Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 3  Send TopicPrint
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Polygraphy as Pseudoscience (Read 13994 times)
George W. Maschke
Global Moderator
*****
Offline


Make-believe science yields
make-believe security.

Posts: 5777
Location: The Hague, The Netherlands
Joined: Sep 29th, 2000
Polygraphy as Pseudoscience
Dec 12th, 2006 at 9:32am
Print Post  
The Wikipedia entry for Pseudoscience includes a section titled "Identifying pseudoscience." I invite all to peruse this checklist and consider for themselves how polygraphy fares.
  

George W. Maschke
Tel/SMS: 1-202-810-2105 (Please use Signal Private Messenger or WhatsApp to text or call.)
E-mail/iMessage/FaceTime: maschke@antipolygraph.org
Wire: @georgemaschke
PGP Public Key: 316A947C
PGP Public Key (offline): 2BF4374B
Personal Statement: "Too Hot of a Potato"
Back to top
IP Logged
 
LieBabyCryBaby
Very Senior User
****
Offline



Posts: 246
Joined: Apr 28th, 2006
Re: Polygraphy as Pseudoscience
Reply #1 - Dec 13th, 2006 at 9:29pm
Print Post  
Well, there you go. That just goes to show that we can all learn something new. I now know the meaning of "granfalloon." Thanks, George.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
George W. Maschke
Global Moderator
*****
Offline


Make-believe science yields
make-believe security.

Posts: 5777
Location: The Hague, The Netherlands
Joined: Sep 29th, 2000
Re: Polygraphy as Pseudoscience
Reply #2 - Dec 14th, 2006 at 9:24am
Print Post  
LieBabyCryBaby wrote on Dec 13th, 2006 at 9:29pm:
Well, there you go. That just goes to show that we can all learn something new. I now know the meaning of "granfalloon." Thanks, George.


The existence of polygraph granfalloons, chief amongst them the American Polygraph Association, which purports to be "Dedicated to Truth" (APA motto) but sees no ethical problem with a past president and life member falsely passing himself off as a Ph.D. in marketing his polygraph services, is but one of the many hallmarks of pseudoscience stamped all over the empty vessel of polygraphy.
« Last Edit: Dec 14th, 2006 at 9:40am by George W. Maschke »  

George W. Maschke
Tel/SMS: 1-202-810-2105 (Please use Signal Private Messenger or WhatsApp to text or call.)
E-mail/iMessage/FaceTime: maschke@antipolygraph.org
Wire: @georgemaschke
PGP Public Key: 316A947C
PGP Public Key (offline): 2BF4374B
Personal Statement: "Too Hot of a Potato"
Back to top
IP Logged
 
George W. Maschke
Global Moderator
*****
Offline


Make-believe science yields
make-believe security.

Posts: 5777
Location: The Hague, The Netherlands
Joined: Sep 29th, 2000
Re: Polygraphy as Pseudoscience
Reply #3 - Sep 17th, 2011 at 9:20am
Print Post  
Although it doesn't address polygraphy, Brian Dunning's video about critical thinking and recognizing pseudoscience, Here Be Dragons, may be of interest:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=752V173e31o
« Last Edit: Sep 27th, 2014 at 1:48pm by George W. Maschke »  

George W. Maschke
Tel/SMS: 1-202-810-2105 (Please use Signal Private Messenger or WhatsApp to text or call.)
E-mail/iMessage/FaceTime: maschke@antipolygraph.org
Wire: @georgemaschke
PGP Public Key: 316A947C
PGP Public Key (offline): 2BF4374B
Personal Statement: "Too Hot of a Potato"
Back to top
IP Logged
 
Twoblock
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 732
Location: AR.
Joined: Oct 15th, 2002
Gender: Male
Re: Polygraphy as Pseudoscience
Reply #4 - Sep 17th, 2011 at 5:30pm
Print Post  
George

I agree with this video and I'm the biggest skeptic around and don't believe much until I try it myself when it come to urbal benefits. However, I think this guy is wrong when it comes to the FDA.

I have been plagued with skin cancer for 20 years. I had four surgically removed with two returning. Then my daughter obtained a product that cured melanoma on her prize stallion. It was suggested that he be put down. He lived another 12 years. I then used it on the two carcinomas that returned. It cured them and they never returned. Then I got melanoma myself in my right temple and applied this product. Walla. It was cured. I can furnish pictures of the different stages of cure. It has cured cancers on me, three members of my family and four others 17 times without a failure. But do you think the FDA will do research on it. Hell no. Why? Because this product has been curing cancer for 100 years and pharma industries and the medical profession can't make their billions from it. I firmly believe that the FDA is the enforcement arm of the AMA and Pharma.

I will not name the product because I don't believe in advertising on someone else's website.

