Ed Earl wrote on Mar 20^th, 2009 at 6:56pm:


Speaking of such lists and avoiding direct questions...

Are you trying to assert that polygraph operators do not, on a routine basis, omit (intentionally or otherwise) the well-established truth that the autonomic nervous system responses chronicled on a polygraph instrument can result from numerous phenomena other than attempts at deception?

Yes or no, it’s that simple.

Alternatively, do you feel that it is common for polygraph operators to inform examinees that despite the existence of other possible causes, during the scoring of the examination, ANS activity will be associated with deception, and deception alone?

I fully agree with your assertion that individuals facing a polygraph interrogation should consider views of all sides. 

And if you continue to maintain that the contrived physiological "explanations" of how the "test" actually "works" a rarity, anyone who is on the fence with regard to who to believe will quickly know who is telling the truth within ten minutes of the polygraph suite. 

Quote:


Oh ye of little faith.   

It's like faith healing.  You have to believe!  Retaining ones critical judgment and questioning the word will on serve to piss off the preacher!

Best thing would be to convince the preacher you've been converted, when actually your not.  Secretly maintain your critical judgment, but   throw in an "amen brother!" here and there.   Just know their gospel better than they do, and realize it's just dogma.  If they throw you a control question, lie like a politician and visualize your only begotten son as "road kill".   When questioned about your "reaction", tell the minister some VERY MINOR sins you've committed (stole a church pen, touched yourself inappropriately, snuck a sip of the altar wine etc.) and beg for his polygraphic forgiveness.  Then leave the temple "saved"!

Brother CAN YOU SAY Amen!

TC

P.S.  Praising their Satan (GM, Lyken, Richardson) will be seen as blasphemy, and an "inquisition" will ensue.  Your devils will be cast out heathen!  For reading the Gospel of George!  An apocryphal text written in a dark cave!

Ed Earl wrote on Mar 21^st, 2009 at 12:43am:

Your arguements are illogical.  You continually denigrate George and Gino for authoring a book in which they, in your words, encourage people to lie.  Yet you feel you have some sort of "lifeguarding" duty to protect people who intend to cheat on their polygraph by letting them know that cheating is wrong.

You present yourself as having a moral and ethical problem with encouraging cheating, but simultaneously present yourself as someone who needs to save people who actually try to cheat.

That is absurd and contradictory.  Which is the greater evil in your mind?  Writing that a person should attempt to cheat or actually attempting to cheat?  If you don't feel that a person who attempts to cheat is wrong (or perhaps you only feel they become wrong if you give them advice that cheating is wrong and THEN they cheat anyway) then how can you villify someone who doesn't cheat but writes that they believe it is acceptable for others to do so?

I think a much more logical answer to the question of why you and other polygraph operators spend time on this message board is that George and Gino have published good information, and they are obviously correct in their thinking.

Your stated reason for being here is simply inconsistent the posts you have authored since you've been here.  

Do you really think that someone trying to "cheat" on a polygraph needs to be told that such cheating is wrong in the eyes of a polygraph examiner?  I would think that anyone needing to be told such things lacks the requisite intelligence for any job requiring a polygraph exam.

Sergeant Quote:
You continually denigrate George and Gino for authoring a book in which they, in your words, encourage people to lie


No its not in my words, it is in their words where they encourage people to lie and try to teach them how. Read chapter 4.

Police officers and concerned citizens take steps every day to keep honest people from being defrauded by con-men. Just because George and Gino's fraudulent unsupported claims about someone being able to use their book to help them pass a polygraph test are protected by the first amendment makes them no less fraudulent. 

People can pay attention to my alternative point of view or ignore it. They  can listen to the warnings or ignore them. If they choose to ignore the warnings and try to lie or cheat or use countermeasures then they can live with the consequences. There is nothing contradictory in my position, You just don't agree with it and feel somehow obligated to oppose it. 

George and Gino peddle their book insinuating that it will make a person more or less "polygraph proof". Would you buy a ballistic vest if the exact same make and model had not been tested to make sure that its design conformed in all aspects to the minimum requirements of NIJ 101.06?

If you knew that it had never been tested and proven to work would you or would you not warn your brother officers who were stupid enough or gullible enough to fall for the advertising and buy one based on  two pseudo-experts with no training or credentials in ballistics, engineering or the chemical structure of bullet resistant materials? Or perhaps would you encourage them to buy one and let an expert marksman shoot them while wearing it to see if it worked? If you knew that they didn't work you might offer no objection to them being bought by drug dealers, gangsters and other crooks.

I'm betting you wouldn't place in very high regard the "expert" opinion of someone regarding accident investigation if their only training and experience consisted of being in a fender bender and watching NASCAR on the weekends. 

George and Gino's program has not been tested and they have no proof that it will make anyone "polygraph proof"  That would require a scientific study establishing that someone could take their book and by following their instructions pass polygraph tests in field situations. They know they are stuck with an unprovable premise because in order to prove it they will require the cooperation of liars and criminals. Two groups who are unlikely to cooperate and whose cooperation could NOT be trusted because they are liars and criminals. 

