wrote on Jun 26^th, 2008 at 12:01am:

My 'non-response ' isn't obvious? Both responses to my comment seem to support my thoughts. How many scientists have made claims to something they never experienced and later their 'theory' was 'proven' incorrect? I think one fact about the polygraph test is that it is a machine, the machine is not doing the thinking, it is mearly reporting on what it is being fed. The element that makes the test accurate is the person creating the testing questions and how skillfully they ask the same questions in different contexts. Doing this with intelligence and skill is how George Slattery's important work he did came to be amicable as evidence in a court of law on so many national cases* GBS has been quoted many times in his life, unless you had a face to face conversation with GBS it makes you a bit small to judge him* You are supported by others that have limited knowledge of the wide range of actual facts on this matter and I dont expect to suddenly enlighten any of you* My best to all of you*  ;D

You wrote that the people who say the polygraph is not reliable are the ones who have been hooked up to it and had their lies revealed.  Cullen and I offered examples of people who say the polygraph is not reliable and who have not been "hooked up" and have not "had their lies revealed".  These examples refuted your statement, yet your follow up post indicated we had proved your point for you.  

Your response did not make sense.