Hey Chicken Shit (aka Anonymous),

Come on "pal", meet the challenge.  What do you do for a living other than posting bullshit on this site?  Why won't you answer?  How can it hurt?   

Also, just what exactly is your experience with polygraph?   

For the record, I have been a polygraph examiner since 1984.  I have administered polygraph examinations in support of just about every type of investigation.  I have held positions at both the field level and at the Quality Control level.  I have been on the receiving end of no less than four polygraph examinations.   

So, what is your polygraph related experience?  What exposure have you had?  How many polygraph examinations have you either administered or recieved?  Lets make it easy, how many have you even observed?   

In most debates one has to establish some level of bonifides to be considered knowledgable on a particular subject.  On the subject of polygraph it's time for you to establish yours, then maybe we can debate.

I'm not asking you to stoop to any level lower than what you have already reached.  Simply lay out a few of your credentials as it pertains to the topic of polygraph.  It's a fair request given the fact you want to engage in a debate on the topic. 

From what I can see here, the only person who has had any real exposure to polygraph is Mr. Richardson, and I would venture to say, most of his was spent in the area of research for the FBI, not on the streets running charts.  As far as I know, George has never placed the pneumo tubes on anyone, at least for the purposes of administering a polygraph examination.  Simply taking one and failing it does not an expert make.   

You're all pretty quick to attack Ed Gelb's supposed credentials (and I am no fan of his), but your so damn reluctant to cite a few of your own. 

Stop with the bullshit and get serious.  If you want to debate then establish your right (other than just having an opinion and an asshole to voice it) to do so.  Lay out your credentials by answering a few simple questions.  Once you do that then maybe we can talk.  Until then, get back to the barn yard and keep pecking!

Torpedo, I'm with ya brother!

Batman

Batman,

You write:

Quote:


But the question is, have you learned anything from this couple of decades of activity.  Your discourse here does not provide a great deal of evidence of such nor any reason to be encouraged with the prospect of future discourse...

You further write:

Quote:


Perhaps you are better off not knowing...If it turned out that I had no "bonifides," how would your ego handle this finding in view of the continual drubbing you take in ongoing debates? 

Quote:


You really are clueless, aren't you.  I suppose that's one of the attributes of being anonymous. Coward. "Batman" has the decency to register. You are just noise.

-Marty

Quote:


Oh, the irony.

Sure looks like the banner has gotten some attention.  If any of our new arrivals are polygraphers, would you care to prove you can detect countermeasures, as so many of you have claimed?

Skeptic

Quote:


Registering makes it possible to relate your posts to prior posts. One then can lbetter judge your (and others) posts in a specific context and be reasonably certain their alias isn't being spoofed. As for the personal attacks, I was reacting to your similarly personal attacks on George et al.  I don't generally respond that way to personal attacks directed at me. They bother me less than those directed at others I have come to respect. While I think the "yellow" taunt of the challenge is somewhat gratuitous, the response of the polygraph community on the whole has been rather poor.

After reading Drew's challenge details, his offer is actually reasonably well thought out and provides some measure of scientific validity.  Too bad no one has seen fit to take him up.

-Marty

Oh, Mark, Mark, Mark....you haven't bneen reading the same posts have you.  It seems to me that you of "that" ilk have been slandering "us" with a variety of monikers that sound and look an awful lot like your list.  I am sorry, but George gets targeted because he is the pseudo-leader of this crew.  When you are at the top, you take the good with the bad.  You say that at least one thing....you are right...I am glad that you feel that way...and you certainly have a right to your personal opinion.  My opnion?   I disagree that you are right...and vehemently.   The one thing I can say is thank God none of you have security clearances!

Torpedo wrote on Jan 31^st, 2003 at 12:28am:


Torpedo,

I still hold a Secret Clearance, what do you have to say about that?

The FBI has labeled me deceptive regarding issues of national security, however, I still have my clearance.  Honestly, how do you explain that?

If the FBI thinks I am a spy, surely they would IMMEDIATELY inform the DoD that I am a security risk.  Why haven't they?   

I'll tell you why -- The FBI knows that the pre-employment screening ploygraph is a joke, and that no one else in the government would take them seriously if they ever tried to investigate or prosecute the heinous accusations produced by polygraphers.

As a matter of fact, if I chose to go back to Active Duty, I am positive (based on my specialty) that I would immediately have my Top Secret reinstated.  How could that happen, Torpedo?  The polygraph is certain I'm a spy!!!!

Maybe you ought to think before you type.  If you are going to blast someone, you ought to hit them personally, rather than the cowardly blanket statement you chose.  Your intention was to discredit Mark's trustworthiness (without any proof that he is not worthy to hold a security clearance).  But in turn you have blasted many others on this site, including myself, again with no proof.

I ask you as a former Security Manager, former TS/SCI holder, and current Secret Clearance holder, why should YOU have a clearance?
Polygraphers make life-changing decisions with little to no proof, yet credit their decisions to the mighty polygraph strip, which only they can read.  Self-decieving liars, in my book, are not trustworthy, and should not hold a security clearance.

Next time, think before you type.

Chris