Since they know that they cannot now nor ever will be able to prove they are right, they constantly try to shift focus away from that fact by claiming people who oppose them are wrong?   If they want to settle the issue, they should just do the research and submit it for peer review and publication. If someone else does the research and proves them wrong, which they have, George and Gino just criticize the methodology even though it passed peer review and publication standards sufficiently well for NAS inclusion. Of course, George and Gino are first going to have to find a scientist to do the work for them because they lack the credentials to get past the first level of peer review for any scholarly journal dealing with psychology or physiology.

You have seen George and Gino constantly raise issue with the qualifications of trained polygraph examiners to explain the psychological and physiological aspects of polygraph. Yet their own qualifications regarding polygraph, psychology, or physiology fall somewhere SOUTH of the claim that they "Stayed at a Holiday Inn Express Last Night"

If a person passes a polygraph while answering questions truthfully while attempting countermeasures it is a factual impossibility to determine whether or not the countermeasures were effective. If he answers the questions truthfully and gets caught using countermeasures he will fail the test, based on the logical premise that cheaters have something to hide. Therefore, using countermeasures adds at least one additional possibility to fail a polygraph without a single shred of scientific proof that if offers any additional possibility to pass.

Why are you here? 

If a Prospective examinee seeks your advice really they have only 3 choices. Be absolutely honest and truthful and don't try to cheat on the test, Cheat on the test by attempting countermeasures, or Refuse the examination. These possibilities are mutually exclusive. What would your advice to them be?  If your answer is anything, but "Cheat on the test by attempting Countermeasures" we agree on 2/3 of those possible responses and the only two which in my opinion represent an honorable path. 

What I am saying here is if you are basically an honest and truthful person, DON'T BUY INTO GEORGE AND GINO's ANTIPOLYGRAPH RHETORIC.  YOU DON'T NEED IT AND IT WILL LIKELY HURT YOU. 

What I am saying to Liars, thieves, child molesters and terrorists is:

Hurry, Hurry, Hurry, Step right up and get your very own copy of the one. the only, the  Amazing and World renowned, Dr. George Maschke's Polygraph Passin Book. Surprise your friends, cheat and deceive the police and prospective employers. 

Yes friends this secret formula handed down through untold  generations by uncles to their second nephews in the ancient and mysterious Scalabrini tribe now rests in the care and custody of their last remaining direct descendant, my most loyal minion here Gino. You have my personal promise that it works and I guarantee you that if it doesn't I won't care and you can't make me care because by that time I will be far far away and by virtue of the First Amendment to the actual Constitution of these United States of America which saw fit to bestow its personal guarantee of protection upon me. Yes Me, the one, the only, the  Amazing and World renowned, Dr. George Maschke. 

While millions have paid thousands for this valuable information, I come here today to offer you this wonderful and mysterious cure for your fear of telling the truth. Not for the very low price of $1.00 dollar. Not even for the ridiculously low price of 50 cents. No friends an neighbors I am not asking for a quarter, not 1 thin dime, not even a buffalo nickel. 

Yes Friends, liars, neighbors, child molesters, thieves and terrorists, your background is not my concern. You can have this priceless knowledge today right here, right now absolutely free and I absolutely positively give you the personal guarantee of the amazing, astounding, world renowned Dr George Mashke himself that it is worth every penny. 

Hurry Hurry Hurry Step right up Gettem while they're hot.
© 2009 Ed Earl


I hope they try it, Polygraphers aren't scared of them.

I think that there is a very logical reason why he gives the book away rather than charging for it that has nothing at all to do with altruism. 

Ed Earl wrote on Mar 21^st, 2009 at 2:23pm:

Please look up the term "ad hominem" attack.

When you refute George and Gino's opinion simply by claiming that they do not possess what you consider to be sufficient expertise it is not a compelling argument.  In debating circles an ad hominem attack is considered a sign that you have nothing intelligent with which to argue your own point.

Some time ago a number of polygraph operators staged a coordinated attack on Dr. Richardson's credentials in an effort to show that his opinion on the polygraph was wrong.  I thought they did nothing but present themselves as fools who were forced to resort to character assassination instead of well-reasoned arguments.

Quote:


The truth for the first part.  Mostly true on the later.

As for ad hominy attacks, here is a good one by a well know polygraphic interrogator.  GM must have really struck a nerve with this guy for him to make up such lies.  And to an applicant DURING A POLYGRAPH TEST!!

Note the pompous and arrogant tone, while saying things he knows is not true!  One might well ask, if the info on this website is so bogus, why does he find it necessary make up such outrageous lies?  Looks like grade A "damage control" to this old sailor!

http://antipolygraph.org/articles/article-052.shtml

Quote:


Do you recommend a person terminate the polygraph if the examiner becomes "aggressive" or "accusatory"?   

Do you recommend a person REFUSE to submit to a post test interview/interrogation?

This is what Mr. "ed earl/sancho panza" VanArsdale recommends to attorneys on HIS website.

What would you tell your client (say a woman accusing her husband of child abuse/or cheating) if the husband stood up and told you "Look your getting too aggressive and making accusations! Bye!!"  Or if after you informed him you've collected your polygraphic data,  he just walked out and refused to talk further with you?  Would your report to the wife be favorable?

TC