Odin,   
    
     Was there actual name calling?  or did it just feel like it?  was it because of the frustrations of not being able to answer us in a logical or "trust me, I know what I'm talking about" fashion.   We have been trying for you to get evidence of some of the allegations that you have put out here.  But seems like you see it as superfluous, but facts are facts.   
In your posts, it seems as if you are going to take out your anger and frustrations on the person taking any polygraph that you'll administer.  I pity that person who even looks at you cross-eyed.   I don't know if there are codes of ethics that polygraphers adhere to, but seemingly you will play the judge, the jury and the executioner.

ODIN wrote on Dec 12^th, 2005 at 2:16am:


The most competent study done on this topic was done by the National Academy of Sciences.  Are you accusing them of biased, one-sided results?

Quote:


You haven't responded at all.  You have made claims that you haven't backed up or retracted.  Those are your claims; they've simply been quoted back to you.


Quote:


I'll readily admit that having an instrument to practice on is helpful.  However, I took three polygraphs with the NSA, employed countermeasures, and neither failed nor was accused of using countermeasures.

Quote:


A study isn't "one-sided" merely because its conclusions aren't what you like.

Studies by polygraphers clearly suffer from a potential conflict-of-interest confounds.

However, the National Academy of Sciences did the most comprehensive review of scientific studies on the polygraph.  If you have evidence their report was "one-sided" or "biased", please present it.

If not, it looks like we have yet another unevidenced claim.

Quote:


I'm sorry to hear about it, and I had a very happy childhood, thanks for asking.

I'll readily admit that I'm fairly ruthless when it comes to debating polygraph examiners.  The reason is really simple: a lot of people go through lots of pain due to the polygraph and polygraphy practicioners.  These aren't harmless lies that we're talking about.  Claims that the polygraph works, that polygraphers can detect countermeasures (one of the few ways people can protect themselves against the polygraph's capriciousness) do real harm to people.

That, my friend, is why I insist you back up your claims, or retract them.  Because as long as I am posting on this site, such claims won't pass without challenge.

Quote:


I truly am sorry that you find it insulting when you are called upon to back up your own words.  However, I think the average reasonable person can see that this isn't an unreasonable request.

Quote:


Best of luck dealing with whatever you need to take care of.  Personal tragedy strikes us all.

polyfool wrote on Dec 12^th, 2005 at 4:45am:


Yes, it does specifically mention this.  So properly-done countermeasures, as taught by TLBTLD, would deal with this.

During my three NSA polygraphs, I employed breathing countermeasures, including controlling my breathing while the tubes were on and apnea at certain points.  At no point was I accused of employing countermeasures.

Quote:


Yes it is. I won't lie.

But when I see that someone is going to "play the game" then they should expect I will play my game to catch them. There is nothing unethical about it.

Nervousness is one thing but deep gulps of air are obvious, and got deeper for certain contraols. I caught him with that stunt in the second chart by inserting an irrelevant just before the last control of the test that he was going to distort the chart.

In the two charts it was the same controls consistantly, and on the third chart when he knew the game was up he stopped doing it. He has not been the only one.

"boneheads"  name calling may be childish too"

I figured I would stoop to all your levels. 

You hate me because I am an examiner, I hate people that pull countermeasures because of you guys. You guys should feel bad. I give most I catch at counter measures a second chance.

No more.

I see now most of you show us no kindness or understanding, just hate and bitterness. It's time people attemping countermeasures are shown the same intolerance. Everytime I see it I will nail them to the cross.

got to go, see everyone in a few days.

Remember all God still loves you, though I do not.

See bitterness is a two way stree, but I bet you will tell me I am out of line and leave your own alone unadmonished.

polyfool wrote on Dec 12^th, 2005 at 4:45am:


Yes, but they forget that or can't keep it up. Other times they just plain slip up.

I will agree that the breathing rate will change to a degree. However, when this change is so dramatic that it is obvious to a child what is going on, it's easy to tell what the person is doing.

I hade one guy that was so overdoing it, his galvo was matching the deap breaths he was taking. Then when I released the cuff and his amp and rate went down about 50 - 70% (I kid you not.) I damn near laughed my ass off at him. It was that obvious. BTW, I did get an admision that he learned that "on some web sight".