Like I said. I proved it on me first then others without a failure. I still don't believe the pseudoscience of polygraphy because I proved it ineffective on me first.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Twoblock
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 732
Location: AR.
Joined: Oct 15th, 2002
Gender: Male
Re: Polygraphy as Pseudoscience
Reply #5 - Sep 17th, 2011 at 10:35pm
Print Post  
Should that have been herbal instead of urbal? Are phonetics allowed here. lol. I do pretty good in ebonics or eubonics also.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
George W. Maschke
Global Moderator
*****
Offline


Make-believe science yields
make-believe security.

Posts: 5777
Location: The Hague, The Netherlands
Joined: Sep 29th, 2000
Re: Polygraphy as Pseudoscience
Reply #6 - Sep 18th, 2011 at 6:23am
Print Post  
Twoblock,

The point in the video concerning the FDA is the importance of blinded clinical trials with statistically significant numbers of individuals for evaluating the effectiveness of a drug. Anecdotal evidence is not enough.

With regard to polygraphy, our personal experiences do not prove that it's not valid. Even a valid test for deception (and none has yet been devised) would have a margin of error, and inevitably some truthful persons would be wrongly classified as deceptive (and vice versa).

But polygraphy has not been proven to reliably differentiate between liars and truth-tellers under field conditions. Those who claim it is a highly accurate test for deception (who inevitably have a financial stake in polygraphy) have failed to support such claims with evidence that withstands scrutiny.

With regard to the FDA, it doesn't initiate testing of drugs. The company that wants to market a drug does so. I'm glad that your melanomas are cured, but your experience is not enough to prove that the treatment you employed is generally safe and effective.

Of course, as you noted, herbal is spelled with an "h." Some people aspirate the h, some don't, which explains how a misspelling like "urbal" can arise.
  

George W. Maschke
Tel/SMS: 1-202-810-2105 (Please use Signal Private Messenger or WhatsApp to text or call.)
E-mail/iMessage/FaceTime: maschke@antipolygraph.org
Wire: @georgemaschke
PGP Public Key: 316A947C
PGP Public Key (offline): 2BF4374B
Personal Statement: "Too Hot of a Potato"
Back to top
IP Logged
 
skeptic too
Guest


Re: Polygraphy as Pseudoscience
Reply #7 - Sep 22nd, 2011 at 6:52pm
Print Post  
This video is nothing more than orthodox establishment thinking, and the guy who made it is nothing more than a tool for the establishment. 

He cites FDA clinical trials as the holy grail methodology of "scientific proof".  YET - he conveniently does not mention that the same FDA pulled more than 1,700 prescription drugs from the market in 2009, after they underwent the vaunted FDA clinical trial process.  Explain that one George...

Then he hocks his own book at the end of the video - but warns the viewers to watch out for such tactics.  He denigrates both chiropractors and acupuncture, which have been supported by major medical universities and centers such as John Hopkins.

And, George, if you believe the BS this "expert" is spewing then why don't you accept the controlled US government clinical studies of the polygraph.  Yeah, I know the polygraph is a very crude instrument with limited utility --- but if one were to accept the information in this video then polygraph should be accepted.  After all, the same US Government that controls the FDA controls polygraph... 

Just some food for thought my friend.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
George W. Maschke
Global Moderator
*****
Offline


Make-believe science yields
make-believe security.

Posts: 5777
Location: The Hague, The Netherlands
Joined: Sep 29th, 2000
Re: Polygraphy as Pseudoscience
Reply #8 - Sep 23rd, 2011 at 4:43am
Print Post  
skeptic too,

The FDA's 1,700 prescription drug recalls in 2009 were evidently based on manufacturing lapses, and not faulty clinical trials.

The US government has not conducted any trial of polygraphy that is remotely comparable to the FDA's clinical trial process.

As Alan Zelicoff, M.D. has observed, "If we had medical tests that had the same failure rate as a polygraph, then physicians that use those tests would be convicted of malpractice."
  

George W. Maschke
Tel/SMS: 1-202-810-2105 (Please use Signal Private Messenger or WhatsApp to text or call.)
E-mail/iMessage/FaceTime: maschke@antipolygraph.org
Wire: @georgemaschke
PGP Public Key: 316A947C
PGP Public Key (offline): 2BF4374B
Personal Statement: "Too Hot of a Potato"
Back to top
IP Logged
 
George W. Maschke
Global Moderator
*****
Offline


Make-believe science yields
make-believe security.

