George, that is most generous. 

Deal me in for a one-on-one debate with my opponent for APA president elect, Jamie McCloughan.

What say you, "dedicated to truth" APA establishment politicos -- especially Mr. McCloughan. Are you ready to break some new ground?

[cue crickets]

If Mr. McCloughan doesn't have the stones to debate me, he should withdraw from the race.

most of all it would benefit the members

First, you came to me.  I didn't write that email.  You asked for a debate, took it upon my self to facilitate that you get treated better than I did.  My mistake, I apologize for even trying.  I now totally get why some of the other responses were curmudgeonly.  Maybe I should learn to do the same.  With age comes experience, it's a hard lesson to learn; but like drinking orange juice after brushing your teeth, one that we all have to relearn the hard way.  

I tried to give ya the vocal forum and linked it here.  You had your cake and could have ate it too.   

You say you want the forum, but, it was just handed to you, and linked to here for all to hear.  I am just to a point, where I think you don't want to debate; you want a debate or platform where you have the advantage and control so you can dictate the narrative and agenda.  That is not how debates work.

You aren't even trying anything else to make him want to debate you, other than shooting your mouth off here.  And even then, all you can say is

Dan Mangan wrote on Jun 13^th, 2016 at 9:58pm:


Seriously?  That is all you have to convince him?  

Dan, what is in it for him to debate you?  That is the real question.  He has this locked up so far as he is concerned.  Even you acknowledge you know you'll lose.  What kinda person runs knowing he is going to lose, and not at least try to pull off an upset?

Oh and as the copyright talk, well never mind.  

Done with this.  Have fun.  

Back to handling real issues and corruption in the industry. When you get done thinking little bugs are tough, come on down and try fighting a gorilla and her trained chimps.  The APA is the least of the Industry's problems.

You know, I should thank you for not calling in last night.  it seems I hit some sore spots in Texas with what I said, while waiting on you to man up (so to speak)   

I will clarify tonight.  Who knew using this format of media would have gathered the most response I have been looking for over the past two years when people started telling me this was an issue for the courts.

Anyway, have to set up the pod cast.

SPECIAL POLYGRAPH EPISODE, PART 2

Seems I have cut a nerve in Texas, Lets see is I can cut a wee deeper

Seems the truth can be hard to swallow in Texas, but now I know I have their attention.  I have had three, very angry phone calls about last nights show.  What was their review, well, lets just say, it was strong.


There was also some discussion on anti trade, and anti competitive issues and that as APA members, I thought this behavior was frowned on. 

If they were pissed at what I said last night, well, lets just say I won't be driving a convertible or washing dishes next to the kitchen window anytime soon; especially with the treats I have had in the past from Texas Association of Polygraph members.

Also we I'll be talking about his Dan is actually right about a few things.  I know the texans will be listening.

A fifteen-year claim of 98% accuracy

> Home-grown "Model Policies" that have little in the way of scientific foundation

> Staunch resistance to a bill of rights -- similar in spirit to those in the medical and mental health fields -- for polygraph test-takers, to elevate informed consent and minimize potential harms

> An industry-insider culture that is insular, closed-minded and self-protective

All good points in some way.   


http://www.blogtalkradio.com/maxprovocateur/2016/06/15/special-polygraph-episode....

Joe, those are two good questions.

In my opinion, the best way to curb the kind of anti-competitive behavior you speak of is through polygraph-consumer education and awareness, as well as through the APA's rigorous endorsement of a comprehensive bill of rights for polygraph test-takers, which could contain specific items geared toward consumer protection vis-a-vis the open market.


As for using polygraph to "clear" ethics issues within the microcosm of the polygraph industry, forget it. Polygraph is without any proven scientific basis. It functions best as a pseudo-scientific contraption (bogus pipeline) that aids the investigation and interrogation process by facilitating admissions. 

For almost 95 years (!), the courts have overwhelmingly declared polygraph inadmissible, condemning the "test" as being unreliable.  And for good reason -- it is. Thus, it would make little sense to use polygraph in ethics investigations. 

It seems to me that far better remedies would be available through the courts, or perhaps agreeing to binding arbitration with a reputable -- and neutral, obviously --arbiter, wherein the rules of civil procedure are generally followed.