I also got an admission on the issue he was being tested on. I felt bad for the kid, he got caught up with the wrong croud.

Thanks for your kind reply. This is how things are debated

Gelb,

I agree. One would think most people's breathing would change when the test is over due to the simple fact that the test is stressful even for truthful examinees.

If I'm not mistaken, I believe TLBTLD instructs examinees to refrain from changing their breathing rate until the chest tubes are removed for the very reason that the examiner could still be recording in an attempt to recognize countermeasures.   

Odin said "Most of the boneheads that read your book don't know that sometimes the box is still running after the test is over. Then the breathing rate changes dramaticly from 13 cpm to 19 cpm in amp and rate, breathing countermeasures are clearly being performed.  "


   so is the test really over?  is it being deceptive to tell the applicant that the test is over and you still go on to measure the breathing rates?  could it be that the breathing level changes due to the fact that anxiety and nervousness is less noticeable because of the finality of the test?
    "boneheads"  name calling may be childish too.

Quote:


Your "facts" are very one sided as well, and very bias.

I have been far to busy responding to cowardly attacks and insults of children. I can back up these claims of personal attacks, even upon my apperance.

I am not in the mood for this right now people. 


Before I leave to handle a family situation I will leave you with this.

Most of the boneheads that read your book don't know that sometimes the box is still running after the test is over. Then the breathing rate changes dramaticly from 13 cpm to 19 cpm in amp and rate, breathing countermeasures are clearly being performed. 

The Book is good so long as the readers have an insturment to perfect their new found knowladge. 

That is all you will get as far as how I get those performing countermeasures. there are other ways, but that is all you will get.

Your studies are just as one sided. You show me a study that says one thing, and I will show you a study that says another. I have found that studies mean nothing. ON BOTH SIDES. 

Enough for a while, right now I just want to get through this very hard time in my life. I am not running and will answer every question, as if it will matter because anything I come up with will be "one sided" and thus not good enough.

That is clearly how you avoid debate. That is clear.

I never attacked one of you personally, but clearly skeptic didn't get hugged enough as a child, or maybe got hugged too much. Yes that was an attack. 

I am very upset right now and am in more pain than any of you know.

I think every one of us need to grow up and learn how to "talk" to eachother rather than sling insults. I should have ignored the insults and stuck with the research I have access to, but that would have done no good because it would have been deemed one sided. 

No specifics to those one sided studies studies have been addressed, because you can't prove them wrong without referring to your one sided studies, then I respond with my one sided studies and it becomes a never ending fight.

I don't have it in me after last night for a fight like that.

Now if no one minds, I need to take care of an important family matter that is in need of my undivided attention. I do hope that is not one sided of me. Any further insults would just be classless right now. I hope you guys are bigger than that, but I won't expect it.

It will tell me what kind of people you are.

Now excuse me I have a plane to catch.

Odin,

   why do you come on this discussion board just to throw one-sided views to us, expecting for us to believe everything you say?  are you from the APA just to goad us?  you come on, say something, we ask for proof, then POOF!  you're gone!   
   you've gone as far as researching textbooks on polygraph (albeit one-sided) telling us how it can be used by lawyers, courts etc.  why don't you show us in your books what the polygraph does to law-abiding citizens seeking employment all the while telling the truth , then found DI at the hands of most examiners?  does your books show that side of the equation?  or does it only aggrandize the polygraph examiner and his machine?   
  we are still awaiting your response to the amazing ways that you can catch people in using CM controls.

To all the anti-polygraph distinguished posters:

It appears our polygrapher ODIN, by estimation and analysis must be a young and newly annointed polygrapher. Long on breath, questionable  on patience, and short of fact.  His exuberance and ranting to any challenge gives him away, Myself having asked many questions and gotten nothing back in return.  His links are to other polygraphers references and inputs, who by definition have a vested interest in perpetuating the lie that is the polygraph. 

ODIN

Your more than welcome to keep posting but I truly suggest that if you wish to be listened to, that you start by posting facts. Otherwise if you haven't noticed the principles of this website are ignoring you. I intend to do the same. 

