And here i say the same thing


   I'm against polygraph ; how many lives have been ruined by polygraph??  , many people become nerveous even if they say the truth.


And polygraph failed , MILITAR EXPERTS , SPIES , DETECTIVES...are trained to beat detector lie , Do you remember the case of FBI agent who beat detector lie during years???  Polygraph  could not demonstrate nothing against him.

accustomed people   to  use many tiomes thepolygraph can beat it in the short run , ok , one time two times you can lose against polygraph  but in the short run MANY PEOPLE CAN BEAT IT, No matter is there and profesional examinator.



But my question... how militar , spies are trained to beat polygraph?


I'm sure  that autosugestion , e.g.  if you have stolen in stores , u should think during one week before the polygraph test "i dont have stolen in stores"... i don't know if is effective . but professional know its because they change the question , so u should be prepared. 

One thing its clear , people with cool head , can beat polygraph without a doubt .


Those pro-polygraph are capitalist people who only think in sell polygraph , and they are lying because say that polygraph its near to 100% effective , THIS IS REALLY A BIG LIE.
 
At the most 70% , no more .

cheers

Alterego, the polyboys will never come to the plate.  Never.  Come back in three years, five, ten.  They can't do what Dr. Richardson challenges them to do, and they damn sure won't admit that they can be had by one of their own who came clean on what the ploy, er, poly actually consists of.  You might as well expect Castro or Kim to open up their political prisons for you.

If I had a new science to put out there, and someone challenged me to prove that x relevant factor of it were scientifically viable, I would jump at the chance... IF I knew I could prove it.  If not, well... being an honest man, I would withdraw the product or concept from the marketplace and either improve it or discard it.

Not so the polyboys.  They know that their machine is guesswork, pure guesswork, and that they are reading BFB that has -already- been proven to be alterable, controllable in some cases and not in others, and not standardizable as to how it should read.  Basically, BFB can read back abc for one person lying, and abc for the next person telling the truth on the same question- with or without the same response.  Never mind countermeasures, which throws in a new variable.

The polygraphers lost bigtime with EPPA.  They can't lose again, and they will do anything to keep their business...

So Dr. Richardson, good man that he is, may never see his righteous challenge taken up...

Sunday, 28 January 2007 marks the fifth anniversary of Dr. Drew Richardson's challenge to the polygraph community to prove its claimed ability to detect polygraph countermeasures, and still not a single taker! Nor has a single journal article or book chapter been published in the polygraph literature that explains how a polygrapher may reliably detect polygraph countermeasures!

LieBabyCryBaby,

Countermeasures are of little interest to me personally.  I knew about the time I graduated from DoDPI polygraph examiner training some fifteen years ago that lie detection had little to no diagnostic validity IN THE ABSENCE OF EXAMINEE COUNTERMEASURE APPLICATION.  My interest in this challenge is simply to demonstrate to those of you who do believe that there is some diagnostic value in what you do for a living that you can be beat any day of the week by any number of people with minimal training.  Again, what personally interests and saddens me is that this nonsense is used even if we existed (which we don't) in an environment in which there was an absence of viable and readily applied countermeasures.

You would think that Dr R. would know that "programming" individuals in a "mock" crime is 5 times the folly as the proponents of this challenge deem polygraph to be. It seems to me that a challenge that is deemed as "unworthy" of the poly field would encourage the challenger to modify the challenge. Programmed crime scenarios? Please. Not that you care, but any examiner (former) who would make such a challenge has no credibility in any discipline (IMO) .
If you want to test an airplane, ya gotta take it up in the air (field studies), not a wind tunnel (mock/programmed scenarios).
I doubt that famous examiners are "scared" of your challenge---I'm sure that they view the merit of your challenge as silly. Amongst examiners, I don't hear much about your challenge other than one talented examiner who you once worked with called you a (professionally speaking) light-weight douche bag. I thought that that was cruel and crude.  

ad hominem(ly) yours, palerider

To state that polygraph examiners secretly have insecurities as to our collective (?) ability to detect countermeasures is like me stating here that you secretly feel like less of a whole man as a result of your desperatley attached failing hairline. It is pure speculation. The basis for his experiment is as developmentally flawed as what you folks claim polygraph practice is. Pursuing deception is like monitoring wild animals, and monitoring an animal who is bought at a pet store and tied to a tree isn't wild now, is it? Dr R has a very silly challenge. He is rather like the single man at the bar who is shouting that women have no sexuality since they ignore his advances. It's really quite embarrassing George.

Of course there is a differance between laboratory and field research!!!!!! Are you mad?????? 


Success! I no longer want to argue with you. Your begging the question is getting exhausting and your general argument is so repetitive---I've run out of motivation. I suppose that if the MMPI(?) had shown you to be obsessive compulsive with axisII elevation (or whatever) --thus losing out on a job-----than perhaps you would have a website devoted to the inherant imperfection and gross acceptance of that particular psychometric tool. And one of your points would be that you challenge the psychometric-administering community to detect countermeasures----which of course would be a meaningless challenge. If anything, the activism (against the test/nemisis) would appear to be an expansive version of the patriarch- destruction in psychanalysis. Polygraph was the less than perfect Daddy, who was bigger and better than yourself, but who eventually let you down. AIDS in Africa, Global Warming, Cancer Research-------but no, you chose anti-polygraph. I met a man who picketed a vending machine for shortchanging him. He could have been enjoying the comfort of hearth and family, but something in him cracked. Some people can't take a little incidental screwing.
Although in the big picture , there are no coincidences (IMO).