This morning, I was interviewed by Marc Moser and Sandy Clough ("The Sports Guys") on Denver AM radio station 950 ("The Fan"). The immediate occasion for the interview was the recent polygraph examination taken by Denver Broncos receiver David Kircus, who recently took a private polygraph examination regarding a fistfight over which he now faces felony assault charges. The interview may be downloaded as a 6.6 mb MP3 file here:

https://antipolygraph.org/audio/sportsradio-denver-am950-31-05-2007.mp3

Quote:


Hi George,

I listened up to the point where Interviewer quoted Kircus as saying that DK said his career is on the line.

Some observations I made.

Firstly, George!!! you referred to the term 'Conductance' in same sentence as 'resistance'. I'm proud of you.

Then you said that the p/g measures BP. It doesnt measure blood pressure. The examiner doesn't take
any cognisance of pulse rate change (even if there was one) - The examiner looks for and scores the 
increase in blood volume recorded between RQ's and CQ's. The rise and fall of the mean cardio tracing
is related to the change in blood volume. not blood pressure.

Then, the IRQ is not used to establish baseline norms. The IRQ is used to restore homeostasis in the examinee.

CQ's: Any examiner who constructs a CQ base don the same type of issue/crime being tested in the
RQ, is an asshole. One may never assume that the examinee has done the same thing earlier in life.
Just by making that assumption and posing such question to the examinee skews the entire test, because
there is no scientifically validated 'same response' for all people to an incorrect inference.

The safest CQ is the assumed lie control. The only assumption we can eve rmake about anyone's past is
that they have lied to persons in their 'inner circle'.

Lastly, by 'deluded persons' I presume that you are referring to someone with a psychiatric condition.
In reality, such person would probably never appear before a p/g examiner because by the time they reach late teens they are institutionalised. I think you were thinking of sociopaths..? and anyway they
theoretically are good subject material because they fear consequences and loss of liberty/benefits
more than do 'normal' people.

Otherwise, you were 100% correct. 

Hi George,

Its nevertheless still fundamentally wrong and unreliable to assume that the subject has ever committed the same behaviour earlier in life. 
Lets hypothesise that the subject is being tested for direct involvement in an airliner hijacking...the Examiner may not ask a CQ: B4 the age of X-5 did you ever take illegal control of an airplane...The only reliable CQ is prior in life lying to yr inner circle.

Despite your correct inference that p/g examiners try to BS the subject about baseline truth etc...
There is a distinct difference between Baseline Norm and Homeostasis. Baseline Norm is where the
mean tracings run after homeostasis has restored. The IRQ is utilised to allow homeostasis to restore the tracings to the subjects baseline norm (norm for the situation) - but they are not one and the same thing.

No wonder you didnt want to go and Rock n Roll with Doug ..whatsisname....Its a helluva long way to go
from Holland to Redneckville, merely to engage a deluded megalomaniac.

Sincere Regards,
1904