Good luck in your hunt to catch countermeasures, For you will only get them if you are lucky, Exceptionally lucky.

Regards

Quote:



I'll simply note that the APA's findings (which, as you note, have a vested interest in promoting the polygraph) are at odds with those of the National Academy of Sciences.

ODIN wrote on Dec 11^th, 2005 at 2:38am:


And I will find it surprising if you actually address them, since all you continue to do is avoid backing up your claims.

1) Claims that states without the polygraph for Law Enforcement jobs tend to have higher corruption in Law Enforcement
2) Claims that those who use countermeasures have something to hide
3) Claims that you can detect countermeasures.

Please back up these statements, or retract them.

Quote:


I suppose you think we haven't heard such excuses before.

Polygraphers claiming they can detect countermeasures, then making excuses as to why they won't prove their claims, are a dime a dozen around here, bud.

Either prove your claims or retract them.

Quote:


Since the others who "hide behind a veil" of secrecy have already admitted they can't prove their claims, it seems to me you're claiming special priviledges here.

Proving your claims as regards countermeasures would be easy: take up the Polygraph Countermeasure Challenge.  It's structured and scientific in its approach, and you should have no good reason not to do so.  Otherwise, retract your claims.

Quote:


No problem.  My responses are directed mainly at our esteemed readers, who I will continue to remind that you have made claims that you won't (and evidently can't) back up, and won't retract.

Polygraphers continue to be their own worst enemies.

Odin,


   Please continue with your links.  They are much more informative than the conjectures and speculations that you post.  Those textbooks that you get your articles from are very one-sided.  Well, of course that they would be, all written by polygraph examiners.   

   Thank you in advance for future links.

Oh yea.

How it the "law suit" going with the FBI?

Funny how I can't find it on file at the court.

http://users.rcn.com/jonmarin/Polygraph1.htm

You keep posting that, that is good. I am doing further reaseach on everything.

I will be distracted by you no further.

Translated

I am done with you, although I will answer each issue. I will find it amusing of your response.

As far as me proving I have caught countermeasures in the past, that would expose my identity thus puting my job at risk.

No thank you.

I will hide behind the same vail that some of you do. 

Or am I not worthy of that same right?

Your further responses will go unread. Thank you for your time.

Have a nice day

"Sir"

Odin,

  the link to your article touts " In 1997, the American Polygraph Association(www.polygraph.org) published a compendium of research studies on the validity and reliability of polygraph examinations conducted since 1980. Ansley, summarizing its content regarding field examinations (real tests, not simulations), wrote the following:

Researchers conducted 12 studies of validity following 3,174 field examinations, producing an average accuracy of 98 percent. Researchers conducted 11 studies involving the reliability ,f independent analyses (one examiner reviewing another’s charts) of 1,609 sets of charts from field examinations confirmed by independent evidence, producing an accuracy of 92 percent.


James Bassett has been a polygraph examiner in private practice since 1972. He is a full member of the American Polygraph Examination and maintains an office in downtown Cincinnati. He can be reached at (513) 421-9604 or on the web at www.theftstopper.com ;  

    funny thing is, it is written by a polygraph examiner!   can you get anymore self serving?

ODIN wrote on Dec 11^th, 2005 at 1:06am:


Odin, 
These are some of the claims you've made without evidence to back them up:

1) Claims that states without the polygraph for LE jobs tend to have higher corruption in LE
2) Claims that those who use countermeasures have something to hide
3) Claims that you can detect countermeasures.

Please back up these statements, or retract them.

http://www.michbar.org/journal/article.cfm?articleID=501&volumeID=37

some bed time reading boys. talk you every onr soon.

Odin wrote "If I don't I will give up my license and by then I will be bigger than Backster or Reid. That is my Goal. "

   why would you give up your license?  have we in anyway swayed your belief in the inaccuracy of the polygraph?  if your goal is to become bigger than Backster or Reid, that may be a lofty goal in the Polygraph examiner's world.

