Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8  ReplyAdd Poll Send TopicPrint
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) took the test (Read 55874 times)
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box ODIN
New User
*
Offline



Posts: 12
Joined: Dec 7th, 2005
Re: took the test
Reply #75 - Dec 10th, 2005 at 4:37am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Skeptic wrote on Dec 9th, 2005 at 7:16am:
You seem rather selective in your evidence, Odin.  I'll note that Twoblock also mentioned Louisiana, which does polygraph LE and (from the anecdotal evidence, which seems to be all anyone has come up with thus far) has serious corruption problems.

But if you can't prove your claims, just say so.  Others have already demonstrated more honesty by admitting they can't prove whether or not they lied about their polygraph experiences--and frankly, you should have a far easier time of proving your claims, if you can.  By your own standards, it's time for you to "put up or shut up".

How about it, Odin?  Going to come clean?


If I remember correctly the New Orleains PD has internal examiners. Cops stick together A polygraph that is never seen is like a tree that falls in the woods when noe one is there.

If you can't beat the box, you might be able to beat the examiner. more so if the examiner is one of your "own". Cops polygraphing cops is always a bad idea, and should never be done.

It is a good ole boys network over there. If you know someone you're in.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box Skeptic
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 549
Joined: Jun 24th, 2002
Re: took the test
Reply #76 - Dec 10th, 2005 at 4:38am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Anyway, congratulations to SoontobeLE and others who have "passed" the polygraph, either through luck or by the proper use of polygraph countermeasures.  It's clear that countermeasures do work, and it's clear from the longstanding "countermeasure challenge" that polygraphers don't have the means to detect them, all bluffing notwithstanding.

The polygraph doesn't work.  It's fool's gold, and it's foolish to trust your fortune to such snake oil.  Countermeasures are a viable way to ensure that this device, which is really only good at measuring a few bodily characteristics, isn't used to disqualify people who shouldn't be disqualified.

It's time that this political crutch be dropped, and that agencies either do their jobs correctly or admit they need more resources to do so.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box ODIN
New User
*
Offline



Posts: 12
Joined: Dec 7th, 2005
Re: took the test
Reply #77 - Dec 10th, 2005 at 4:39am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
mustbaliar wrote on Dec 10th, 2005 at 4:33am:
LOL.  Good luck to you, Odin.  


will need it in this pit of vipers
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box ODIN
New User
*
Offline



Posts: 12
Joined: Dec 7th, 2005
Re: took the test
Reply #78 - Dec 10th, 2005 at 4:51am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Skeptic wrote on Dec 10th, 2005 at 4:38am:
Anyway, congratulations to SoontobeLE and others who have "passed" the polygraph, either through luck or by the proper use of polygraph countermeasures.  It's clear that countermeasures do work, and it's clear from the longstanding "countermeasure challenge" that polygraphers don't have the means to detect them, all bluffing notwithstanding.

The polygraph doesn't work.  It's fool's gold, and it's foolish to trust your fortune to such snake oil.  Countermeasures are a viable way to ensure that this device, which is really only good at measuring a few bodily characteristics, isn't used to disqualify people who shouldn't be disqualified.

It's time that this political crutch be dropped, and that agencies either do their jobs correctly or admit they need more resources to do so.


people using countermeasures, in most cases have something to hide. Hiding the truth is lyeing.

If so confident the put up. speak up for the REAL challenge.

We have something to lose is we fail, so you say. The only thing you guys are willing to do it "post it on the sight"? Yea next to a weak excuse.

Put something on the table. If your minions fail there should be a price and that price should be antipolygraph.org and it's rights to be given up to the winning examiner.

It's clear that countermeasures do work, and it's clear from the longstanding "countermeasure challenge" that polygraphers don't have the means to detect them, all bluffing notwithstanding.

The polygraph doesn't work.  It's fool's gold, and it's foolish to trust your fortune to such snake oil.  Countermeasures are a viable way to ensure that this device, which is really only good at measuring a few bodily characteristics, isn't used to disqualify people who shouldn't be disqualified.


wow talk about side steping. You must be good at dancing.

I can tell you no examiner will ever step up so long as you have nothing to lose other than a little pride. Put it on the table, otherwise all this shuffleing will make people wonder if you are all somke and mirrors yourself.

lol I see some sweating, and it's not mine
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box polyfool
Especially Senior User
*****
Offline



Posts: 311
Joined: Feb 23rd, 2005
Re: took the test
Reply #79 - Dec 10th, 2005 at 5:06am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
ODIN wrote on Dec 10th, 2005 at 4:30am:
I would like to see the applicant packet, chart and video of the polygraph before I make judgement. I want to see all the FACTS before I judge. Something went wrong somewhere or he didn't do it. There is no way something like that would have gotten past me.



ODIN,

Get real--don't you think the Newport News Police Department would be smart enough to have the goods on this guy before charging him? Give me a break--he's a state trooper--you know they crossed their "t"'s and dotted their "i"'s.

With all due respect, ODIN--I'm sure you're not the first examiner to claim someone like this wouldn't get past them. Have you seen him? He doesn't look like a pedophile--very clean-cut, but you never can tell with these types. Not that examiners could ever be accused of being biased.  Wink

Your beloved polygraph failed to weed out this alleged pedophile.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box ODIN
New User
*
Offline



Posts: 12
Joined: Dec 7th, 2005
Re: took the test
Reply #80 - Dec 10th, 2005 at 5:20am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
polyfool wrote on Dec 10th, 2005 at 5:06am:
ODIN,

Get real--don't you think the Newport News Police Department would be smart enough to have the goods on this guy before charging him? Give me a break--he's a state trooper--you know they crossed their "t"'s and dotted their "i"'s.

With all due respect, ODIN--I'm sure you're not the first examiner to claim someone like this wouldn't get past them. Have you seen him? He doesn't look like a pedophile--very clean-cut, but you never can tell with these types. Not that examiners could ever be accused of being biased.  Wink

Your beloved polygraph failed to weed out this alleged pedophile.


Yet again no one listened.

If you can't beat the polygraph then beat the examiner, that is what alderich Aims did from what I understand fome my class notes from school.

I am also aware that child molesters look like my friend. I deal with them every day. If you can't say the same I don't think you have a leg to stand on by trying to educate me on what they look like . No offense.

I have seen lots of cops get the shaft just because the right person pointed the finger, and once it gets to the press it becomes a witch hunt. Once the press brands you as guilty you are guilty.

Unless you are OJ, MJ, Blake, or some other drug taking, drunk, nut job celeb.

By the way it is the buzz in the comunity that OJ went DI. guess he really didn't do it.

Just because you are clean cut does not mean I won't do my job. all the execs at enron were clean cut, but they were still theives that should be tared featherd and shot.

Point is, It's the clean cut ones I am more suspecting of.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box Skeptic
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 549
Joined: Jun 24th, 2002
Re: took the test
Reply #81 - Dec 10th, 2005 at 5:40am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
ODIN wrote on Dec 10th, 2005 at 4:51am:
people using countermeasures, in most cases have something to hide. Hiding the truth is lyeing.


More unsupported claims.  It's virtually your hallmark, Odin.  Back them up, or withdraw them.  Others have already done so, when you made up the excuse that you wouldn't until everyone else did so.

Have you considered the possibility that people might use countermeasures because the polygraph is known to be a poor instrument for detecting truthfulness?  Have you even considered the possibility?

Quote:
If so confident the put up. speak up for the REAL challenge.

We have something to lose is we fail, so you say. The only thing you guys are willing to do it "post it on the sight"? Yea next to a weak excuse.

Put something on the table. If your minions fail there should be a price and that price should be antipolygraph.org and it's rights to be given up to the winning examiner.


That, of course, is up to the site's proprietors.  But for the record, IMHO you're being ridiculous.  As the challenge stands, the winner gets PR and bragging rights.  Moreover, there's no reason to suppose anyone will be more "honest" about the results of the challenge if the Antipolygraph.org web site is on the line than if it isn't.  So what's really going on here?

Are you simply trying to bluster your way out tough questions as to why you won't take up the challenge to prove your claims?

Quote:
wow talk about side steping. You must be good at dancing.

I can tell you no examiner will ever step up so long as you have nothing to lose other than a little pride.


Oh, come on.  Let's make it really interesting.  Why not play for houses?

Look, you and other polygraphers have made the claim that you can detect countermeasures.  Now you are furiously backpedalling, saying the only way you'll back up your claims is if others risk far more than you're willing to do.

You know what?  I think you're playing games and spinning excuses.

You say you've caught people using countermeasures.  We're asking you to prove it.  I doubt you will, since you've thus far made lots of claims and haven't backed them up.  So you know what?  From now on, as long as you post here I will remind you and others of the claims you've made and haven't backed up.

Thus far, we have (among others):

1) Claims that states without the polygraph for LE jobs tend to have higher corruption in LE
2) Claims that those who use countermeasures have something to hide
3) Claims that you can detect countermeasures.

These are claims you've made, and it's incumbent upon you (that means it's your obligation) to back them up or withdraw them.

