I do understand more than a bit of your points of view, you neglect to mention that.  I just don't agree with your methodology in fixing the issues.  Having said that, there is much I have a hard time agreeing with.   

Also, saying I am at the "feeding trough," wow, really?  You do know who you're talking to right?

NOBODY, in or out of the industry, can ever accuse me, or even imply, that I am at, or even near, any "feeding trough."  In fact, they do more to keep me away from the feeding line, than they do to keep you away.   

I find this funny because, not only do I defend the test, I backed it up with action.  To this day, I am still the only polygraph examiner, to offer to publicly sit for my own test; and bet my career based on the results.   

Personally, if you want to attack accuracy and reliability, one would think, prominent examiners in the polygraph industry, dodging their own tests, would be a better attack.  To write papers on accuracy and reliability is one thing; one can argue about statistics, and theory, and concepts.  Avoiding the use of a product you sell, and insist is good enough for others; that is an action which is not only unarguable, but indefensible, and inexcusable. 

It seems to me, using the acts of, "respected, and prominent" examiners petrified of the test, would work a whole lot better than words in a study.  Studies are great, but in the end, when the chips are down, will they eat their own dog food?  The actions of prominent members, do no support the words of their association.

SHAME ON THEM. 
 
Some would say that I am, beating a dead horse; if only that were the case.  A dead horse doesn't kick a sleeping dog.  Also, it is the best argument that there is regarding the subject of accuracy and reliability.

The one chance, prominent members of the community had to make a statement about the accuracy and reliability of polygraph, and the only one to rise to the challenge, is the one person they insist is a bigger danger to the industry than you.  Then, they call me crazy for even making the suggestion that we use our own test, to weed out the lies and solidify the truth.   

Think about that for a minute, very important people in the industry, criticized me, for suggesting that we use our own test to sole an issue within our own industry once and for all.   

Dan, if you are going to fight, fight with facts that point out actions which are contrary to words.   

Even if you do take my advice, there is still one inconvenient truth.  One examiner, who had more to lose than anyone, still put 100% faith in the test he sells, when all the others ran.  I don't take gambles like that unless I know I'll win.   

If you ask me, that makes me a far better advocate for the industry than the ass clowns, I am forced to stand behind at the "trough," who clearly have no faith in the reliability or accuracy of the test they sell. Honestly, I can't believe I have to compete with these troglodytes.

So to say I am at the, feeding trough, when frankly, you know better, that just insults me and degrades you.   

This does beg re-asking the question though.

Joe McCarthy wrote on Nov 28^th, 2016 at 8:27am:

But you still practice polygraph, and belong to the biggest polygraph association in the world; supporting it's activities by giving it money every year to propagate an agenda you are morally against.  By doing this you financially support and condone its activities.   

Seems this is the equivalent of the Boston Archdiocese, giving money to and being a member of planed parenthood

Joe,
I believe it may also be related to loyalty, a virtue rarely found these days.

Ex Member wrote on Nov 29^th, 2016 at 12:11am:


Loyalty is a nonexistent quality in todays time.  Everyone you meet has a knife, and is looking for a place to plant it.   

I do take comfort in the fact that, the ninth ring of hell is reserved for betrayers and cut throats.

DTA

Everyone is irrelevant in the end.

Joe McCarthy wrote on Nov 29^th, 2016 at 1:36am:


Ahhhh, thank you Grasshoppa.....

We are contemporaries.