Skeptic wrote on Dec 10^th, 2005 at 6:53am:


Skeptic,

You make an excellent point here. It's also important to note that the polygraph is dangerous in allowing child molesters to walk away from their crimes in the very beginning by throwing investigators off their trails. I personally know of one such child molester who was guilty as hell and passed his polygraph. The mother, who was forced to take a poly, initially had problems with hers, but the examiner gave her the benefit of the doubt, talked with her and re-started the test and she passed. This child molester never paid for his crimes. Very sad.

ODIN,

Your position is clearly noted.  You would have polygraphy instituted into the mainstream with reckless regard to consequences resulting from incorrect examiner opinion.  Perhaps we should also institute a  state of socialism.  With you I respectfully disagree.  You have posted here with nothing but ill-will and ulterior motive.  I have noted your continual misspelling of George as Gorge, which is at minimum insulting and most likely derogatory in nature (one or two mistakes are understandable, every post with mention of George's name is unacceptable).  I wish you well in your endeavor to continue to demoralize and demolish dreams.  It is examiner's like you that have become destroyers of career paths that are well deserved.  Keep your faith in polygraphy and do not weep when that faith is turned to vapor.  I have invited you more than once to contribute constructively, however you continue to post with malice.  Good day sir, if you no longer participate it will be appreciated.

Quote:


An unfortunate thing that occurs (This is from what I've been told from som LE folks) is that when some pedifiles, particularly child molestors, take the poly, the fact that they are careless enough to commit the crimes they commit may also contribute to the fact that their vital signs will not react enough to the poly to get a "DI."  For example, I talked to an officer who works with the Georgia police department where John Couey, the man charged with molesting and Killing a 9 Year-Old girl in Florida earlier this year, was arrested and he said that Couey acted as if it was no big deal as he was being arrested.
    Thats the problem with false negatives on ploygraphs is that you may get someone who's mind is truely warped and they may "beat" the machine while lying through their teeth while employing no countermeasures whatsoever.  I am aware that this convicted sex offender did undergo a ploygraph, but from the news reports I've heard, after the poly, they asked him something to the effect of did he commit the crime and he stated something to the effect of "I thing you know the answer."  I believe this man deserved to be executed in a slow and painful manner if he did commit this crime, but the issue at hand here is that the ploygraph simply is not sufficient.  

Odin said "Point is, It's the clean cut ones I am more suspecting of. "

Bias = prejudice   

  is this really what an examiner should bring to his table?   seems like anyone sitting at your table might have already lost. 

  Odin, seems like everytime you answer, you paint yourself into a little corner, and when you are in the corner, you scream and scream.   
  Answer with facts, not emotion.  Facts have integrity.

polyfool wrote on Dec 10^th, 2005 at 6:33am:


My problem with the polygraph and bona-fide, convicted child molesters is that it gives them a loophole.  It gives them a way out, countermeasures or no countermeasures.  The polygraph simply doesn't work, and it's foolish to rely upon it to tell you whether the molester is re-offending.

Why would anyone want to give molesters an easy way to "demonstrate" their innocence, when the process doesn't work?

ODIN wrote on Dec 10^th, 2005 at 5:20am:



ODIN,

So, it's the clean-cut ones you're more suspecting of? Maybe that was my problem--perhaps, I was too clean-cut. I wish someone would have told me looking a little shady would have helped with the examiner. Darn. 

So, you admit that you bring bias to the table as an examiner by being more suspecting of the clean-cut examinees. Great--you helped prove my point that examiner bias exists. Bias comes in many forms--perhaps, you're biased against the clean-cut ones because they're better looking than you and you're just jealous? Like I said, bias comes in all shapes and sizes--it's not just about stereotypes.   

Though, I don't deal with child molesters everyday, it's fair to say I've had some dealings with them. I know what it's like to have your skin crawl while listening to the sick words uttered by a man admitting to raping his eight year old daughter. The point of my post was not to educate you on what child molesters look like--like I said, "hard to tell with those types, " though from your  posts, looks like you could use some additional education. No offense.   

Face it--the polygraph didn't do what it was supposed to do--weed out a criminal from the law enforcement selection process. 

Nice swipe at the press. I'm sure the media is your best friend, when it helps you spread false information regarding the polygraph's validity.

ODIN, 
Please say this isn't the end of our beautiful friendship.