Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 [2] 3 4  Send TopicPrint
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) More Anti-polygraph literature ... (Read 38312 times)
cesium_133
Senior User
***
Offline


Nulla veritas in se qui
dicunt "Animum tuum lego"

Posts: 91
Location: USA
Joined: Jan 8th, 2006
Gender: Male
Re: More Anti-polygraph literature ...
Reply #15 - Aug 9th, 2006 at 9:04pm
Print Post  
retcopper wrote on Aug 9th, 2006 at 3:11pm:
Eos:

I think I posted before that I enjoy the philosophical discussions about polygraphy more than the "nuts and bolts" part of polygrapghy that most people here are interested in.


Well, fine.  Debate consists of four levels of argument: propositions of definition (most basic), of fact, of values (your preferred mode of discussion), and policy (overarching them all).- source: I debated in high school.  Loved it.  The regular posters here do not shy from a debate, and some of us will even use rather blunt language and situational similes to make our points.  I know I will.

Quote:
That is why I do not post evidence or studies to refute a lot of what is posted here.


I find that very interesting for someone who is so involved with the topic.  I personally love arguments in the pure style of Aristotle, but give me sound evidence any day of the week to back my assertions up.  I love quoting facts.  This also, with the utmost respect, seems to be a recurring way for the pro-poly side to beg off a true, intellectual debate.  If you have the facts to support your argument (for a proposition of fact argument), lay them out, I urge you!  Who knows what you, we together, might uncover?  If you have it, by golly, flaunt it!  Values only go so far in influencing a discussion on policy, as it's very hard to debate a nebulous concept like a "value".

Quote:
On this particular point I have the information regarding studies about increasing usage  but do not want to take the time  to look for it and post it.


Why not?  You took the time to come here and make a case.  Do you not believe in it enough, or care about it enough, to see it through?  Man, I sure would want to.  I love winning.  Do you have a URL for it?  If it's in your possession, it's a few clicks of the keyboard to post it.  C'mon, big guy, humour us Smiley  I swear I will read every word of what you post (I already do).

Quote:
It's funny how people here complain about the abuse of polygraph and how evil we are but when certain individuals here "mock" handicapped people not one word of disgust is rasied.  Kind of hypocritical.  Don't you think?


Objection, irrelevant.  I don't think that polymen are evil per se, and certainly not all of them.  I think a certain number of you truly believe that you're doing a service to the country and that your results are reliable.  We here dispute that, but constructively.

The ones I have problems with are the ones who continue to promote the box to be what it is not, and egregiously: able to tell lie from truth.  Accurate 90-98% of the time.  Objective rather than subjective.  Usable by itself, without having to rely on the polyman to divine the results.  Omitting that the main purpose of the poly is the facilitation of interrogation.  Also, those in the poly community who spread (and intentionally) disinformation about what the human body does in response to being polyed, in response to lying or truth, and about what they expect from an examination (what CQ's and IQ's do, e.g.) I find to be rather distasteful.

The remark about handicapped people is directed at me.  I stand by my remarks.  I have the utmost sympathy for both disabled people and their families, and it grieves me to my core when I see a person, esp a child, who is handicapped (like those twins in Utah).  However, the farce of FC has parallels to polygraphy that cannot be ignored, and I stated my case thereon using mental imagery and descriptiveness that some might balk at.  Well, I call 'em as I see 'em, and part of making a case is using every tool at your disposal.  I don't hold back, and am proud to say so.

I continue to debate the anti side.  Without regret...
  

I think polygraphers escaped among the evils of Pandora's box, which might have been an old analog polygraph... only God can tell whether you're lying or not, and He's got other things on His plate...
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
LieBabyCryBaby
Very Senior User
****
Offline



Posts: 246
Joined: Apr 28th, 2006
Re: More Anti-polygraph literature ...
Reply #16 - Aug 9th, 2006 at 10:46pm
Print Post  
Onesimus wrote on Aug 9th, 2006 at 6:00pm:
Sorry


Apology accepted.   Grin
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
quickfix
Especially Senior User
*****
Offline



Posts: 331
Joined: Jan 15th, 2006
Re: More Anti-polygraph literature ...
Reply #17 - Aug 9th, 2006 at 11:10pm
Print Post  
EosJupiter wrote on Aug 9th, 2006 at 8:03pm:
Quickfix,

Yes I have been there and seen it. To me it shows me they are sucking wind on getting anyone to become a polygrapher. More are leaving than they are getting. Not an increase in the overall useage. The telltale give away is how long the want adds are posted and they have been there for quite some time. From my point of view not much upside to being a polygrapher, its like being a CID or NCIS agent in the Army or Navy. Everyone dislikes you except other agents.  And the government is trying hard to find other technologies to get away from the polygraph. I wouldn't feel warm and fuzzy about any job security either. Just my observation.

