Here's a "challenge" I originally issued in another thread under another topic.  It has to do with countermeasures:

All of you who actually lied your asses off on relevant issues in a polygraph, and then passed the polygraph despite your lies due to countermeasures, speak up now.  Which relevant questions did you lie to, and which countermeasures did you use to pass?  Before anyone speaks up, make sure you understand what a relevant issue is and what a relevant question is, or you're going to come off sounding like the release of gas through a real anal sphincter.   Also, make sure you read up on the difference between a conclusion of deception and a conclusion of inconclusive.  They are not the same thing, and there are enough ignorant people on this board who don't know the difference in either case, so don't be one of them.   

Speak now.  I have provided referenced studies in another thread that show that countermeasures have no effect on innocent examinees, but may help a guilty examinee produce a false negative.  I want to know if there are any of you who have actually produced a false negative.  Make sure you know what a false negative is, or ask and I or someone else in the know will tell you.

Ok, but if no one is willing to stand up and admit that he or she actually passed a polygraph by using countermeasures while lying to a particular "relevant" issue, how are we supposed to believe that they really work?  Just because George and Co. say so?  They can't have it both ways; they can't, with any credibility, tell all the scared little boys and girls that the only way they can ensure that they'll pass a polygraph is by using certain countermeasures, when there appears to be no one out there who will step up and admit that he or she passed the polygraph despite lying to a particular "relevant" issue--especially when one of their oft-cited researchers, Ben-Shakhar, says that such countermeasures do nothing for the innocent examinee.

Their faulty advice is going to get some of those scared little boys and girls into trouble with an experienced polygrapher.  I've seen it happen with my own eyes.

Anal S,

You've got to be a polygraph examiner. I'd recognize that over inflated ego with a lack of credibility anywhere.

Quote:


I am equally tired of your misguided regurgitations.  I am not "I-SMELL-BS" in disguise, nor have I ever read one of his/her posts.  I have read what Gino has said about those posts, though, and it doesn't sound like there was much substance to them.

My "purpose" is simply to dispel some of the fearmongering going on here.  George, Gino and Co. have nothing to support their agenda other than tired rhetoric and questionable and refutable lab studies.  I have repeatedly said that I can sit here and reguritate lab studies to support my claims just as easily as they can.  The polygraph is widely used simply because it is the best "lie detector" or "truth confirmer" available.  Your "extensive experience" aside, there are those with actual experience on the other side of the table to whom your silly arguments are laughable.

Quote:


Actually, my name isn't "Hugh."     Good guess, though.  One adjective I haven't used to describe my feelings about this site is anger.  Humor, yes.  Sad, yes.  Misinformation, yes.  Fearmongering, yes.  Silly, oh yes!  But anger, no.  It takes a lot to make me angry.  What you judge to be anger is simply a quick wit and enjoyment in using it to poke fun at short-sighted people who are so willing to buy into information that supports their hopes and conjectures.

You correctly characterize interrogation as a blend of lying, manipulation, and sometimes aggression.  Tried and true methods to extract information from the guilty.  The innocent needn't fear.  The polygraph, besides being much, much more accurate than George and Co. would have you believe, is also an excellent tool of intimidation to extract information from the guilty.  If that's all it were, it would be of value.  Fortunately, there are those of us with actual experience rather than tired rhetoric, regurgitated misinformation, and hopes of revenge who know it actually works, much to the dismay of the tiny minority of polygraph failures who dispense their placebo on this site.

One last thing: I will "get the hell off this site" either when I really do tire of it (which shouldn't take much longer), or when George and Co. tire of me making them look bad, at which time they will find a pretense to get rid of me.

Quote:


The above techniques need to be employed because criminals don't simply say, "Gee, you got me" when confronted with polygraph results.  It is a good tool to augment such techniques, though.

As for the DoD DIS, who says they don't look at the poly results?  It's simply that poly results backed up with admissions is much, much more compelling and can't be effectively refuted by anyone, whether a believer in the polygraph or not.

OK, enough dilly-dallying.  Back to the countermeasures challenge.  Any takers?  Come on, somebody speak up . . . 

That's right, nothing but the sound of crickets in the grass . . .

Hi,
I second Polyscam's offer to your challenge.  If you come to me, I'll be more than happy to take you up.