FROM THE APA'S WEBSITE: FAQ'S IRO ACCURACY AND RELIABILITY ISSUES:-

Quote:
Why do Critics Figures Vary?
One of the problems in discussing accuracy figures and the differences between the statistics quoted by proponents and opponents of the polygraph technique is the way that the figures are calculated. At the risk of over simplification, critics, who often don't understand polygraph testing, classify inconclusive test results as errors. In the real life setting an inconclusive result simply means that the examiner is unable to render a definite diagnosis. In such cases a second examination is usually conducted at a later date. 

To illustrate how the inclusion of inconclusive test results can distort accuracy figures, consider the following example: If 10 polygraph examinations are administered and the examiner is correct in 7 decisions, wrong in 1 and has 2 inconclusive test results, we calculate the accuracy rate as 87.5% (8 definitive results, 7 of which were correct.) Critics of the polygraph technique would calculate the accuracy rate in this example as 70%, (10 examinations with 7 correct decisions.) Since those who use polygraph testing do not consider inconclusive test results as negative, and do not hold them against the examinee, to consider them as errors is clearly misleading and certainly skews the figures. Unquote.

MORE APA - BS !! IF YOU DONT GET IT SPOT ON 87,5% OF THE TIME THEN YOUR ACCURACY CANNOT BE 87,5%. 7 CORRECT CALLS = 70% AND NOTHING MORE.

I THINK IT IS SAFE TO SAY THAT THE NEXT EXAMINER WHO ACHIEVES A PROVEN 70% ACCURACY RECORD -  WILL BE THE FIRST ONE.

IF THE APA SAYS THE SKY IS GREEN, BUT YOU SAY IT IS BLUE, IT IS GREEN. BECAUSE THEY
WONT HOLD IT AGAINST YOU AND A ZILLION OTHERS WHO SAY THE SKY IS BLUE, IT MAY BE 
CALLED GREEN.

THATS THE WAY THINGS WORK DOWN AT THE APA's 'REFECTORIUM PRO FOSSORE'