Posts: 5777
Location: The Hague, The Netherlands
Joined: Sep 29th, 2000
Re: Polygraphy as Pseudoscience
Reply #9 - Sep 27th, 2014 at 1:53pm
Print Post  
Applying this checklist comparing features of science with those of pseudoscience to the field of polygraphy is instructive:
  

science-vs-pseudoscience.png ( 176 KB | 72 Downloads )
science-vs-pseudoscience.png

George W. Maschke
Tel/SMS: 1-202-810-2105 (Please use Signal Private Messenger or WhatsApp to text or call.)
E-mail/iMessage/FaceTime: maschke@antipolygraph.org
Wire: @georgemaschke
PGP Public Key: 316A947C
PGP Public Key (offline): 2BF4374B
Personal Statement: "Too Hot of a Potato"
Back to top
IP Logged
 
1st4th5thand6th
User
**
Offline



Posts: 28
Joined: Sep 13th, 2014
Re: Polygraphy as Pseudoscience
Reply #10 - Sep 27th, 2014 at 5:23pm
Print Post  
LOL...you could replaced the psuedoscience catchword with polygraphy and no one would ever know the word psuedoscience was there in the first place!!! LOL
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Dan Mangan
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 616
Joined: Jul 31st, 2014
Re: Polygraphy as Pseudoscience
Reply #11 - Sep 28th, 2014 at 12:33am
Print Post  
1st4th5thand6th,

You can yuk it up until hell freezes over.

Why is that?

Because polygraph "works" -- at least in one fashion or another.

In the grand scheme of things, that's all that matters.

Consider this:

  • Polygraph has expanded exponentially since 9/11.
    PCSOT has made inroads into the UK and beyond.
    Russia, China, India and many other nations are becoming increasingly invested in the liebox.


Polygraph is here to stay...at least until the next big thing in lie detection is more firmly is place.

To learn more about that eventuality, go here: www.converus.com

Meanwhile, you will have to reckon with the fact that life ain't fair, and Uncle Sugar hates to take chances when it comes to national security.

Yes, the deck is stacked in that regard.

That's the way it is.
  

Daniel Mangan, M.A.
Full Member, American Polygraph Association
Certified PCSOT Examiner

Website: www.polygraphman.com
Email: polygraphexam@gmail.com
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
EosJupiter
Especially Senior User
*****
Offline


But of Course ...

Posts: 483
Location: Always Out There ......
Joined: Feb 28th, 2005
Re: Polygraphy as Pseudoscience
Reply #12 - Sep 28th, 2014 at 1:11am
Print Post  
I rarely ever comment on this board anymore, but as a scientist and engineer, 2 letters "BS". Just like fMRI was going to be the next big thing in detection of deception devices. This eye movement device delves into the same area that the fMRI tries too. That the human body has a definitive standardized response to lying. Standardized responses from human beings is a pipe dream. Which has always been the holy grail for any device that claims to be able to detect deception. And I can off the top of my head think of at least 5 OTC medicines that would not only hinder any attempt to monitor eye movements, if not completely negate reactive eye movements. Try as you might  Mr. Mangan, science and substance beats pseudoscience everytime. And once a subject is trained on how the detection of deception con is played, (pick your device), it basically renders the process useless. Or in layman's terms, once you know the magicians trick, it is far from impressive.
  

Theory into Reality !!
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Dan Mangan
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 616
Joined: Jul 31st, 2014
Re: Polygraphy as Pseudoscience
Reply #13 - Sep 28th, 2014 at 1:32am
Print Post  
EosJupiter,

So what?

The "magician's trick," as you call it, still works on most of the people most of the time.

If, for nothing else, EyeDetect will replace polygraph in federal and state government credibility assessment applications out of sheer economic superiority.

As you know, fMRI is cost-prohibitive.

Polygraph is relatively costly and decidedly high maintenance.

EyeDetect is...and please forgive the un-PC term...a God$end.

This game is all about gross percentages -- and bang for the buck.


  

Daniel Mangan, M.A.
Full Member, American Polygraph Association
Certified PCSOT Examiner

Website: www.polygraphman.com
Email: polygraphexam@gmail.com
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
EosJupiter
Especially Senior User
*****
Offline


But of Course ...

Posts: 483
Location: Always Out There ......
Joined: Feb 28th, 2005
Re: Polygraphy as Pseudoscience
Reply #14 - Sep 28th, 2014 at 3:29am
Print Post  
Mr Mangan,

Just like every other Detection of Deception machine, or should I say Placebo Device, its only as good as the selling job that's done with it. If you correlate Placebo Effect to any deception detection process, its one and the same. The ultimate countermeasure to be trained is "Just don't believe". Core Non-belief leads to no adrenals released, no F3 reactions, no reactions on the machine. Its that simple, and knowledge is power. Remove the fear and anxiety and you get nothing. So it doesn't take a rocket scientist, once informed,  to see any deception detection device as being worthless.  So until a device is built that can actually read the human mind, any of these devices remain just what they are, interrogation props. And a knowledgeable subject will know he has nothing to fear from them. Which defeats even the most ardent operator.
  

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