concernedapple wrote on Jan 19^th, 2006 at 10:22pm:


Seems to me they "detected it..."

Nonombre

Dash,

IF being in Law Enforcement is your dream, than continue to pursue it. Maybe applying to a PD in one of the states that has the smarts not to use polygraphs or even worse the CVSA.  Good luck in your job pursuits.


nonombre wrote on Jan 20^th, 2006 at 2:15am:


NoNombre,

I give you credit, you have the ability to only show up when you see something obvious.  My how intuitive.
At a wake you would probably see the bad makeup on the corpse and point it out to the dead persons family. Dam you must be one fine polygrapher with that keen sense of timing. 

How about something original, from the point of opposing articles, original thoughts, or at least an opinion that shows there is more than just an opportunist in cheap clothing. From previous dealing you still have no stomach for indepth debates.  It would be refreshing once in a while.

nonombre,

There are no journal articles or book chapters that explain how to detect polygraph countermeasures. Nor are there any published studies suggesting that polygraphers can detect them at better-than-chance levels of accuracy. I think it's clear that "countermeasure detection" is an exercise in guesswork. This is borne out by the fact that when polygraphers accuse a subject of attempted countermeasures, they generally decline to specify what, precisely, they think the subject was doing to influence the chart readings.

Even the broken clock is right twice a day, and it is not surprising that polygraphers' opinions that countermeasures have been employed are sometimes correct. To date, no polygrapher has demonstrated any ability to reliably detect countermeasures.

Quote:


Mr. Maschke,

But there are several courses available to polygraph examiners that do a very good job teaching polygraph examiners how to detect and counter physical and psychological countermeasures, including a 40 hour course at the federal polygraph school (classroom and lab) that is well established as the "Gold Standard."

So what exactly do you think these people do for a full week?  Sit around, throw darts at your picture, and discuss how to accuse everybody of countermeasures until somebody confesses?

Hmmm?

Nonombre 8)

nonombre wrote on Jan 21^st, 2006 at 6:33pm:


NoNombre, 

I call them as I see them. And again I don't sit on fences waiting for something to happen and yell, see see see, the sky is falling.

As far as the DODPI, countermeasures course  .... Hmm lets see. A course from a very questionable and unaccredited school, DOD schools though efficient at putting military MOS training out, are not the toughest and most are only marginally recognized by real accreditation counsels., the exception to this being DLI, the Intel Schools, Military Medical training, there are others, but they are few and far between. DODPI's acceditation,  ACICS is a trade school certification organization,  And let me see, you folks consider yourself professionals. Professionals usually means accredited and valid certifications. Now some of you have real undergraduate degrees from real universities and colleges. THose I consider valid.  but in no shape or manner is ACICS worth squat. The only reason you have that at all is any real research institutions or schools,  wouldn't touch DODPI with a 10 ft pole. 

ACICS school list link: 
http://www.acics.org/accredited/documents/institutionsbyprograms2005_000.pdf

See if you can find a top notch research institution in this list. Not even a tier III school. But they do accredit beauty schools. 

Try all the countermeasure detection training you like, its not possible to those who know / practice  countermeasures cold. And by the way, if countermeasures are not valid or worth the time, then why would DODPI have a course in detecting them. Seems to me DODPI has endorsed (indirectly) that countermeasures work, and they are worried. And tacitly validates this website. 

Another example is California Polygraph association meetings schedule link:

http://www.californiapolygraph.com/training/033006conference.htm

The one that is most hilarious is: 

Saturday, October 15, 2005 
0730–0745     Late Registration 
0800-1200     A Fresh Look at Dealing with CM’S
                     Jim Wygant

What are they going to do sit around and gripe there little sham is completely blown. 

At least this time you actually had original verbage and thoughts. Much better than the random, I told you so !!

George:  Touche'

Poly,

Again we give NoNombre the opportunity to defend his position. Again he remains silent.  Notice a pattern here.

Regards ....