Batman,
"...there are a hell of a lot of polygraphers out there, to include those associated with federal, state, and local government, who are in direct violation(sp) of same...". My point exactly. I still await word from Dr. Dutton of the APA.
As for the issue about recording other aspects of life, you are correct. There are many organizations out there working to correct the problems in the medical field as well as any other area with similar problems. They don't need our help. This forum is dedicated to polygraph issues.
I have no doubt that you perform polygraph tests in a professional manner and would not mind having the examination recorded. But the fact is, there are those who are not quite so ethical.

George,

I'd give you a point or two for digging up that quote except I don't believe it was an objection to recording interviews, polygraphs or interrogations, it was simply an explanation as to why it isn't done.  I stand by what I said.  The primary reason law enforcement does not routinely record interviews/interrogations is simply that much of what is said it taken out of context by defense attornies and presented to juries in such a manner as to lead them to believe a persons rights were violated, or the law enforcement officers did something illegal, improper, or wrong.  Contrary to popular belief, it isn't always the law enforcement officials who object to recording what they do, it's the prosecutors.  There have been numerous occasions where I would have loved to have a confession on tape, however was prohibited from doing so.  Even though I have no personal objection to recording interviews or interrogations, I can certainly understand the reluctance to do so.  Our jury system if far from perfect, and defense attornies are fully aware of what it takes to overload the somewhat limited mental capacities of many jurors. 

Maybe you should be going after prosecutors, and elected officials rather than law enforcement officers and polygraph examiners as it pertains to recording various procedures related to interviews and interrogations, to include polygraph examinations.

Again, I believe you are willing to throw the baby out with the bath water simply because you perceive yourself as having been wronged by polygraph.  You have said that if you had received the postion that was denied to you (as a result of your 'failed' polygraph) then your personal vendetta against polygraph would never have come to being.  I'm sorry, but I have to seriously question your overall motives as it pertains to this crusade of yours against polygraph.  I would be much more impressed if you had taken this position regardless of your polygraph results, however by your own admission, we wouldn't be having this conversation if you had 'passed'.   

Batman

Anonymous,

Thank you so much for that stirring blowjob of George. 

However, his motivations are revealed in his simple admission that if he had in fact 'passed' his polygraph and gained admission to the "good old boys club" that he sought membership to, he would not have raised such a loyal anti-polygraph following as yourself because he would be on the inside looking out.

Don't promote George for sainthood just yet.  He's just as big a hypocrite as many who post here.  George didn't come upon his revelation until he was denied admission to the club.  By his own words; if he had gained admission then this anti-polygraph stance of his wouldn't be an issue.  He wouldn't be out there bearing the cross for the anti-polygraph community.  It is possible he would still harbor his anti-polygraph sentiments, however highly doubtful he would have put voice to them.  He would have simply stood by and watched all the poor, and abused polygraph victims languish in the wind, as he moved up the chain.   

Your anti-polygraph god is a false one, so beware who you worship.  As far as I am concerned, the only person who ever needed to suffer in order to relieve the pain of others was Jesus Christ.      

I anxiously await the removal of George's appendage from your mouth so you can reply.

Batman

PS: Save all the remarks about my crudeness, it's been well documented that on occasion, and when given the proper motivation, I am such. 

Batman,

I suppose in reverse order....it is quite clear that you don't need motivation to be crude, it comes rather naturally.  On rare occasion, apparently some perverse motivation must lead you to be or do otherwise.

Neither George nor any on this site has made the sacrilegious comparison you made in your recent post.  I would advice against such or at least make those in your presence aware of such behavior so they can avoid the consequences of your actions.

With regard to the subject at hand, how can you possibly be so stupid?  George has said on numerous occasions that he believed the foolishness of polygraph until confronted with the conflict between what he knew/knows to be ground truth regarding relevant issues and the results obtained on the polygraph exam in question.  If that examination had not existed, he would have had no reason to reconsider his previous beliefs and do the research necessary to inform himself and which now allows others to benefit from that knowledge.  Your crudeness, blasphemy, and stupidity all combined will not overcome knowledge and truth.  Perhaps your community might do better with a different spokesperson or perhaps eventually realizing the folly of your ways you might consider another approach under a different pseudonym.  You have so little credibility at this point and have so stained the name of the caped crusader that I don't believe you can recover excepting a cyber costume change at this juncture.

Batman,

No doubt, George, will address your simple wit in due time, but, perhaps in the mean time, you might refer me to the appropriate comic book, TV or movie production where Batman comes forth with a crudity (same or similar) such as that which you displayed in your post before last.  I think not...and as I said before, the polygraph community is sorely lacking if this is the best they can offer.  Re-read my last post and see if you can pick up on your stupidity...even you may see the logic of George's needing to have failed a polygraph exam in order to have reason to explain the conflict between ground truth and polygraph results....if you read it three times.

