AntiPolygraph.org Message Board

Topic Summary - Displaying 6 post(s).

Posted by: agony
Posted on: Mar 31^st, 2010 at 4:35pm

Mark & Quote

Quote

Quote:

As an extremely loyal and honest person, I still can't wrap my head around the fact that someone I love this much would lie to me. It's as simple as that.

Unfortunately, your loyalty, your honesty, and your love are completely useless if your partner's loyalty, honesty, and love fail to measure up. What you need now are a couple of other virtues: judgement to know when you are being taken advantage of, and courage to escape a destructive relationship before you are damaged any further.

-Aunty Agony.

Posted by: George W. Maschke
Posted on: Mar 31^st, 2010 at 5:06am

Mark & Quote

Quote

apknow,

Understand that polygraph chart readings are evidence of nothing. Computerized readings add no more validity to polygraphy than they do to astrology. It's a gimmick to fool suckers.

Polygraphy is sheer pseudoscience, and it's inherently biased against the truthful. It's quite common for truth-tellers to wrongly fail. Conversely, had your SO been a liar intent on fooling the polygraph (and you), (s)he could have used simple countermeasures (explained in Chapter 4 of The Lie Behind the Lie Detector) to pass.

I have a question regarding the following:

Quote:

An unknown STD popped up in our relationship.

What is an "unknown STD?"

Posted by: T.Cullen
Posted on: Mar 31^st, 2010 at 1:12am

Mark & Quote

Quote

Quote:

If someone walks up to you and slaps your face, rest assured you have been slapped in the face

If somebody slapped me in the face and there was video of it that would certainly be a valid basis for claiming I had been slapped in the face.

All wishes aside, what is the basis for concluding with a 99% degree of accuracy that somebody is being "deceptive", based soley on the graphical output depicting data produced during a polygraph?

TC

Posted by: T.Cullen Posted on: Mar 31^st, 2010 at 1:05am	Mark & Quote Quote
Maybe I should restate my question. What is the basis for concluding the output shown on the PDF chart, no matter how many times it's checked, provides valide evidence that your SO was actually being deceptive with a 99% degree of certainy deception? This is the assumption your are making, isn't it? TC

Posted by: yankeedog
Posted on: Mar 30^th, 2010 at 10:30pm

Mark & Quote

Quote

apknow,

I am afraid you already have the answer to your question. Wishing something not to be true will not change the reality of the situation. Even if you put your polygraph experience(s) aside, what does the evidence tell you? If someone walks up to you and slaps your face, rest assured you have been slapped in the face. If you were sitting on a jury and had this evidence before you, would you convict or acquit? Cry

Posted by: T.M. Cullen Posted on: Mar 30^th, 2010 at 10:22pm	Mark & Quote Quote
Quote: I (even still) want to believe my SO is telling the truth, but a 0.99 DI-FAIL came in Where are you getting this ".99 deception indicated"? What is your basis for that? TC

Question:

Options:	Text	Color	Split Pie
Option 1:
Option 2:
Option 3:
Option 4:
Option 5:
Option 6:
Option 7:
Option 8:

Automatic End in:	days and minutes. Leave it blank if you don't want to set it now.
Enable Guest Voting:	Check this if you want guests to be able to vote in this poll.
Hide results:	Check this if you do not want the results of this poll shown until voting has been closed.
Multiple Choice	Check this if you want to allow users to vote for more than one option.
Time limit for deleting vote:	Time in minutes users are allowed to delete their vote (0 to disable delete).
Use legends for Pie Chart	Check this to use legends instead of labels next to each pie slice.
Pie Chart Radius:	Must be a value between 100 and 200 (default 100)

Name:
E-mail:
Your Verification Code is:	Please type the characters that appear in the image. The characters must be typed in the same order, and they are case-sensitive.
Verification Code:
Preview