Regards ....


Job security is just fine.  Virtually all federal agencies are paying 15-25% special polygraph pay, above regular federal civil service salaries.  We have several dozen applicants vying for a few positions, which affords us the luxury to select the most qualified.  Reason is not that polygraphers are leaving (non have left us), but because the mission is increasing 20% per year.  The APA website is not updated regularly, so some of the announcements are probably out of date.  Agree with you on one thing, we're not well-liked outside our own;  that's okay, I'll just hug my LES!!

Regards
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Fair Chance
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 551
Joined: Oct 10th, 2002
Re: More Anti-polygraph literature ...
Reply #18 - Aug 9th, 2006 at 11:49pm
Print Post  
Dear Quickfix,

No contest from me, the polygraph usage in pre-screening employment and regular employment in the federal agencies is expanding.

I believe the current frame of mind in usage will not change until there are not enough "qualified" candidates approved through polygraph exams.  Do you believe that this will be a problem that will need to addressed within the next three years?

Have you noticed in your exams that an unusual amount of applicants have not met basic security concerns in the past five years regardless of polygraph usage?

Do you think your answer to the previous question is more to due with lax hiring standards for basic qualifications or an overall decline in the background litmus test for the basic hiring standard?

Is there a solution in sight or is this just an indication of problems that the government is going to have in general in trying to hire so many people requiring Top Secret Clearances with SCI and additional letters?

If we threw away the polygraph tomorrow, what do you think the major challenges of gaining federal employment with a clearance would be?

Regards.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
quickfix
Especially Senior User
*****
Offline



Posts: 331
Joined: Jan 15th, 2006
Re: More Anti-polygraph literature ...
Reply #19 - Aug 10th, 2006 at 12:39am
Print Post  
Please bear in mind that my opinion is based on DOD knowledge/experience, which doesn't include the hiring practices of non-DOD entities such as FBI, USSS, etc.

I don't think there is a lack of qualified personnel within DOD military, civilian or contractor ranks;  there is a severe shortage within the linguist pool;  one problem is that many are non-US born naturalized US citizens, which makes conducting the normal background checks impossible;  background investigators cannot travel to Iran, Afghanistan, etc, to conduct records checks, interview previous employers, etc;  thus the reliance of other vetting tools such as polygraph testing.  The shortage of linguists will get worse in the next three years before it gets better as long as the US is involved in military operations in those areas.  Yes, I've seen some that have not met the basic security concerns since 9/11;  clearance adjudicators do everything they can to ensure that issues of concern are addressed prior to the granting of clearance/access.

Regarding possible lax hiring standards..., those being hired are not immediately given the "keys to the kingdom";  access is confined to the lowest level required to perform the duties of the job.  Based on the applicants I've seen in the past 5 years, the majority of applicants are of high caliber, but their BIs cannot be performed to the same extent as a US-born applicant.

Is there a solution in sight?  In the short term, I don't think so;  it is going to take some major changes in attitudes and policies of agency heads to improve the procedures of granting clearances and access, particularly at the TS/SCI level.

Throw away polygraph tomorrow, and I think the adjudication process time will probably significantly increase, as background checks take longer to take up the slack.

One comment needed here is that most positions require a urinalysis as a condition of employment;  why then do some agencies polygraph on past drug usage if the urinalysis comes back negative.  An applicant's marijuana use 5, 10, 15 years ago is irrelevant to today's society.  Other agencies do not polygraph on past drug use, one less obstacle to overcome in the polygraph process.

Regards

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
EosJupiter
Especially Senior User
*****
Offline


But of Course ...

Posts: 483
Location: Always Out There ......
Joined: Feb 28th, 2005
Re: More Anti-polygraph literature ...
Reply #20 - Aug 10th, 2006 at 12:45am
Print Post  
quickfix wrote on Aug 9th, 2006 at 11:10pm:
Job security is just fine.  Virtually all federal agencies are paying 15-25% special polygraph pay, above regular federal civil service salaries.  We have several dozen applicants vying for a few positions, which affords us the luxury to select the most qualified.  Reason is not that polygraphers are leaving (non have left us), but because the mission is increasing 20% per year.  The APA website is not updated regularly, so some of the announcements are probably out of date.  Agree with you on one thing, we're not well-liked outside our own;  that's okay, I'll just hug my LES!!

