Ex Member wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2016 at 5:38pm:



Happy Kwanza to you!   

I didn't vote for any of them.  I said that before.  I guess this is another example of either reading comprehension issues, or a selective memory.

Hillary wouldn't have done anything either, she is a bigger protector of the good ole boys clubs than Trump.  Moreover, America knows she can be bought.  For the right price, that woman would eat her young, and then slap her momma in the mouth for a nickel

So...you voted for Hillary?  Say it ain't so!

Trump is a lover of the good ole boy network when it comes to business, so he will give ear to the people with money.

So, yea, best of luck

Indeed yes. I suppose some clarification is in order on my previous post. In my family growing up, Christmas was not a secular holiday as such, but the focus was on family gatherings and good will to mankind. My Christmas is about Frosty the Snowman, Rudolph the Red Nosed Reindeer and Santa. Mangers and the like were peripheral and usually only for the "Spirit of Christmas." I cannot remember even one time going to church during the Christmas holiday period. But, it irks me when I am told discard parts of my culture. It would be akin to telling Mexicans to stop whacking piñatas because it's "violent." I love crushing political correctness. Going to get a refill on the rum and eggnog now.

OK, Ark, we get it. 

But don't you think it's time for the APA to take God out of its polygraph seminars?

By the way, Merry Christmas everyone. 

For those of you fighting the futile war against Christmas, kindly take your "happy holidays" and insert it as far as you can into your rectum.

Considering Trump's history as a guest on Howard Stern's radio show, maybe he'll appoint Ed Torian as polygraph czar.

Ex Member wrote on Dec 18^th, 2016 at 9:40pm:


Thank you for the suggestion, Arkhangelsk! Indeed, I am not aware that President-Elect Trump or any of his nominees have publicly expressed an opinion on polygraph policy.

If anyone has contact information for any relevant members of the incoming administration, I would be grateful if you could privately let me know.

Given that Trump is a businessman with a keen appreciation for efficiency, I could see him going all in for EyeDetect.

Just because someone is a hawk, does not necessarily mean they will sign on to pseudoscience. By the way, your name is not George.

Ex Member wrote on Dec 18^th, 2016 at 9:40pm:


C'mon, Ark. Let's get real.

Look at the military hawks and law-and-order types Trump is tapping for key positions. 

If anything, polygraph use is likely to expand -- not contract -- under Trump's administration.

George W. Maschke wrote on Dec 17^th, 2016 at 12:12pm:

George, with The Donald coming into the Oval Office in just 32 days, it may be the opportunity. I see him as someone who could quickly see the folly of what's been transpiring all these years. You should try reaching out to his staff before the same ideas become entrenched in his administration. He's a rebel and could entertain alternatives.

Dr. Stephen E. Fienberg, who headed the National Research Council's Committee to Review the Scientific Evidence on the Polygraph, died on Wednesday, 14 December 2016. He was 74 years old:

https://www.cmu.edu/news/stories/archives/2016/december/obituary-fienberg.html

Fienberg's committee produced the landmark report, The Polygraph and Lie Detection (PDF), which advised against polygraph screening, concluding that "its accuracy in distinguishing actual or potential security violators from innocent test takers is insufficient to justify reliance on its use in employee security screening in federal agencies."

As we note on the AntiPolygraph.org home page, Fienberg once quipped "Polygraph testing has been the gold standard, but it's obviously fool's gold."

Alas, the foolishness of reliance on the pseudoscience of polygraphy is not so obvious to scientifically illiterate policy makers. Stephen Fienberg's wisdom will be missed.