NoLieGuy4U

You have seen proof of my efforts in the legislative arena on these boards and you still ask questions as to my efforts. Gee Whiz!! Polygraph is the very least of my efforts and yet you try to portray it as the major portion. My glass is clear. Yours seem to be clouded by your hatred of George and this website. I have showed you proof of my efforts outside of the polygraph. You have been challenged to show proof of your strong accusations against George and as yet you haven't/can't provided one iota of proof. Until you do your accusations will fall on deaf ears and you will be awarded no credibility here.

If I was told my scientist uncle was aiding Irainian intelligence with atomic secrets, I would say prove it beyound a shadow of a doubt and I will deal with him severally. If you can't, then our family will deal with you severally.

If you have knowledge of an ongoing investigation into George's activities, and you are making that knowledge available on a public website, then you are a traitor to the investigation. If, on the other hand, you can't prove your accusations, well --- you could be in trouble from either direction.

If you can't prove your accusations, then I predict that you will be ignored by the readers of this site from now on. It starts with me right now. I can better use my time trying to hold to the little standards we have left.

Polygraphers are intent on having the last word. So go ahead.

    NoPolyCop, 

Okay, let's try a couple more direct questions.Do you believe counter-measures CAN work in a Control Question Test?
MY ANSWER:  In regard to PHYSICAL countermeasure attempts, probably not.  I say this based on the Examiner having modern computerized equipment with motion sensors.  The failure of the test subject to cooperate would simply cause at best an inconclusive outcome, or perhaps have such efforts be regarded as deceptive in their own right, which--- not surprisingly, would result in that person being interrogated.  Therefore, I don't believe such a test subject would create a pure 180 degree outcome as you are dreaming / hoping for.   

   In regard to mental countermeasures, you assume the variable that the "Performer" / test subject is using just the right amount vs. too little or too much, and that they could do so consistently.  If such an ability were true, then why would we test intel sources who may have been trained in same.  The simple truth is, no government has been able to train their personnel to "Beat" a polygraph test should the other side have had them in a position to test them.  Rather, they know at best they could cause an Inconclusive; again given the variables of modern day equipment and a properly trained examiner.   

Do you believe that counter-measures are effectively discovered the vast majority of the time?

  Your question presumes the level of training and equipment are consistent with each Examiner for a consistant answer to this.  What I believe is true is that based on gutter rats like Doug Williams, and turn coats who assembled this site; that the polygraph community has never been better.  You folks gave them the very attention they needed for funding and improvements.  Further, that most of the techniques discussed here are / were oriented toward the analog instrument without motion sensors.  Most of those cold war era examiners are now retired, and a younger generation of computer examiners quite dedicated have the best tools and training we all pay for.  You know what, they just can't get enough of such professionals.  Don't believe that ?  DACA is backed up over a year's wait, and agencies are begging for talent.  That sort of goes against the grain of what you see here, but this place is a fantasy of the failed, a dream of the would be deceptive.  You may not like them, but don't blame the Centurion for standing their post with their given general orders.   

  NoPolyCop, it is too bad that you had the experiences you did, but don't blame the inadimate instrument as it is merely a recording device.  Rather, look to the human element as to where your objections are, as that is where Medicine, Aviation, Construction, Polygraph, and other human endeavors fall short.  That we persue each of these is not a sin, as the persuit of greater truth / realization is inherant in all mankind.  Not all mankind is inherantly Truthful.   

   Now, was that covering what you have asked thorough enough ?

"n.p.c.",

why woud you answer the very question you are asking us, examiners?

It seems rather rude to support your assertions that we don't answer your question when you simply ask, then answer the very questions you ask with your own rhetoric, then accuse us examiners of not answering your questions...

Sackett  

sackett wrote on Mar 23^rd, 2008 at 3:56am:


Let me answer  your question directly and honestly.

It is because by doing so, I lend credibility to this site, by exposing the unwillingness for polygraphers like you to answer direct questions directly.  NOTE: This is an example of a direct answer.

You see,  my dear friend Sackett, my questioning is not done so I personally can find out the answers.  If that was so, I would PM you.  No, the questions I ask are asked to help educate the "guest" readers of  this site, (of which there are 20 or more at any given time).  Educate enough people about the fallacy of polygraphy, and eventually polygraph is debunked to the extent all it is good for is a game show prop.

The unfortunate issue is that it does have some merit, but because of polygraphers being unwilling to act honestly in their profession, they are killing their own goose.  NOTE: This is an example of an explanation.  

The jihadi article, "The Myth of the Lie Detector" (أسطورة جهاز كشف الكذب), is still available on www.tawhed.ws, though it now has a new URL:

http://www.tawhed.ws/r?i=7t40y4fs

As of 12 August 2009, it has been viewed 15,930 times and downloaded 3,703 times. A banner advertising the article has also been added to www.tawhed.ws. (See attached graphics.)