Regards


quickfix,

I will hold judgement on the 1/2 full or 1/2 empty scenario and let the events happen as they may. Again if you have data to post to support your position then post it. But I have to agree with Fair Chance, that at some point saturation and the law of diminishing return will set in. And just for the sake of argument, it is rather disconcerting to know that my tax dollar is being spent on a process that is truly worthless. Bet if you polygraphed congress or the senate who have clearances you folks would be out of business. You seem to avoid those of power and process. Again good debate and only time will tell.

Regards ...
« Last Edit: Aug 10th, 2006 at 7:23am by EosJupiter »  

Theory into Reality !!
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Fair Chance
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 551
Joined: Oct 10th, 2002
Re: More Anti-polygraph literature ...
Reply #21 - Aug 10th, 2006 at 5:16am
Print Post  
Dear Quickfix.

You answered my questions directly.  Right or wrong, the answers are appreciated and your opinion is listened to.  I think it is going to be a very interesting time in government security in the next five years.  While I will not throw stones at you and we will not likely share a meal together, we can at least converse which is much better than most of the world at this time.

Regards.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
underlyingtruth
Very Senior User
****
Offline



Posts: 123
Joined: Feb 2nd, 2006
Gender: Female
Re: More Anti-polygraph literature ...
Reply #22 - Aug 10th, 2006 at 4:47pm
Print Post  
LieBabyCryBaby wrote on Aug 9th, 2006 at 4:33pm:
The fact is that the vast majority of examinees who undergo polygraph screening exams--suprise, surprise--PASS the exam.  Compared to the number who pass the exam, the few disgruntled polygraph failures who pose as experts on this site are a TINY minority.


Really?  Where did you get those numbers? I'd love to read that very incorrect source...  of course, you won't provide it because you just made it up!
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
cesium_133
Senior User
***
Offline


Nulla veritas in se qui
dicunt "Animum tuum lego"

Posts: 91
Location: USA
Joined: Jan 8th, 2006
Gender: Male
Re: More Anti-polygraph literature ...
Reply #23 - Aug 10th, 2006 at 9:47pm
Print Post  
Lie Baby, George is an expert.  He's self-taught and self-experienced through the tests he took.

Benjamin Franklin taught himself French and the arts of diplomacy, as well as other fields of expertise.  He didn't have the schooling that Jefferson or Adams did.  Would that have made Franklin less authoritative on French or diplomatic protocol?

Again, a sure sign of an argument lost: ad hominem insults.  An unsupported assertion, without sources or figures, and then a "polygraph failures who think they are experts" comment.  Shoot the messenger when the message is not to the King's liking.

I say again: George knows his stuff.  I will go as far as to call myself a lay source on this topic- not an expert, but someone you could come to with a general question.  I've not failed any tests.  Am I suspect, too?  As always, inquiring minds want to know...
  

I think polygraphers escaped among the evils of Pandora's box, which might have been an old analog polygraph... only God can tell whether you're lying or not, and He's got other things on His plate...
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
quickfix
Especially Senior User
*****
Offline



Posts: 331
Joined: Jan 15th, 2006
Re: More Anti-polygraph literature ...
Reply #24 - Aug 10th, 2006 at 11:42pm
Print Post  
Quote:
Dear Quickfix.

You answered my questions directly.  Right or wrong, the answers are appreciated and your opinion is listened to.  I think it is going to be a very interesting time in government security in the next five years.  While I will not throw stones at you and we will not likely share a meal together, we can at least converse which is much better than most of the world at this time.

Regards.


Thanks;  I will say for the record that polygraph testing is not the end-all/be-all, and doesn't take the place of good investigative work in the criminal arena, and doesn't substitute for THOROUGH background investigations in the security world.  I also readily admit that false positives do occur, although not to the extent that many claim.  The fact is, in the screening world, the vast majority of examinees do satisfactorily complete their exams.  Where's the proof?  Search for on the internet and open up any of the annual "DOD Polygraph Reports to Congress" submitted each year and the statistics are readily available.  Anecdotal facts are also included in these reports to show the utility of polygraph testing.  Certainly a strong argument against the cry of "no better than a coin-flip".  And before anyone attacks this stance, be advised that the DoD report does NOT include non-DOD agencies such as FBI, USSS, etc.

It's not a perfect solution to national security, but research continues and technology continues to get better.