Show you have the intellectual integrity, courage and honesty to make good on your claims or withdraw them.  I will hound you about it until you do.
« Last Edit: Dec 10th, 2005 at 9:53am by Skeptic »  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box polyfool
Especially Senior User
*****
Offline



Posts: 311
Joined: Feb 23rd, 2005
Re: took the test
Reply #82 - Dec 10th, 2005 at 6:33am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
ODIN wrote on Dec 10th, 2005 at 5:20am:
Yet again no one listened.

If you can't beat the polygraph then beat the examiner, that is what alderich Aims did from what I understand fome my class notes from school.

I am also aware that child molesters look like my friend. I deal with them every day. If you can't say the same I don't think you have a leg to stand on by trying to educate me on what they look like . No offense.

I have seen lots of cops get the shaft just because the right person pointed the finger, and once it gets to the press it becomes a witch hunt. Once the press brands you as guilty you are guilty.

Unless you are OJ, MJ, Blake, or some other drug taking, drunk, nut job celeb.

By the way it is the buzz in the comunity that OJ went DI. guess he really didn't do it.

Just because you are clean cut does not mean I won't do my job. all the execs at enron were clean cut, but they were still theives that should be tared featherd and shot.

Point is, It's the clean cut ones I am more suspecting of.



ODIN,

So, it's the clean-cut ones you're more suspecting of? Maybe that was my problem--perhaps, I was too clean-cut. I wish someone would have told me looking a little shady would have helped with the examiner. Darn.  Wink

So, you admit that you bring bias to the table as an examiner by being more suspecting of the clean-cut examinees. Great--you helped prove my point that examiner bias exists. Bias comes in many forms--perhaps, you're biased against the clean-cut ones because they're better looking than you and you're just jealous? Like I said, bias comes in all shapes and sizes--it's not just about stereotypes. 

Though, I don't deal with child molesters everyday, it's fair to say I've had some dealings with them. I know what it's like to have your skin crawl while listening to the sick words uttered by a man admitting to raping his eight year old daughter. The point of my post was not to educate you on what child molesters look like--like I said, "hard to tell with those types, " though from your  posts, looks like you could use some additional education. No offense.   Wink

Face it--the polygraph didn't do what it was supposed to do--weed out a criminal from the law enforcement selection process.

Nice swipe at the press. I'm sure the media is your best friend, when it helps you spread false information regarding the polygraph's validity.

ODIN,
Please say this isn't the end of our beautiful friendship.   Cry
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box Skeptic
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 549
Joined: Jun 24th, 2002
Re: took the test
Reply #83 - Dec 10th, 2005 at 6:53am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
polyfool wrote on Dec 10th, 2005 at 6:33am:
Though, I don't deal with child molesters everyday, it's fair to say I've had some dealings with them. I know what it's like to have your skin crawl while listening to the sick words uttered by a man admitting to raping his eight year old daughter. The point of my post was not to educate you on what child molesters look like--like I said, "hard to tell with those types, " though from your  posts, looks like you could use some additional education. No offense.


My problem with the polygraph and bona-fide, convicted child molesters is that it gives them a loophole.  It gives them a way out, countermeasures or no countermeasures.  The polygraph simply doesn't work, and it's foolish to rely upon it to tell you whether the molester is re-offending.

Why would anyone want to give molesters an easy way to "demonstrate" their innocence, when the process doesn't work?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box gelb disliker
Senior User
***
Offline



Posts: 92
Location: ou ti nth emiddl eo fnowhere
Joined: Jul 28th, 2004
Re: took the test
Reply #84 - Dec 10th, 2005 at 8:58am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Odin said "Point is, It's the clean cut ones I am more suspecting of. "

Bias = prejudice   

  is this really what an examiner should bring to his table?   seems like anyone sitting at your table might have already lost.

  Odin, seems like everytime you answer, you paint yourself into a little corner, and when you are in the corner, you scream and scream.   
  Answer with facts, not emotion.  Facts have integrity.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box Smokey
Ex Member
*



Re: took the test
Reply #85 - Dec 10th, 2005 at 10:39am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Quote:
Polyfool wrote: Your beloved polygraph failed to weed out this alleged pedophile.


An unfortunate thing that occurs (This is from what I've been told from som LE folks) is that when some pedifiles, particularly child molestors, take the poly, the fact that they are careless enough to commit the crimes they commit may also contribute to the fact that their vital signs will not react enough to the poly to get a "DI."  For example, I talked to an officer who works with the Georgia police department where John Couey, the man charged with molesting and Killing a 9 Year-Old girl in Florida earlier this year, was arrested and he said that Couey acted as if it was no big deal as he was being arrested.
    Thats the problem with false negatives on ploygraphs is that you may get someone who's mind is truely warped and they may "beat" the machine while lying through their teeth while employing no countermeasures whatsoever.  I am aware that this convicted sex offender did undergo a ploygraph, but from the news reports I've heard, after the poly, they asked him something to the effect of did he commit the crime and he stated something to the effect of "I thing you know the answer."  I believe this man deserved to be executed in a slow and painful manner if he did commit this crime, but the issue at hand here is that the ploygraph simply is not sufficient.  
« Last Edit: Dec 10th, 2005 at 12:24pm by Smokey »  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box Brandon Hall
Ex Member


Re: took the test
Reply #86 - Dec 10th, 2005 at 12:34pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
ODIN,

Your position is clearly noted.  You would have polygraphy instituted into the mainstream with reckless regard to consequences resulting from incorrect examiner opinion.  Perhaps we should also institute a  state of socialism.  With you I respectfully disagree.  You have posted here with nothing but ill-will and ulterior motive.  I have noted your continual misspelling of George as Gorge, which is at minimum insulting and most likely derogatory in nature (one or two mistakes are understandable, every post with mention of George's name is unacceptable).  I wish you well in your endeavor to continue to demoralize and demolish dreams.  It is examiner's like you that have become destroyers of career paths that are well deserved.  Keep your faith in polygraphy and do not weep when that faith is turned to vapor.  I have invited you more than once to contribute constructively, however you continue to post with malice.  Good day sir, if you no longer participate it will be appreciated.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box polyfool
Especially Senior User
*****
Offline



Posts: 311
Joined: Feb 23rd, 2005
Re: took the test
Reply #87 - Dec 10th, 2005 at 4:47pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Skeptic wrote on Dec 10th, 2005 at 6:53am:
My problem with the polygraph and bona-fide, convicted child molesters is that it gives them a loophole.  It gives them a way out, countermeasures or no countermeasures.  The polygraph simply doesn't work, and it's foolish to rely upon it to tell you whether the molester is re-offending.

Why would anyone want to give molesters an easy way to "demonstrate" their innocence, when the process doesn't work?


Skeptic,

You make an excellent point here. It's also important to note that the polygraph is dangerous in allowing child molesters to walk away from their crimes in the very beginning by throwing investigators off their trails. I personally know of one such child molester who was guilty as hell and passed his polygraph. The mother, who was forced to take a poly, initially had problems with hers, but the examiner gave her the benefit of the doubt, talked with her and re-started the test and she passed. This child molester never paid for his crimes. Very sad.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box gelb disliker
Senior User
***
Offline



Posts: 92
Location: ou ti nth emiddl eo fnowhere
Joined: Jul 28th, 2004
Re: took the test
Reply #88 - Dec 10th, 2005 at 8:03pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Odin wrote "If I don't I will give up my license and by then I will be bigger than Backster or Reid. That is my Goal. "

   why would you give up your license?  have we in anyway swayed your belief in the inaccuracy of the polygraph?  if your goal is to become bigger than Backster or Reid, that may be a lofty goal in the Polygraph examiner's world.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box ODIN
New User
*
Offline



Posts: 12
Joined: Dec 7th, 2005
Re: took the test
Reply #89 - Dec 11th, 2005 at 1:06am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
http://www.michbar.org/journal/article.cfm?articleID=501&volumeID=37

some bed time reading boys. talk you every onr soon.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 
ReplyAdd Poll Send TopicPrint
took the test

Please type the characters that appear in the image. The characters must be typed in the same order, and they are case-sensitive.
Open Preview Preview

You can resize the textbox by dragging the right or bottom border.
Insert Hyperlink Insert FTP Link Insert Image Insert E-mail Insert Media Insert Table Insert Table Row Insert Table Column Insert Horizontal Rule Insert Teletype Insert Code Insert Quote Edited Superscript Subscript Insert List /me - my name Insert Marquee Insert Timestamp No Parse
Bold Italicized Underline Insert Strikethrough Highlight
                       
Insert Preformatted Text Left Align Centered Right Align
resize_wb
resize_hb







Max 200000 characters. Remaining characters:
Text size: pt
More Smilies
View All Smilies
Collapse additional features Collapse/Expand additional features Smiley Wink Cheesy Grin Angry Sad Shocked Cool Huh Roll Eyes Tongue Embarrassed Lips Sealed Undecided Kiss Cry
Attachments More Attachments Allowed file types: txt doc docx ics psd pdf bmp jpe jpg jpeg gif png swf zip rar tar gz 7z odt ods mp3 mp4 wav avi mov 3gp html maff pgp gpg
Maximum Attachment size: 500000 KB
Attachment 1:
X