flbcm850 wrote on Aug 8^th, 2007 at 4:16pm:


Excuse the editing.

Breathing CM's wont help you one iota in a CVSA test.
Not one of the Polygraph CM's will help you in fact.
 
When taking a CVSA test, the examiner may instruct you to wait till he signals you to answer.
If he does, then he's quite sharp and what you should do is wait a second longer before you answer.
If he does not (signal when to answer) then wait approx 2 secs before you answer - that way your 
Flight or Fight response would have diminished somewhat.

But, the biggest problem remains that 'situational stress' does not equate to 'deceptive stress'.
Quite possibly you had nothing serious to conceal.

stoppolyabusenow wrote on Dec 8^th, 2007 at 3:33pm:

I have written similar sentiments on this board many times.  I know the polygraph process is not accurate because I was telling the truth and answering all the same questions the same way on all four of my pre-employment polygraphs.  I failed three out of the four.

Some of the polygraph examiners on this board respond to my story by calling me a liar, and then claiming to "prove" mathematically that the polygraph is accurate.  Then they tell me my experiences don't mean anything.  They have written that I have psychoses that prevent me from being accurately polygraphed, and that I am stupid for expecting a different result on any of my subsequent exams after failing the first one.  They are also completely comfortable jumping to the (erroneous) conclusion that because I refer to my polygraph experiences as a "story", I am obviously not telling the truth and am not even a real cop.   

It seems they are not familiar with Occam's Razor.  If I tell the truth on a test which is purported to detect deception, and the test result is that I am lying, the simplest explanation is that the test is not accurate.

I'm sure that examiners can come up with loads of possible excuses as to why a truthful person could fail a polygraph.  If the polygraph was a valid method of detecing deception then truthful people would pass, and deceptive people would fail.  That simply doesn't happen with enough regularity.

The problem with poly's are also that if the falsely accused, unless somehow proven innocent by other later evidence are  still considered guilty based on the poly results. Therefore counting those results as "accurate", and the accused .....GULITY.
I think that the fact that people with "agendas" get on here to "poke fun at George and others" is a further argument of the failed validity of poly's.
Would you rather have a science that is never questioned even though there are SERIOUS flaws in it?
If the science was good and proven there would no need to "poke fun" or disagree.
I think DNA testing may be a good example of a scientific and court approved test that not many are fighting though I cannot be sure of that.

Plenty of people are fighting against DNA testing, and there are websites that are advocating a more measured weight given by courts regarding DNA evidence. Like any test, there are serious errors. As more and more of the DNA test errors are coming to light, we will see a backlash against that modality of testing.


Yes, but at least DNA testing is "scientific".

Sure there are errors in any test (scientific or pseudo-scientific).  But can you honestly put Polygraph testing in the same category as  DNA testing, or HIV testing in terms of scientific validity?

Can you imagine coming up with a HIV test which:

1.  Can't really tell for sure whether you have HIVs?

2.  Routinely labels healthy people as "aids carriers"?

P.S.  I changed my moniker, per your request.  Happy?