Batman,

Your uncivil remarks to Anonymous are inexcusable. You should be ashamed of yourself.

You write:

Quote:


Your opinion of my "overall motives" has no bearing on the merits of any argument(s) I've made regarding polygraphy. This attempt to change the subject with a personal attack is a classic ad hominem argument.

I explained the personal experiences that led me to speak publicly on polygraph matters in the message thread Who's Using Polygraph. It bears repeating here.

When I failed my FBI pre-employment polygraph examination despite having told the truth, I was dumbfounded. I couldn't believe it. But it didn't directly cause me to form an antipolygraph point of view. My polygrapher had told me that the polygraph was 98% accurate. I naively believed him, and supposed I must have fallen within the 2% margin of error of an otherwise valid test.

It was only after reading David T. Lykken's seminal book on polygraphy, A Tremor in the Blood: Uses and Abuses of the Lie Detector that my position against polygraphy solidified. I was outraged to learn that my government had branded me as a liar based on a procedure that has no scientific basis whatsoever. As an officer in the Army reserve, I had adhered to a code not to lie, cheat, or steal, or tolerate those who do. My government (through an FBI polygrapher) had deliberately lied to me, just as it continues to lie to every single employee or prosepective employee it polygraphs. And I had no avenue of appeal.

For several years, I bit the bullet. I said nothing publicly. I had no idea how many others had been similarly affected. That changed in 1999, when I found the website NoPolygraph.com and linked up with other polygraph victims, who are much more numerous than I had supposed. I was at first reluctant, but ultimately felt compelled to take a public stand on the polygraph issue.

A year later--and after much research, correspondence, and cooperation with others--I co-authored The Lie Behind the Lie Detector and helped to launch AntiPolygraph.org.

So, in some sense, my experience in failing a polygraph "test" ultimately led to my forming an antipolygraph viewpoint and the establishment of this website. But it is certainly not the sole reason.

If I had not had the experience of failing the polygraph, I might never have researched it further, or discovered the extent of the harm that reliance on this pseudoscience is causing both to individuals, and to the national security and public safety. Indeed, I would most likely have spent my time engaged in other pursuits.

Batman, you have correctly observed that there are other, greater harms in society than that caused by polygraphy. I have no disagreement with you here. But you seem to suggest that all societal ills greater than those related to polygraphy must be addressed before polygraphy comes in for scrutiny, and that if I and others focus on polygraph issues now, that we are somehow "hypocrites." I strongly disagree. (By that logic, the harm associated with reliance on the pseudoscience of polygraphy must be allowed to continue so long as greater problems exist, i.e., forever.)  As Orolan noted, there are many organizations dedicated to addressing other issues. My life experience has made me aware of polygraph issues. I speak of that which I know. That I speak out on polygraph issues, instead of, say, medical malpractice (an issue regarding which I have little knowledge or experience) does not, in my opinion, make me a "hypocrite."

AntiPolygraph.org exists for the purpose of ending the harm associated with reliance on the pseudoscience of polygraphy. We seek to expose and end polygraph waste, fraud and abuse. We have no "hidden agenda." Before AntiPolygraph.org, there was no organization decicated to polygraph issues. The popularity of this website speaks to the need for such an organization.

All information on AntiPolygraph.org is provided to the public for free, and neither I, Gino Scalabrini, nor anyone else associated with AntiPolygraph.org receives any remuneration, in cash or in kind, for our efforts. I think that the considerable time and effort we've put into the site has been time well spent.

I make no claim to godhood, sainthood, omniscience, or super heroism.

And so we continue to endure this thread in which no one has yet to put forth any rational explanation as to why something as simple as an audio/video recording of all polygraphs SHOULD NOT BE requred of those friendly and considerate examiners.

Dear Batboy, every time there is a thread that makes the unemployment line look ever brighter, you come in and display your total lack of upbringing.  Now, I have no problems with you disagreeing with the bulk of us who see polygraph examinations for the fraud that they are, however one does have to seriously ponder the likes of you.  

It is obvious from your posts that you have little to no respect for yourself, muchless for others.  Being a lady, I have to have intense fear from ever being in a position to associate with you.  Not only do you have a nastiness toward women, but display blatant disprespect for them.  You know that ladies come in here, and to spew such low-life and ignorant remarks is very ungentlemanly-like.

Batboy, it is people in positions like yours, positions wherein your own internal ineptitude dangerously places you in a position to control lives, that is as much a risk and danger to National Security as that toy that you play with.

Audio/video recordings would provide some genuine guarantee that you do not abuse that position, or that you do not come across a strong female like myself who, out of public service, would recycle you into an appropriately functioning male member of society, and attempt to pull your arrogance and cruel nastiness out on me.  Audio/video recordings would guarantee professionalism.  

I have yet to hear one single argument to reason NOT audio/video recording these fraudulent and flawed "tests".

Regards,
Seeker