Regards
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Drew Richardson
Especially Senior User
*****
Offline



Posts: 427
Joined: Sep 7th, 2001
Re: More Anti-polygraph literature ...
Reply #25 - Aug 11th, 2006 at 2:51am
Print Post  
Quick fix,

You write in part:
Quote:
...(polygraph) research continues and technology continues to get better....


I am reasonably familiar with the history of polygraph research and practice over the last 75 years.  I am not aware of anything that would lead me to share in any optimism that might stem from your assertion(s).  The basic paradigm(s) of lie detection are incredibly theoretically weak (and not getting any more robust).  Some bad ideas even continue to cycle in and out of favor with passing generations, e.g., the relevant irrelevant (RI) test format.  Please share with us what us what is the source of your optimism.  Regards...
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
retcopper
Very Senior User
****
Offline



Posts: 192
Joined: Aug 31st, 2005
Re: More Anti-polygraph literature ...
Reply #26 - Aug 11th, 2006 at 3:15pm
Print Post  
Drew:

Why would the polygrpagh industry want to share anything with you? You get caught up in all your self serving studies, theories and idealism, clouding your perception of polygraphy. Get out of the lab, see the real word which is a dangetrous place rigt now and ask your egg head friends to help make it safer rather than tearing  down the tools the "good guys" are using to help make it a better world.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Drew Richardson
Especially Senior User
*****
Offline



Posts: 427
Joined: Sep 7th, 2001
Re: More Anti-polygraph literature ...
Reply #27 - Aug 11th, 2006 at 3:41pm
Print Post  
Retcopper,

You write:
Quote:
Drew:

Why would the polygrpagh industry want to share anything with you? You get caught up in all your self serving studies, theories and idealism, clouding your perception of polygraphy. Get out of the lab, see the real word which is a dangetrous place rigt now and ask your egg head friends to help make it safer rather than tearing  down the tools the "good guys" are using to help make it a better world.


Neither a dangerous nor a safe world is per se a call for foolishness on the part of those who see themselves wearing white hats.  Hopefully, Quickfix (to whom the question was addressed) will have a more substantive and meaningful reply.  With regard to eggheads and dangerous times, perhaps you are familiar with the Manhattan Project, yes? lol
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
underlyingtruth
Very Senior User
****
Offline



Posts: 123
Joined: Feb 2nd, 2006
Gender: Female
Re: More Anti-polygraph literature ...
Reply #28 - Aug 11th, 2006 at 8:06pm
Print Post  
retcopper wrote on Aug 11th, 2006 at 3:15pm:
Drew:

Why would the polygrpagh industry want to share anything with you? You get caught up in all your self serving studies, theories and idealism, clouding your perception of polygraphy. Get out of the lab, see the real word which is a dangetrous place rigt now and ask your egg head friends to help make it safer rather than tearing  down the tools the "good guys" are using to help make it a better world.  


We'd be happy to read YOUR self-serving studies, theories, and idealisms.  Where are they?

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
EosJupiter
Especially Senior User
*****
Offline


But of Course ...

Posts: 483
Location: Always Out There ......
Joined: Feb 28th, 2005
Re: More Anti-polygraph literature ...
Reply #29 - Aug 11th, 2006 at 9:02pm
Print Post  
retcopper wrote on Aug 11th, 2006 at 3:15pm:
Drew:

Why would the polygrpagh industry want to share anything with you? You get caught up in all your self serving studies, theories and idealism, clouding your perception of polygraphy. Get out of the lab, see the real word which is a dangetrous place rigt now and ask your egg head friends to help make it safer rather than tearing  down the tools the "good guys" are using to help make it a better world.  


RetCopper,

I couldn't help myself on this one, but here goes. I will gladly take the title egghead, being both a scientist and an engineer. To the betterment of mankind I submit that it applies to all mankind, good or bad. The polygraph by its inherent nature to cull and villify just one person, again diminishes your intended statement. Just one false positive or negitive and your basis for being a good guy is gone. Any process or system where human interpretation is the final answer is endemic of failure. For we as humans are inherently flawed. I submit that such a flawed system can and never will be of any use in a society based on laws, democratic ideals, and the betterment of mankind. Its the intelligencia that must be the guardian and voice of these principles not the functionaries that try to dispense the rule of law. So Egghead as I may be, I would rather be known for my intellect and compassion, than for my ability to use a flawed tool that has dangerous ramifications. This is long winded I know, but the point is neccessary when discussing GOOD vs BAD.

Regards
  

Theory into Reality !!
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 
Send TopicPrint
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo