Okay, I get it... I hurt your feelings cause I said that when you make the statements that polygraph isn't about lie detection, (flying in the face of what the rest of the industry is saying the purpose of polygraph is) is lying, misleading, deceiving, etc. and so that is what you are referring to when you say I called you a liar.  No my friend, that was just my opinion, which is all a polygraphers opinion of someone being deceptive being, an opinion.  Consider it akin to a false positive.

No, we are on the same planet, but because we are hashing things out here on an internet board, it is the best we have to communicate like this.  I know mistakes can happen with this form of communication, but there is no better way, we just have to live with these mistakes, okay?

Edited:


So that is why you're here, eh? I thought you were here for the recipes.

Quote:

No, they would not disagree. The first space shuttle had less computer memory and hard drive than a modern Ford Taurus. The more complexities were the space shuttle back-up systems, and the back-up for the back-up systems. The first shuttle was very much a more analogue type vehicle. 

Quote:


sometimes, but I generally retain my wits----especially if operating heavy machinery.

Quote:


Do you actually believe polygraph examiners agree on everything? Are you 17 years old?

Quote:


I suppose in your profession, there are no errors? I'll have to contact Dominos to see.
OK, cheap shot----sorry, I'm grouchy. 
Yes Lale, errors happen. My wife has a client who was told last month that she had HIV. It was a false positive. The woman made drastic changes in her life---until the mistake was rectified 2 weeks later---the woman had already cashed her 401k, taking a huge loss in annuities/interest. That's the second false positive they have had in 2 months. Go figure.

Edited:


I never said Scantool was not accurate. I just said it is a great tool to diagnose peripheral malfunctions----but the public has this steadfast misconception that the machine is the end all simple solution.

"Zero chance" eh? Now you are just being blustery.

Quote:


Quote:


Now we agree on something (lol). Tell me more of your problems, and together we can make sense of why the voices keep telling you to do bad things.

Edited:
 

Don't we all. The root of "articulate" is "art." I don't use technical dictionaries when I write here (maybe it would help my spelling eh?)----it's useless, as many posters have problems with looking at science and how many fields have both strengths AND weaknesses----and the weaknesses don't negate the validity of the whole. Doing such is, again I say, Inductive Reasoning. Look it up.

night night.

I sit corrected.

sackett wrote on Mar 9^th, 2008 at 2:05pm:


What are you trying to say here, Sackett?  The purpose of a polygraph procedure is to verify the truthfulness of the statements a person makes, is it not?  Of course, the machine itself cannot detect lies, but the polygraph machine, in the hands of a competent polygrapher is supposed to be able to detect lies to a reasonable degree of certainty, correct?

you replied, "What are you trying to say here, Sackett?  The purpose of a polygraph procedure is to verify the truthfulness of the statements a person makes, is it not?  Of course, the machine itself cannot detect lies, but the polygraph machine, in the hands of a competent polygrapher is supposed to be able to detect lies to a reasonable degree of certainty, correct?"

I certainly feel like an inarticulate layman.  I thought my postings were fairly clear and written for the simplistic of minds, apparently, I was wrong.  

One last time... The same way you have a f-f-f reaction in the ANS when you see a cop on the side of the road when driving, your body reacts to the mental developement of a lie because we subconsciously know it's wrong (based on the natural thought process being truthful and the sociological reinforcement throughout our life that lying is wrong).  All societies in the world have the same basic premise.  The correlation is clear and obvious.  BTW, why do we have the ANS reaction versus maintenance of homeostasis when seeing a cop?  What is it about a guy on the side of the road, in a marked car, with a radar gun that poses the threat.  We have that reaction before going through even the first of cognitive thoughts of, what is my speed?  Did he get me?  How much is the ticket, etc? (Also equivalently post presentation thought to, am I going to be falsely accused a liar, etc) 

You and others like to address lying as the sole act of saying something (out of your mouth) that is not true.  This allows for the further premise that, I told the truth and they called me a liar.  The facts is, withholding, minimizing, rationalizing and avoidance are also manners of lying through the natural thought process. All of this are causes for the mental conflict resulting in the ANS reaction. Are there other reasons for ANS reaction? Yes!, but not generally in a polygraph suite.

Besides, you can't give yourself an ANS reaction voluntarily. You can't think through the question of, "did you do___..?." and later cause a ANS reaction if you have no recollection of the incident and/or conflict arising from the answer of no."  Meanwhile, you know if you're not telling everything which you have knowledge of about an issue and are withholding that information.  This knowledge is a reason for the ANS reaction.  

Finally, as I've already discussed in previous postings, the general nervous system, i.e., cognitive thought, residual to a question and answer will not cause the same ANS reaction, though it will certainly effect the GNS.  BUT, that effects the whole system, and throughout the entire test, not specifically to one question or the other.

I hope that explain things stisfactorily enough.  If not, I can not make it any more easier to understand, and I give up trying to get through to you and your anti-buddies.

Sackett   

No Sackett, please answer my questions directly.  I'll re-phrase for simplicity:

Is the purpose of a polygraph examination to find out if a person is telling the truth?

Does a polygraph examination accomplish this task to a reasonable degree of certainty?

Okay, okay, nopolycop, you're the one anomaly of human nature.  But I suspect you're probably saying that simply to be argumentative.  Doesn't matter...readers know what I mean.

Sackett

P.S.  I've already answered your other question sufficiently. Stop trying to bait me... and you wonder why no examiner would touch "the challenge?"