Ludovico wrote on Oct 1
st, 2007 at 2:35am:
Well. Golly gee, boss. Someday I gotta get me one-a them there edumacations.
You didn't seriously come here for me to educate me did you? You came here to flex some mathematical muscle or sompin' - or to get me to behave (if all else fails I'll get mod-slapped again - that'll teach me).
Call it a character flaw but I think that everyone is capable of learning, even those steeped in their own delusions...
As for getting mod-slapped, I can't help it if you weren't properly socialized enough to play nice in the sandbox with the other kids...
Ludovico wrote on Oct 1
st, 2007 at 2:35am:
You and I have both read the report.
I seem to recall something else they said about countermeasures not working... and perhaps even increasing the likelihood of not passing...
I think you need to go back and reread it again. You're mixing Honts' recent work with it, which itself has enough holes to drive a truck through...
Ludovico wrote on Oct 1
st, 2007 at 2:35am:
Hey!
You left your fly open, and your dribbling on your pants. Zip it up in public, huh pal.
(you checked. didn't you)
Nope, I'm wearing sweatpants...
Ludovico wrote on Oct 1
st, 2007 at 2:35am:
Even if you didn't yet, you might. Or, through sheer will power and stubbornness you won't. Just to prove your superiority. But you'll check later, won't you. Or, next time you zip or check you'll think of me. You're welcome.
Nope...
Ludovico wrote on Oct 1
st, 2007 at 2:35am:
Now try this.
You take polygraphs? (Or anyone that does.)
I've never taken a polygraph in my life. However, I do research and program evaluations of sex offender treatment. Hence my interest in polygraphs..
Ludovico wrote on Oct 1
st, 2007 at 2:35am:
Next time you have to take one, don't bother to be honest. Plus, before your polygraphs, don't bother to adhere to your security guidelines or probation rules. The polygraph doesn't work right. No worries. Right? You already branded it with the great big rubber stamp of "psuedo...
Find anything in my postings here that encourages dishonesty and criminality...
And yes, it is pseudoscience but I didn't brand it as such. The NAS and others (Lykken, Iacono) did. I also think there is pretty compelling evidence that reliance on it is a threat to the community...
Ludovico wrote on Oct 1
st, 2007 at 2:35am:
Feel good now?
Good.
If you seriously want to have a real conversation about this you gotta let us know sometime. This ain't it. This is just a poly-bashing circus for some disgruntled folks (and cheap entertainment for others). But you did a good job putting me in my place with all those tough questions about science. Yessiree.
For now, go spin that propeller on yer hat for a while. But check your fly before you go out.
What's so sad about this is that I know that most people who work in sex offender treatment, even the polygraphers, are truly earnest in their efforts to prevent relapse and reoffending. I'm sorry that you feel the need to denigrate science and scientific inquiry because it happens to demostrate that your career choice is a sham...
Rather than continuing your invective and vitriol against me, how about engaging in real dialogue and debate on the scientific evidence for and against the polygraph? Perhaps I could learn something from you and the same might happen for you...
Otherwise, you're the only one providing cheap entertainment...