that you thoroughly understand the difference between screwing up and "righting yourself" versus ignoring your development and possibly repeating history if you become distressed. The overall theme of the test will be honesty, not sanctimony. Remember the difference between a boss and a commander---and tell your story. Keep it real Ben.

nomegusto wrote on Dec 19^th, 2007 at 10:47pm:


what the hell makes you think my name is catrin?  my first name is ben hence the name beezy.  i am no disgrace because being dishonest about what i did when i was 15 has nothing to do with how well i can protect my country

beezy wrote on Dec 19^th, 2007 at 6:53pm:


You are a DQ waiting to happen.  You can choose to use the countermeasures in TLBTLD or you can choose to be honest and approach the examination with an open mind and tell the truth.  Should you choose to use the countermeasures, and your opinion is "they can assume but is their word against mine" I wonder who "they" are going to believe, you or a seasoned examiner?  Hope you get your act together before you take the examination.   Best of luck to you

EJohnson,

Well said, and point taken.

I appreciate you pointing out the ill perceived frailties regarding my previous post. 

In response to the specific points that you raise… I respectfully disagree with your interpretation that I was providing advice that could result in the disqualification (DI) of a pre-employment or criminal polygraph testing procedure.

------------------------------------------
I wrote in my previous post:

“I strongly suggest that you carefully read the booklet, and educate yourself about polygraph testing and the methods involved.”
---------------------------------------------------

In addition, I really have no idea why someone may be concerned with passing a polygraph, and honestly don’t really care. 

Advising someone to read a book (any book) is in no way “Obstruction of Justice.” Nor, am I aiding this individual to deceive any investigative agency.

Telling the truth during a polygraph exam is certainly no guarantee of passing a polygraph exam. False positives are not uncommon, and truthful individuals are routinely denied employment opportunities as a result.


triple x