An article entitled "Polygraph Testing A Utilitarian Tool" authored by FBI Special Agent polygrapher William Warner and published in the April 2005 edition of the FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin (http://www.fbi.gov/publications/leb/2005/apr2005/april2005leb.htm#page10) has been brought to my attention.  The author appears to realize that the debate regarding validity and reliability of polygraph testing (presumably CQT testing in its various applications) is a losing battle if not a closed subject for the majority of scientists in the relevant community(ies) who have examined it.  The thrust of Mr. Warner's article appears to be that polygraphy should not be dismissed simply because it is invalid and unreliable, but through the various examples he offers, he believes it (polygraphy) merits consideration because of its utility.  Although I would suggest through an equally impressive listing of polygraph mistakes, that Mr. Warner consider the negative utility or lack of utility of the polygraph, I believe the most salient point that Mr. Warner fails to consider in his article is the relationship between validity and utility.  The admissions and confessions that Mr. Warner considers to be evidence of utility (He further fails to consider or at least discuss that same might be obtained in the absence of polygraphy) are (if related to polygraphy at all) dependent on an examinee believing that polygraphy has some validity as a diagnostic test, i.e., that it works.  Now that the cat is out of the bag so to speak and it is largely clear to the scientific community that no such validity exists, with the advent of various forms of widespread and rapid communication fostered by various vehicles such as this site (Mr. Warner should be congratulated on citing it in his bibliography), the general public is not far behind.  The ignorance that has been the foundation and the bulwark of any polygraph utility is crumbling and eventually will collapse altogether.  If Mr. Warner is not now aware of the relationship between validity and utility, he most certainly will be then.  Perhaps Mr. Warner might care to join us and continue a discussion of his article and the topics of polygraph validity and utility.