a gerbal? what is a gerbal, bonehead?

Quote:


Speaking of which...

Attacking the Person
(argumentum ad hominem)


Definition: 
The person presenting an argument is attacked instead of the
argument itself. This takes many forms. For example, the
person's character, nationality or religion may be attacked.
Alternatively, it may be pointed out that a person stands to
gain from a favourable outcome. Or, finally, a person may be
attacked by association, or by the company he keeps.
There are three major forms of Attacking the Person:
(1) ad hominem (abusive): instead of attacking an assertion,
the argument attacks the person who made the assertion.
(2) ad hominem (circumstantial): instead of attacking an
assertion the author points to the relationship between the
person making the assertion and the person's circumstances.
(3) ad hominem (tu quoque): this form of attack on the
person notes that a person does not practise what he
preaches.


Examples: 
(i) You may argue that God doesn't exist, but you are just
following a fad. (ad hominem abusive)
(ii) We should discount what Premier Klein says about
taxation because he won't be hurt by the increase. (ad
hominem circumstantial)
(iii) We should disregard Share B.C.'s argument because they
are being funded by the logging industry. (ad hominem
circumstantial)
(iv) You say I shouldn't drink, but you haven't been sober for
more than a year. (ad hominem tu quoque)

Proof: 
Identify the attack and show that the character or
circumstances of the person has nothing to do with the truth
or falsity of the proposition being defended.

References:
Barker: 166, Cedarblom and Paulsen: 155, Copi and Cohen: 97, Davis: 80

http://www.datanation.com/fallacies/attack.htm


Two questions occur:
1) To what "academic" bias are you referring, and perhaps you'd care to give examples where that bias, rather than informed research, guide his position?

2) Why is it "illogical" or "unreasonable" that someone who has extensively researched the polygraph (but is not himself a polygrapher) should speak about the polygraph in an informed manner?

Best Regards,
Skeptic

Quote:


This is a straw man.  No one has said that such experience wouldn't change anyone's opinion.  It's certainly true, however, that it would not necessarily change opinions, either.  And really, that's beside the point: after all, when we criticize the polygraph we're talking scientific evidence, not anecdotal.  Once you understand the difference, the "experience" you're talking about is largely irrelevant to the discussion at hand.

Quote:


This statement is entirely counterfactual.  Again, I urge you to actually read George's arguments and research on the subject before you comment on such.  As it is, you're clearly guilty of the same charge you make against Mr. Maschke.

Skeptic

All it takes is a little Batman input to get the fur flying.  You all have to admit, it FEELS GOOD!

Now back to my first post.  To whomever it was that said I was taking advantage of the death of that young lady at Duke University, and any others that feel the same way, YOU MISSED THE DAMN POINT!

I have no problem with George or any others on this site who want to slam polygraph.  Hell there have been a few days when I've slammed it too.  My issue is with the comments about ruined lives.  Put this shit in perspective folks.  People like George, Capt Whatever the Hell his Name Is, Beech Trees, Skeptic, Seeker, etc, have not had their lives ruined.  Maybe, in their eyes, thier reps have taken a little hit, but ruined lives?  Not hardly.  Think about it, seriously.  Make all the arguments you want about how polygraph does not work, or how countermeasures can not be readily detected, but don't refer to your lives as being ruined.  I'm off my soap-box.

Now as for detecting countermeasures, I don't think I have ever said that I could, unfailingly, detect countermeasures Triple X.  I will tell you that on more than one ocassion I have confronted examinees about the use of countermeasures and they have admitted same.  I'm just as sure that on ocassion I have been unable to detect them.  As I have said in numerous posts, polygraph is not a perfect tool.  As for being gifted, well I'm no John Holmes, but I was once compared favorably to a well hung horse.  Actually, the only gift I have that may apply to you Mr. X is the gift to know a true Bullshitter when I hear one.  You sir, are one of the best.  When I see one of your posts I immediatly get my feet up off the floor.

OK, who's next.  My man Septic.  You want me to be civil, well piss off.  How's that for civil?  Why should I be civil to the likes of Beech Trees.  That guy is a first class jerk-off.  He rips all the "pro's" just as hard as I rip the "anti's" (sounds like West Side Story) so why don't you jump his shit about being civil?

Orolan, here's a challange my dear sir.  You mentioned that you know of people who have gone to prison because of polygraph.  Please site the particular cases.  I am anxious to know under what circumstances someone went to prison as a result of taking a polygraph.  You also mentioned people killing themselves because of polygraph.  Can you provide any additional information about this claim?  If you can't meet the challange, I do not expect you to make a public retraction.

If I have left any of my friends off this post I sincerely apologize.  I'm sure we'll link up in the not too distant furure.  Now that's what I call being civil.

Batman

Thanks for the help there, beech trees. A sad case that one is. But this one is worse. This man, one of about 8 different suspects in a murder case, had a solid alibi. He made the tragic mistake of volunteering to take a polygraph to further prove his innocence. And he failed. For what reason, we don't know, other than the fact that the poly is not reliable. The prosecutor, knowing that he could not use this information in court, blurted out the fact that Freddie had failed a polygraph while cross-examining him. The judge quickly admonished the prosecutor, and instructed the jury to "disregard the remark". Amazingly, since he had thus far only brought out heresy evidence, conjecture, and the conflicting testimony of a few "street snitches", the prosecutor rested his case. The jury found Freddie guilty, and he is now serving a life sentence.
Freddie Eugene Casey #218207
Wallens Ridge Correctional Center
PO Box 759
Big Stone Gap, VA 24219

Thanks George. I became aware of Freddie's plight while living in upper East Tennessee in the early nineties. I was not aware that it was on the web.