AntiPolygraph.org Message Board - James Randi on Polygraphy

(UTC)

Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register

AntiPolygraph.org

You can enhance your privacy when browsing and posting to this forum by using the free and open source Tor Browser and registering with a free, anonymous ProtonMail e-mail account. Registered users can exchange private messages with other registered users and receive notifications.

In addition, check out our SimpleX Chat-based chat room, which supports anonymous posting.

AntiPolygraph.org Message Board › Polygraph and CVSA Forums › Polygraph Policy › James Randi on Polygraphy

(Moderator: Administrator)

‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›

Page Index Toggle

Pages: 1

Normal Topic

James Randi on Polygraphy (Read 8989 times)

George W. Maschke Global Moderator Online Make-believe science yields make-believe security. Posts: 6278 Joined: Sep 29^th, 2000	James Randi on Polygraphy Oct 21^st, 2002 at 9:11am	Print Post
	James Randi comments on polygraphy in his weekly commentary dated 18 October 2002 (scroll to the end): http://www.randi.org/jr/101802.html

	George W. Maschke I am generally available in the chat room from 3 AM to 3 PM Eastern time. Signal Private Messenger: ap_org.01 SimpleX: click to contact me securely and anonymously E-mail: antipolygraph.org@protonmail.com Threema: A4PYDD5S Personal Statement: "Too Hot of a Potato"
	WWW IP Logged

Skeptic God Member Offline Posts: 549 Joined: Jun 24^th, 2002	Re: James Randi on Polygraphy Reply #1 - Oct 21^st, 2002 at 10:20am	Print Post
	I'm going to be laughing for quite awhile about that one. "The polygraph is . . . a highly reliable detector of orgasms. But does it detect lies? Only if you're lying about having an orgasm." Now that's funny. Skeptic


	IP Logged

Seeker Very Senior User Offline "There are only two sins: The first is to interfere with the growth of another human being, and the second is to interfere with one's own growth." Anonymous Posts: 128 Location: Roanoke, VA Joined: Oct 19^th, 2002 Gender:	Re: James Randi on Polygraphy Reply #2 - Oct 21^st, 2002 at 12:04pm	Print Post
	I suppose this would be an inappropriate quote to include in my statement for refusal of the polygraph. I wonder if under those circumstances one could claim lack of evidence? That is indeed the funniest thing yet!


	YIM AIM IP Logged

Anonymous Guest	Re: James Randi on Polygraphy Reply #3 - Oct 21^st, 2002 at 2:56pm	Print Post
	Quote: ...The polygraph is . . . a highly reliable detector of orgasms. But does it detect lies? Only if you're lying about having an orgasm... from James Randi comments on polygraphy in his weekly commentary dated 18 October 2002 As Flounder of Animal House fame would say, "This is Greeeeeeaaaaaaaaaat!!!" I can just see it now....."Did she or didn't she??" A detection of deception application for the polygraph that the polygraph circus clowns of entertainment TV, organized polygraphy, and the NAS panel on polygraphy might jointly agree has promise. Keep the faith, you charlatans of the polygraph screening world,...there may be future employment for you yet Even you clowns doing post conviction sex testing may be able to bring your skills to bear as you figure out how to conduct a polygraph exam during sex. I think the APA should jump on this one…


	IP Logged

Skeptic God Member Offline Posts: 549 Joined: Jun 24^th, 2002	Re: James Randi on Polygraphy Reply #4 - Oct 22^nd, 2002 at 1:29am	Print Post
	The problem, of course, is the nature of this lie. To be found truthful, one would want to demonstrate physiological reactions. Thus, countermeasures might be highly effective. That, and there are some things most people (in this case, husbands, boyfriends, etc.) really don't want to know the truth about. If the lie is good enough that one would need a polygraph to tell the difference, then it's probably good enough for most purposes Skeptic


	IP Logged

Fair Chance God Member Offline Posts: 551 Joined: Oct 10^th, 2002	Re: James Randi on Polygraphy Reply #5 - Oct 22^nd, 2002 at 1:34am	Print Post
	This site is starting to remind of a sailing craft stuck in a ocean without wind. You guys are starting to get cabin fever. Would a pro-polygraph person please start a thread to keep these guys occupied.


