Sorry for the delay all
Dan, going after numbers is doing you no good. People who say that numbers never lie, has never taken a statistics class. Numbers may not lie, but they sure can be manipulated.
The best argument as to accuracy and reliability rests in the industry's behavior.
When I first offered to use polygraph, as an answer, in the Texas dispute, the Texas Examiners, most of them, very prominent in the industry, ran for cover. All their friends and supporters scoffed at the idea. The proof is in PP posts, and posts of examiners here on AP, and things that I have been told myself by examiners who have told me, "we don't do that", "thats not how it's done", and that is a crazy idea." All while continuing to sell an "accurate and relabel" test to customers, but failing to use the test we seek people as, "accurate and reliable"while telling me that the test would never be applied in our own industry.
In texas, rather than take me out in two hours, they spend several years of lying, slandering, circling the wagons and fighting to keep me out of the industry and decisions that affect the Texas polygraph industry. If they are telling the truth and I am lying, than that whole mess would have been over in 2008, and I would not even have a license anymore because of the deal that I would have given it up voluntarily if I failed. The same goes for 2009, 1010, 2014, and 2015. AT any of these times, I have offered out a simple solution, that the polygraph examiners in Texas run and hide from, and examiners elsewhere, doesn't want to address or call texas on.
The proof is in past posts, every time I ask
Joe McCarthy wrote on Sep 29
th, 2016 at 9:16pm:
My questions is.
If polygraph enjoys a 90% accuracy rate, why was my idea to let polygraph settle an issue, ongoing in the industry, ridiculed by other examiners, including the high ranking examiners in the industry and within the APA?
If 90% is the real number, why did APA members in Texas run from my offer to settle the issue in Texas with polygraph?
How does one reconcile this?
Proof is in action or lack thereof.
I was willing to step forward when I was accused of lying; and people claim I am a discredit to the industry? I am the only examiner that trusts our test enough to have put my future on the table, based on a test result.
Everyone either scatters, or gives vague answers that are either non responsive or total avoidance of the subject. What they will not do, is call the Texas examiners to the plate; but they are happy to either criticize my challenge or scream chafes that I am "detrimental" to the industry.
This is actually laughable to me, as I am the poster child for someone who has consumed gallons of the polygraph koolaide, in regard to accurate and reliability.
To this day, I am still, THE ONLY, polygraph examiner, who publicly come out, and believe in the test we sell so much, that I offered to sit for my own test, have the results public, and, if I failed, never practice polygraph ever again. If you look at that, I don't know why I am not held out as an example of someone who is leading by example, in contrast to my detractors and competition.
What is sad is, people still use Maria Hubbard, who either don't believe in the accuracy and reliability she holds out in her own web page, or she nows she would get caught in her lies, and it would be public according to the terms laid of the polygraph results being public. Same goes for Andy Sheppard, Richard Wood, Stuart Ervin, Jack St John, Clayton Wood et al. They all ran and hid from their own tests, and encouraged others to scoff at the idea.
Why use statistics, when you can use, documented past behavior, to back up your argument?
Now, Having said all that.
By doing this, do you wish to be the teapot or the kettle? because Ray has called you to the carpet with questions on more than a few occasions, in which you avoid answering too.
You can't have your cake and eat it too.
Also, you say you want to change the polygraph industry, but yet you only seem to want to improve it, to destroy it from within. You are not going to change anything like that. The industry does need change, and Texas needs a total hard reboot.
The industry needs to reconcile with the fact that some of it's most prominent members from Texas, sent a truly bad message to the American public, by putting doubt in the confidence of some of polygraphs "best examiners" truly believe in the product they sell; or puts into doubt the content of their character as verifiers of the truth.
If you look at who has the most confidence in polygraph, and its accuracy and reliability, in contrast with the leaders and prominent members of the Texas polygraph industry, I come out on top; every time. Maria, right now seems to be the most afraid of this fact, if you look at her recent behavior, in front of children, when my name is even mentioned.
Whats funny is, whenever I am contacted by maria's customers, I am always calm, independent, and unbiased; and I have even defended some of her work where I saw no fault.
I would say I was the bigger man, but.... naaaa that would be too easy.
You want to trash accuracy and reliability, stop using silly numbers, and outdated studies. Use the current behavior of prominent and influential examiners, who actually hold high positions in the industry.
They can't deny or argue the behavior of examiners, when those examiner proudly display the accuracy and reliability on their websites, but yet run when their integrity is called to the plate, or a passed or failed polygraph can benefit them.
Just like you can't have your cake and eat it too, neither can Maria and her sycophants.
Oh and lets point out that TAPE has not addressed or taken action on Ms. Hubbard for her clear, recent violations of TAPE bylaws; the very same bylaws they tried to hang me on. I guess the rules only apply to the truthful, and don't apply to the dishonest and corrupt.