Quote:


What are the evaluatable respiratory responses one can see on a polygraph chart of a person who is controlling their breathing?

Quote:


What does that mean? The polygrapher noted above didn't 'work with' Canuck, he simply wasn't aware that Canuck was controlling his breathing from start to finish. He wasn't aware that the tables were turned on the 'stim test', and that Canuck augmented his response when the supposed number card came up. Care to comment?


Quote:


1. We're still waiting for an example of someone whom you disqualified (absent an admission) for using the kinds of countermeasures described in George and Gino's free book.

2. Polygraph 'lab'? Are you in a white smock surrounded by beakers of fomenting chemicals? Your bald-faced attempts at legitimizing such places as the Philly Hotbox (RIP) are transparent.

Quote:


1.  If you were here, I would SHOW you criteria in incidents of "controlled breathing".  Every examiner knows that you can still see scoring criteria in controlled breathing in most cases...Or was that a little secret I was not supposed to let out?  Gee, I thought you guys knew it all? 



2.  Who cares whether or not he "did" anything during the stim test?  What effect did that have on the outcome of the test?  Remember, HE TOLD THE TRUTH to his examiner.



To quote an earlier post by PDD-Fed, please tell me where this subject perpetrated point countermeasures on an R&I test, that enabled him to pass the test.  The most important thing to rmember here is that he told you guys that he TOLD THE TRUTH.  Has it occurred to you at all THAT is why he passed

3.  By the way, not to beat a dead horse, but after you folks were unable to come up with any plausable way to beat an R&I test, you simply changed tactics and started attacking the use of the format itself.

4.  Bottom line, this person passed because he TOLD THE TRUTH.  You will never admit that but I have learned to accept your close mindedness...

Polycop...

Quote:


WOW.  Talk about a lame response.  Wanna try again, Polycop?

You know, I've read many of the exchanges on this message board with great interest.  Not a few include claims by polygraphers that they can spot countermeasures.  Many before you, Polycop, have claimed to have outed all sorts of CM users (or at least claimed the ability to see right through them).  Yet, strangely, the evidence never quite makes it into the board -- though one exceptionally honest polygrapher did post scanned charts with characteristics he hypothesized, without evidence, were displaying indications of CM's.

I've spent enough time online (newsgroups, etc.) to know bad bluffs when I see them.  And ironically (or perhaps not) almost all of the bald falsehoods told on this board have been posted by claimed polygraphers, who have done far more to convince me of George et. al's truthfulness, integrity and knowledge than anything else.

It's time to put up or shut up, Polycop.

Quote:


I would imagine the effect on the test was to prevent a false positive indication of deception.

Skeptic

Quote:


That's where the Tarot cards come in to the picture, Beech Trees...

Seriously, don't you think it's kind of odd that Mr. Polycop would be that familiar with TLBTLD, even to the point that he "jokes" with people he catches using countermeasures about their not having to pay for it, when not one post earlier he indicated he didn't know the book was available for free?

Deception Indicated, if you asked me  

Skeptic

You know what???  I'm not sure what got me through the poly whether my efforts or the truth.  It doesn't really matter.
What does matter is that by using the combination of both I will be able to pursue a career that i think I'm suited for and I'll excell at.  While I appreciate the congrats Polycop, I think the R/I test is severely flawed.  I know that my "off the charts" response to the stim question helped.  It had to.  It was the only known lie on the test in which to compare my answers (although I know in theory that isn't how the test works).  The fact that all of my relevant questions had the same reaction added to that.

I'd like to emphasize again for the cheap seats that I manipulated my chart for the sole purpose of ensuring a positive outcome even though I was truthfull.  I used anal pucker and, cause my eyes where closed, pictured myself about to jump out of an airplane.

And one more thing George...... you should start a seperate forum just for proponents and opponents to argue over the validity of polygraphy instead of each thread being turned into a virtual boxing ring.

Quote:


Yes, of course you were.

Quote:


It's not the question that has no merit, Polycop, it's the assertion. In essence, you are in agreement then that past American Polygraph Association President Frank Horvath was making a meritless assertion when he told reporter Joe Bauman, 

The tests record physiological responses to questions. The queries usually cover both a crime under investigation and matters that are irrelevant or simply technical such as: Is today Friday? Responses to these comparison questions are checked against responses to relevant questions.

Thank you for confirming what we knew all along.

What is the name of the drug dealer from whom you coerced a confession? I'd like to read the police report and any associated press articles on his arrest and arraignment, which is all of course a matter of public record.

Dave

Quote:


What's the problem? You would prefer to remain anonymous because you are frightened of the repercussions if your posts were attributed to you? Or, there never was a drug dealer from whom you coerced a confession?

Quote:


First, it's the Constitution, not the constitution. As to who has the greatest 'feel' for the Constitution, I wouldn't know. I do know that in a Constitutionally limited form of government your occupation would be toast. You most assuredly do NOT wish to engage me on a debate concerning the US Constitution, polycop.

Are you trying to imply that this alleged drug dealer was fully intending to confess to his crimes the moment he walked through the door? Why the need to polygraph him then? Why did he feel the need to attempt countermeasures? Why the need to boast about an alleged confession and then scurry back to anonymity when called upon to prove your clearly worthless assertion that he 'attempted one or two particularly ridiculous "countermeasures"'?

Yes, I'm fully aware that trickery and deceit (your forté) are sanctioned by the courts as valid and legal techniques for coercing confessions. I have no problem with that.

co·erce
tr.v. co·erced, co·erc·ing, co·erc·es 
To force to act or think in a certain way by use of pressure, threats, or intimidation; compel. 
To dominate, restrain, or control forcibly: coerced the strikers into compliance.
To bring about by force or threat: efforts to coerce agreement.

I see no problem with my use of the word 'coerce' in this post. Or are you trying to tell us that the police do not use threats and intimidation when interrogating criminal suspects?

Quote:


Oh, I think you know perfectly well why he said it polycop.