Quote:


I'm sorry you feel this way.

Perhaps if you'd read more of the material here (such as The Lie Behind the Lie Detector), you'd have a greater understanding not only of the moral/ethical differences between antipolygraph.org and the other sites you mention, but the real problems this site is here to address, as well.

In contrast to your assertion, I believe the flaws of the polygraph are exactly the point. To ignore them is to ignore a process that results both in great personal harm to many people and eggregious harm to national security.

Regards,
Skeptic

Replace it with what, is my question? We don't have the technology to scan minds...yet. I guess the only real answer for the moment is random piss, blood and hair tests. That costs a lot of money though and is invasive to work and your person.

If you were in charge of the hiring process for the fed. gov't, what would you suggest they do to weed out liars? 

Maybe in ten years, they can read minds, and this will all be mute.

Quote:


I'll concede that polygraphs are cheaper than actual scientific determination of wrongdoing.  They are hardly less invasive, however -- quite the opposite, IMHO.

Quote:


I do not believe there is a reliable way to weed out liars at this time (including the polygraph, CVSA, etc.), beyond thorough verification with background checks and drug testing.
 
Skeptic

Fair Chance,

Although I generally agree with much of what you write, I'm afraid I must take exception to the following.

You wrote in part:

Quote:


Actually it (the effect of an examinee’s beliefs regarding polygraph accuracy) really doesn't matter. It is only in the eye of a polygrapher that it does and which necessitates (from his perspective) the initial con we have come to know and love as the stim (now called acquaintance) test.  Polygraphy has no accuracy regardless of examinees beliefs about such.  Many of the innocent examinees that give testimony of false positive results on this site initially believed  ( prior to their personal encounter and ensuing debacle involving such) in the accuracy of polygraphy.  Even for the guilty examinee, his beliefs regarding polygraph accuracy have no bearing on the accuracy of the exam  (again, most formats are not accurate and have no validity), but when confronted with a deception indicated (DI) result, a guilty subject who believes in the accuracy of polygraph may be more inclined to offer a confession/admission than one who does not.   

As the NAS panel indicated, with increased public awareness, this latter group (guilty examinees who "believe" and confess) is/will become a rarer commodity while any continued/increased use of polygraph screening will only increase the number of those examinees who are accurately characterized as being innocent and who either believing or not believing will be subsequently and wrongly found to be deceptive and therefore represent false positive outcomes.  Increased knowledge of the truth about polygraphy will not only increase the public’s  awareness that it (polygraph screening  in particular and lie detection in general) is both faulty and fraudulent but will decrease any utility (a prop for obtaining confessions)  it may ever have had.

Porthos,

If you will take the time to review some posts, you will see that most of the people here are wanna be cops..Not out and out drug addicts..I was on probation for domestic abuse, (pushed my ex-wife out of the house), had unauthorized contact when probation calling for NO CONTACT. I used some of the advise on the antipolygraph.com site to beat my test.
Now that I have had time to think, I some what agree with you....The information on this site offers powerful ammunition...Do we want dirty cops patroling our streets?

I believe this thread has shown a very important, yet so often overlooked, fact.

If you go into a place looking for something good, for good causes, and with the complete intention of finding the good in the place, you will arive with exactly that...the good.  If on the other hand, you go into a place looking for something bad, for unjust purposes, and with the intention of purpetuating a bad thing, you will find just that.   

This site does have both sides - good and bad.  what anyone chooses to find here will be based upon their intentions when coming to this site.

For a lot of folks, they failed a polygraph exam when they knew 100% within themselves that they were honest, and the confusion as to how something could be so dead wrong and yet be such an integral part of the application process bewilders them.  Their stories are the ones that will, as they increase in number, demand an end to all of this nonsense.   

However, these aren't the only folks in here.  Some are indeed looking to better their odds in passing a polygraph exam.  Some are folk who have not taken an exam because of the knowledge that this is such lunacy.  Still others are here for the sole purpose of seeing this horrific insane and unfair practice find its final resting place.  We all come for different reasons, just as we all stay or go for different reasons.

To try to condemn any site for exposing the lie that our federal government continues to sanction is simply one-sided and proves the motivation of some to cling onto their fraudulant jobs while leaving claw marks on the walls.

I suggest a more fair-minded assesment before showing yourself to be so completely ignorant and biased.

Regards,
Seeker

Funnyguy, you seem to have a fixation on drug abuse. This site is about a LOT more than potheads trying to get jobs as cops. It's about ridding the country of this psuedo-science, and keeping people's lives from being ruined in the meantime.
As for George and his PhD, does it matter if he is still working on his dissertation? I suppose you are an expert on Persian proverbs and could whip out such a document over a weekend? I didn't think so. Getting a PhD is not easy, especially in Near Eastern Studies. By the way, did you ever get YOUR PhD?