Perhaps dimas will answer you better than he did Neutral Observer.  This is what he says about his basis for giving advice. " NeutralObserver,  I could answer your question in a variety of ways, I could say I was a Polygrapher, have studied to become one, had experience taking polygraphs, have worked in a field in which polygraphs are used regulary, have a medical background, am in Law Enforcement, that I am a "mind reader"  or a variety of truths or lies, obvious or not, either way it would not matter as they would all be met with the same skepticism due to the nature of anonimity that a message board like this entails.  People will believe what they want to believe, I am simply offering my advice and it has to be taken for what it is worth which could be a grain of salt or its weight in gold.  Polygraphs are very useful, but Polygraphy is very flawed. "  Sounds like a crooked politician to me.

And there is of course a great deal of "sound basis" to take George's advice.  Tell us again George, what would that be?

Well, let's see.....references.... George failed both of his polygraphs and he has read a couple of books.... Last week he couldn't even spell expert, now he are one.

George, editor and chief of the GRUDGE REPORT.  He, like his idol Michael Moore, thinks that just because he hates something it makes him an expert when he criticizes it.  But the fact remains, he has taken two polygraphs and failed both of them, and he has never even tried to use any of the countermeasures he describes and gives advice about.