	IP Logged

Skeptic God Member Offline Posts: 549 Joined: Jun 24^th, 2002	Re: James Randi on Polygraphy Reply #6 - Oct 22^nd, 2002 at 4:03am	Print Post
	Fair Chance wrote on Oct 22^nd, 2002 at 1:34am: This site is starting to remind of a sailing craft stuck in a ocean without wind. You guys are starting to get cabin fever. Would a pro-polygraph person please start a thread to keep these guys occupied. The silence is deafening... Skeptic


	IP Logged

Marty Especially Senior User Offline Posts: 499 Joined: Sep 27^th, 2002	Re: James Randi on Polygraphy Reply #7 - Oct 22^nd, 2002 at 4:18am	Print Post
	Skeptic, Skeptic wrote on Oct 21^st, 2002 at 10:20am: I'm going to be laughing for quite awhile about that one. "The polygraph is . . . a highly reliable detector of orgasms. But does it detect lies? Only if you're lying about having an orgasm." This can not go unexamined. Exactly what studies have show the polygraph a highly reliable detector of orgasms? Sure it may seem that it may be effective, but do we know for certain? Where can I apply for a grant......? -Marty

	Leaf my Philodenrons alone.
	IP Logged

Skeptic God Member Offline Posts: 549 Joined: Jun 24^th, 2002	Re: James Randi on Polygraphy Reply #8 - Oct 22^nd, 2002 at 4:21am	Print Post
	Marty wrote on Oct 22^nd, 2002 at 4:18am: Skeptic, This can not go unexamined. Exactly what studies have show the polygraph a highly reliable detector of orgasms? Sure it may seem that it may be effective, but do we know for certain? Where can I apply for a grant......? -Marty See what DoDPI has in the way of grant money... I'm thinking you should have no trouble finding lots of participants -- "No, really, I didn't have one...you say I'm lying? we should try again, don't you think, doctor?" Skeptic P.S. my apologies for helping to take the discussion to such low levels so quickly...


	IP Logged

Marty Especially Senior User Offline Posts: 499 Joined: Sep 27^th, 2002	Re: James Randi on Polygraphy Reply #9 - Oct 22^nd, 2002 at 6:29am	Print Post
	Skeptic wrote on Oct 22^nd, 2002 at 4:21am: P.S. my apologies for helping to take the discussion to such low levels so quickly... ROFLMAO. Apologies accepted! (Even if apologies are completely unwarranted). Now, back to the serious studies at hand.... -Marty

	Leaf my Philodenrons alone.
	IP Logged

Seeker Very Senior User Offline "There are only two sins: The first is to interfere with the growth of another human being, and the second is to interfere with one's own growth." Anonymous Posts: 128 Location: Roanoke, VA Joined: Oct 19^th, 2002 Gender:	Re: James Randi on Polygraphy Reply #10 - Oct 24^th, 2002 at 10:11am	Print Post
	Marty: I obtained all the necessary documents to apply for a government grant. Do you suppose I can get enough "experts" to particiapte in this study if I get funded? ROTFLMAO I am serious, too. As much money as is thrown away on such foolishness, surely I will get a grant to research the polygraph's validity in detecting orgasims. I am just wondering..who would we consider experts?


	YIM AIM IP Logged

Page Index Toggle

Pages: 1

‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›

« Board Index ‹ Board Top

Top

AntiPolygraph.org Message Board » Powered by YaBB 2.6.12!
YaBB Forum Software © 2000-2026. All Rights Reserved.

Valid XHTML

Valid CSS

Powered by Perl

Source Forge