boeing747 wrote on Apr 16^th, 2006 at 12:40am:

If you choose to lie on your polygraph exam I hope lots of bad things happen to you.

The purpose of this site is not to allow people who have done illegal or immoral acts to successfully lie about them to prospective employers or law enforcement agencies.

The purpose of this web site is to provide information on the polygraph.   

An unfortunate side effect of providing this informtion is that some unethical people will use that knowledge to lie about prior illegal activity.

Sergeant1107 wrote on Apr 16^th, 2006 at 12:47am:


Sergeant,

I know we have already gone 'round and 'round on this subject, but I can't help pointing this out once again...

One cannot stand a shotgun up in the doorway of the schoolhouse and then take no responsibility when a kid picks it up and shoots another kid.

The statement, "I didn't mean for any kids to pick up that gun, you can't hold me responsible," is itself irresponsible and foolish...

Regards,

Nonombre

All im saying is that this site teaches people that they can lie on the test and still pass.  Thats be realistic about the FBI drug hiring requirements.  How many people have smoked weed more than 15 times, ALOT! and are still in the FBI.  It isnt fair to anyone. Who cares if you smoked pot when you were 18 but as long as you havent sharpened up and dont do it anymore.  I dont think you should be able to punish somebody for that. So when people do smoke more that the guidelines say and they want that job, well guess what, this site will teach them how to lie on the polygraph and pass.  And im glad

boeing,
Plenty of people have never smoked pot.  If your integrity is lacking, you are the only person to blame.  You appear very childish lashing out against people such as the Sergeant


Nonombre,
You logic is tragically flawed.  You are comparing KNOWLEDGE to a shotgun.  According to your arguement, anything I learn that could hurt someone falls into the same category.  Do you really think we shouldn't teach chemistry because people could poison others with the knowledge?  Better yet, they could cover up their crimes if they understand how things like fingerprints work...or physics.  Hiding the truth will always damage your credibility.  Why do you not understand this? 

The real fact is that your witch hunts are not fair or scientific.  If they were, knowledge would not scare you so much.  It must be very scary to live in a world where you depend on other's ignorance to sustain your superiority.

I think you have your analogies backwards.  Polygraphers are the ones with the shotguns and pipe bombs turned indiscriminately against both the innocent and guilty.  Maybe you should talk about the Tarlain method of diffusing a bomb?

(lost my first response from a board error  )

Quick reply,
Urine test...use hair or watch the person urinate in the cup.  That example is junk.

Pipebomb- I could care less if there are directions on the internet for ways to build a pipebomb.

knowledge is not the enemy.   a person's actions and intent are the issue.

Lastly, I don't think Onesimus missed your point.  I think he just ignored it because it is a flawed arguement.  If I am correct, I agree with him.  It is a pointless exercise to try to place blame on people who offer knowledge. 

I could just as easily get as many "confessions" by pistol whipping people and telling them I will shoot them if they don't tell the truth.  This is basically what you do...just on an intellectual level.  It is not a RELIABLE method of discovering the truth.  I'm actually beginning to form an opinion that it's mental abuse...purely because of the amount of lying you guys do.

Why should I be prepared to be responsibile for another person's actions?  Should I really worry that if I teach my children that anti freeze is deadly...that they might use it to hurt someone?  Educate people and then hold them responsible for THEIR ACTIONS.  I will never feel guilty because of what someone else does.  

WE ARE TALKING ABOUT GROWN ADULTS HERE.  If it is a child, then the parental units are responsible.  But there is no reason to censor information...unless you are in the field of the polygraph.  

nonombre wrote on Apr 21^st, 2006 at 10:36pm:


Talk about a non sequitir.  Your reasoning in this thread is full of logical fallacies and absurd arguments.  I suggest you have it copywritten for publishing in a logic 101 textbook under the heading "common fallacies".   

Let me ask you something:  if you do believe that countermeasures can affect the outcome of a polygraph test, why are you so sure that myriad other variables could not also affect it?  Say, a nervous or anxious person, someone who is overly "responsive" to judgments regarding his/her character, etc.?  In other words, if the polygraph is limited in its effectiveness by some idiot sitting there flexing his sphincter muscle or biting his tongue, doesn't it naturally follow, arguendo, that its effectiveness could also be limited by other factors?