I have had my lie detector experience and at first I was like many who post on this and many other web pages, an antipolygraph advocate.  My biggest shame in life is what I had become when I could not face up to the truth of my actions.  In retrospect I could not have done so without taking the lie detector test.

I committed a minor crime and tried to pin it on someone else.  As the investigation proceeded I found myself backed into taking a lie detector test.  I attempted the countermeasures and failed and eventually told the truth.  It hurt, but the most painful thing to me was what I had become.  I got myself right and encourage anyone who reads this to do the same.  Instead of attacking the right or wrong of lie detectors, shouldn't the focus be on being more honest and responsible people?

formerofficer - you need some serious help sweetie.  You are sort of like Don Quioti (please forgive the spelling if it is incorrect), in that you are attacking lie detectors like windmills.  Before you dole out advice get yourself right, all the way.

Good on you Zena

You seem to have grasped the ultimate concept that the rest of the personally pained liars cannot, be honest and accept responsibility for yourself.  Many complain as formerofficer do, saying he is good now (despite continuing to lie about his past to his employers).  I say the proof is in the pudding.  Your behavior defines who you are right now.  Those who choose to lie are liars.

BW

For the record, Zena and Boy_Wonder, who posted their messages 15 minutes apart, also posted from the same IP address, strongly suggesting a common authorship for these two posts. Caveat lector.

Boy_Wonder wrote on May 18^th, 2002 at 12:18am:

Good on you Zena You seem to have grasped the ultimate concept that the rest of the personally pained liars cannot, be honest and accept responsibility for yourself.  Many complain as formerofficer do, saying he is good now (despite continuing to lie about his past to his employers).  I say the proof is in the pudding.  Your behavior defines who you are right now.  Those who choose to lie are liars.

Then, by your own definition, every polygraph interrogator is a liar. How does that feel, making a living by lying to others?

beech trees

::)

DFTT

Busted!!  It is clear you will not be distracted by my shenanigans.  I’ll take my lumps and move on.  Wow!  It has been fun and somewhat educational bantering with all of you.  Clearly I have slung some personal arrows as have all of you.  Obviously this will not make for any type of effective communication.  I will no longer post to this web site so you may freely speak your thoughts without my input and silliness.  I will pay close attention though, you are an interesting bunch.

To those potential examinees considering what is advocated at this web site and others like it, remember the persons here claim to be on your side and that they are battling “The Man”.  The advice doled out here is provided to benefit they’re argument, which is based on they’re emotional point of view.  If you are a truly honest person concerned about the validity and foundation of polygraph, talk with a real expert, whether that expert be an examiner, or a university professor in the field of psychophysiology.  Yes the argument can (and will) be made that they will give you biased information.  The information received at antipolygraph.org is clearly and openly biased.  I would hope you would not put your well being, career, and life in the hands of emotional, non-professionals with a personal agenda.

Be good and stay out of trouble!

BW

Quote:

To those potential examinees considering what is advocated at this web site and others like it, remember the persons here claim to be on your side and that they are battling “The Man”.

Nowhere have we claimed to be battling "the man." The goal of this website is readily transparent to most: the abolition of the fraudulent pseudoscience of polygraphy.


Quote:

The advice doled out here is provided to benefit they’re argument, which is based on they’re emotional point of view.

Wrong again. Our argument is based on the fact that polygraph "tests" have not been shown by peer-reviewed scientific research to operate at better than chance levels under field conditions. If you truly believe the accusations you are leveling, perhaps you could enlighten us to a peer-reviewed study purporting to show the validity of CQT polygraphy under field conditions.


Quote:

If you are a truly honest person concerned about the validity and foundation of polygraph, talk with a real expert, whether that expert be an examiner, or a university professor in the field of psychophysiology.

Using this logic, it appears that you would recommend that those skeptical of astrology visit an astrologer for advice on the validity of that trade. If anyone is biased, it is those who earn a living via the fraud of polygraphy. If there is any information on this website that you feel is incorrect, please bring it to our attention.

As far as university professors go, please note the experienced polygraph researchers who reviewed The Lie Behind the Lie Detector. The list includes: Dr. John J. Furedy of the University of Toronto, Dr. William G. Iacono and David T. Lykken of the University of Minnesota, and retired FBI Supervisory Special Agent Dr. Drew C. Richardson.


Quote:

I would hope you would not put your well being, career, and life in the hands of emotional, non-professionals with a personal agenda.

This is our sincere hope as well. Unfortunately, until reliance on polygraphers is eliminated from all employment processes, emotional non-professionals (often with personal agendas) will continue to ruin the careers and lives of many truthful individuals.