George wrote:

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.

George, as you should know, the FBI screening exam contains at least SIX relevant issues.  When an examinee fails the exam, it is almost ALWAYS on one or perhaps two relevant questions.  One is the norm, with two being the exception.  Three might occur (and this is my educated and experienced guess) less than once in 1000 exams.  But SIX? I've never even heard of it happening except in your case. It just doesn't happen to an examinee who is honest and not messing around during the exam. The reason it doesn't happen is that when an examinee has an issue or two of great concern to him/her, that is where his/her focus is concentrated on the exam. This focus dampens any minor concern that the examinee might have on other relevant issues.

Now, as I said before, I believe you engaged in spontaneous countermeasures, which you know as well as I do--and research supports this--can cause an examinee to appear more deceptive.  Why do I state it as fact rather than conjecture? Because it's the only reasonable explanation, since the only other possibilities are, first, that you actually lied on ALL of the relevant questions, which I don't believe despite not knowing you personally.  I don't think that any well-qualified, intelligent person, which I assume you to be, has that many skeletons in his closet.

The second possibility for you having failed every relevant question is that for whatever reason--faulty pre-test research on your part or simply assumptions that you were bright enough to figure out--you made those questions more relevant for yourself than they should have been, and you tried to calm yourself whenever a relevant question came up, which backfired on you because you made the relevant questions even stronger.  But of course, this possibility can also be viewed as spontaneous countermeasures, just not to the control questions as would normally be the case in someone attempting countermeasures.

You can sit there and claim that it was the polygraph that was at fault, and you can blame the examiner.  However, no one fails every relevant question on a screening exam without bearing most of the blame himself.

Now, Sergeant, for your silly reasoning.  You state:

For that to make any sense whatsoever you would have be to able to prove that had the examinee not taken George's advice they would have passed the polygraph.

This makes more sense than your, George's and other "anti-" forum regulars' assumption that an innocent person needs to attempt countermeasures to ensure that he/she passes the polygraph exam. Assuming that an innocent examinee (innocent with regard to the relevant issues) is somehow able to effectively control his/her physiology and avoid detection, how can you prove that he/she wouldn't have passed the exam anyhow?  You can't, plain and simple. And as I keep reminding you, the NAS, which you use to support yourself since you have no experience or training of your own, states that countermeasures can cause an examinee to appear more, not less, deceptive.

The innocent examinee increases his or her chances of passing the polygraph by simply following the examiner's instructions and avoiding countermeasure attempts which have no evidence of being effective at all with an innocent examinee.

Which leads us to the question I keep asking, and to which George gave his unsupportable conjecture rather than a cogent answer:

Where are all the GUILTY examinees (guilty with regard to the relevant issues) who used the countermeasures cited in George's little book, The Lie Behind the Lie Detector, to pass the exam while lying to the relevant issues?  That's right, we never hear from them, do we?  Not even on an anonymous forum.  And George's claim that behind the scenes there are people who have provided "private feedback" that supports TLBTLD is a cop-out.

As an experienced polygraph examiner, I repeat to the reader who might come to this website: The information you obtain from these people, all of whom have absolutely no experience with the polygraph other than having failed one or more polygraphs, is faulty, and you use it at your own peril.  They tell you there's no poisonous snake in the box and to shove your hand in there, yet they won't even put their own hand in the box.  They don't practice what they preach, and they can't support their claims.