LieBabyCryBaby wrote on May 12^th, 2009 at 2:55am:

...I don't need to go through a point-by-point critique of TLBTLD....

To date, you haven't made any specific specific criticism of The Lie Behind the Lie Detector, preferring to speak in generalities instead. I stand by what we've written.


Quote:

However, George takes a good little information booklet and then dives off a cliff with it.  Because of his personal vendetta against the polygraph, due to his having failed every relevant question on an FBI exam, he takes that dive by claiming that he knows how to "beat" the polygraph, and then he hits rock bottom when he counsels others how to do so, despite his own lack of experience, training or qualifications.

What motivates me is not a "personal vendetta against the polygraph" but justified concern over the serious harm that misplaced official reliance on the pseudoscience of polygraphy is causing to national security, public safety, and individuals.


Quote:

... Which brings us back to a question I've asked multiple times on this forum: Where are all the people who read TLBTLD, lie to the relevant questions, and pass the polygraph by using the countermeasures advocated by George, Gino, and all of you sycophants who follow them around?  We never hear from those people, do we?  You can say, "Well, they don't post that information here because they might get caught."  That's a lame excuse, especially since this is a very anonymous forum--I'm proof of that anonymity myself.

The vast majority (>99%) of those who download The Lie Behind the Lie Detector never post to this forum, nor do they contact AntiPolygraph.org by other means. But the feedback that we have received privately over the more than eight years that AntiPolygraph.org has been on-line does not support the view that polygraphers can reliably detect countermeasures, or that countermeasures are ineffective.


Quote:

George failed every relevant question on his FBI exam because he attempted spontaneous countermeasures and it backfired on him.

Yesterday you stated this as conjecture. Today you state it as if it were a fact. You're wrong. I did not use countermeasures of any kind on my FBI pre-employment polygraph examination. I followed the polygrapher's instructions and answered all questions truthfully.


Quote:

In all my experience, I can think of only one other reason why someone with no experience would fail EVERY relevant question, since that is unheard of--and that is that the person actually lied to every relevant question.  I don't believe that George was lying to every relevant question--no one is THAT involved in nefarious behavior.  Studies show that spontaneous countermeasures can increase a person's appearance of deceptiveness.  In short, George screwed himself, and now he is unwittinly screwing others, and I've seen it firsthand in the polygraph room.

However much you may wish to lay the blame for my having failed the polygraph at my feet, the fact of the matter is that I answered all questions truthfully and did not engage in countermeasures of any kind.


Quote:

Since there are no studies and no evidence that countermeasures work, and no witnesses to attest that they do, isn't it completely ignorant for you and others like you to claim, as if you are experts in the matter, that they work?

There are indeed peer-reviewed studies that indicate that countermeasures work. They are referenced in Chapter 4 of The Lie Behind the Lie Detector. And as we point out in Chapter 1, in a peer-reviewed survey of Society for Psychophysiological Research member opinion, 99% of respondents agreed with the statement, "The CQT can be beaten by augmenting one's response to the control questions."