On 16 October 2003, I sent the following  e-mail to polygrapher Ted Todd at ted.todd@sbcglobal.net:


Dear Mr. Todd:

In a current eBay offering titled "1/2 hour Phone Consult w/ A Polygraph Expert" (Item number 2957256707), you claim that a good polygraph examiner will catch attempts to beat the polygraph "every time":

Quote:


However, there are no book chapters or articles in the polygraph literature explaining how a polygraph operator can reliably detect the kinds of countermeasures described in AntiPolygraph.org's free e-book, The Lie Behind the Lie Detector, and no polygrapher has ever demonstrated any ability to detect such countermeasures. Indeed, the available peer-reviewed research suggests that even experienced polygraphers cannot detect such countermeasures. And in its recent report, The Polygraph and Lie Detection, the National Academy of Sciences concluded (at p. 214) that "the evidence does not provide confidence that polygraph accuracy is robust against potential countermeasures."

This being the case, I challenge you to support your claim that a good polygraphist will catch someone trying to beat the polygraph "every time." Why should anyone believe you instead of the National Academy of Sciences?

If you truly believe that "a good polygraphist" will catch countermeasures "every time," then why not accept Dr. Drew C. Richardson's polygraph countermeasure challenge? Before turning down this challenge with the excuse that you cannot reveal your methodology, note that this challenge does not require that you disclose how you detect countermeasures, merely that you demonstrate your ability to detect them. This challenge has thus far gone 625 days without takers. Are you willing to be the first?

Sincerely,

George W. Maschke
AntiPolygraph.org

PS: This public challenge in response to your publicly made claim will be posted on the AntiPolygraph.org message board. You are welcome to reply there.

Harris, it is true that not a single one of the polygraph operators whom I have publicly challenged to support the dubious claims they've publicly made has had the integrity to support his/her statements. But let's give Mr. Todd a chance.

I enjoyed perusing  Polygrapher Ted Todd's other auctions, for example the selling of his Southwest Airlines Rapid Reward miles, in which he apparently is attempting to knowingly circumvent Southwest Airlines' Rapid Rewards Membership Rules, specifically:

Rapid Rewards Awards are transferable; however, the Awards have no cash value and are void if sold, purchased, brokered, or bartered. Any violation of Rapid Rewards rules and regulations, including those related to Award use, will result in cancellation of your account and Awards.

Another shining example of ethics in the Polygraph community.

Dave

Quote:

Good thing my name is not George (no offense George!)



Quote:

Bites the dust, you come across as a complete and utter fool. First off, get your facts straight. George, as well as the majority of people who post on this site, did not lose his job to a polygraph exam.  He was never given the opportunity to work for the agencies that deemed him a liar.  Secondly, if you are stupid enough, not to mention naive enough to think that polygraphers are keeping the undesirables out of our law enforcement agencies, I worry about you.  Look at the situation in Dallas, Texas right now as I speak.  Their department is plagued with more internal problems than they know what to do with.  It seems that their polygraph policy has greatly let them down.  If their department would actually do proper background checks instead of relying on the lunacy of a polygraph exam to determine if a candidate is suitable for hire, they probably would not have anywhere near as many internal police problems as they do.  I live in the greater Miami Dade area, and its no secret how many problems Miami has had with dirty cops.  What does it say when a recognized scholar in the field of polygraphy says himself that polygraphs are trash. I tip my hat to Doug Williams.

"Nobody who has invested much time down a blind alley likes the messenger who shines a light at the brick wall up ahead." --The new Antipolygraph.org maxim

bitesthedust wrote on Oct 21^st, 2003 at 7:03pm:

bitesthedust,

You write, among other things, "[w]hen you make personal attacks against specific examiners for a job well done, you elevate them in the polygraph community..."

The public challenge to Ted Todd that is the subject of this post is not a personal attack, nor is it made in response to "a job well done." I have publicly challenged Mr. Todd to support his publicly made claim that a good polygraphist will catch someone trying to beat the polygraph "every time." (A reasonable person might infer from Mr. Todd's silence that perhaps he did not truly believe what he wrote.)

As for the rest of your post, if you believe that anything I have written on the topic of polygraphy is false or otherwise misleading, please feel free to post a correction.