wrote on Apr 28^th, 2003 at 6:15pm:

:-[ Well, Cats & Kittens, I really hate to say "I told you so", but I think we all knew this day would come....

Not really, Vance. I didn't think that DOE would propose that its polygraph program be completely scrapped, but I didn't expect that it would completely disregard the findings of the NAS report, either. In a recent interview with a Los Alamos newspaper, I said that DOE had thumbed its nose at Congress; a better metaphor would have been to say that DOE has held up a middle finger to Congress, the National Academy of Sciences, and the loyal scientists and engineers who are subjected to the quackery of polygraph screening.


Quote:

Like many applied topics in Psychology, the issue of polygraphy has much more to do with social and political realities than scientific support.

DOE's decision has more to do with bureaucratic incompetence and corruption. Do you think that the DOE's response is really in the best interest of U.S. national security?


Quote:

Good investigators do not use the squigglies produced by a polygraph to infer deception; they use them as a way of applying psychological pressure that can sometimes result in useful information.  That is why, for example, Canadian courts do not accept polygraph test results as forensic evidence, yet nearly every police department has a polygraph and a videocamera....

You've made a complete non sequitur here, Vance. That good investigators "do not use the squigglies produced by a polygraph to infer deception" is not the reason why "Canadian courts do not accept polygraph test results as forensic evidence." Canadian courts, like virtually all courts of law, reject polygraph test results because they are unreliable.

I agree with you that good investigators don't use polygraph results to infer deception, but U.S. counterintelligence officials clearly do.


Quote:

So, why would you expect the scientific status of polygraphy to have any bearing whatsoever on the political status of polygraphy, particularly in the wake of 09/11?

Because without validity, polygraphy offers only make believe security. As Professor Stephen Fienberg, who headed the NAS polygraph review panel put it, "National security is too important to be left to such a blunt instrument."


Quote:

Still, you did your best and that's all any of us can do.   Keep on truckin'!

You can count on that.