Joe McCarthy wrote on Jun 1^st, 2017 at 3:31am:


Joe, as I made clear in my candidate statement, I am committed to making the APA honest, ethical and accountable. To make that happen, some organizational and cultural deconstruction will be necessary. 

There will be significant business erosion as well -- a form of collateral damage, if you will -- as the risks, realities and limitations of the polygraph "test" become more widely known.

For some years now, the APA has laid vigorous claim to the mantle of scientific legitimacy for polygraph "testing," but I call BS.

If the polygraph "test" is indeed scientifically legitimate, there would be no objection to a bill of rights for test takers. There would be no stonewalling when it comes to obtaining complete polygraph files for independent review. And finally, there would be no institutional resistance to a countermeasure challenge series.

Yet, the APA fears all of those things.

Now, if the APA were to reverse course and admit the polygraph "test" is merely a pseudo-scientific gimmick that's used mainly as an investigative tool to help elicit confessions, I'd have no qualms whatsoever -- and I'd resign forthwith from the APA.

Clearly, if polygraph is to ever pass muster as a legitimate forensic science, the APA must not shun scrutiny of the "test" and its related practices.

In my view, Joe, the APA needs to be figuratively dismantled and rebuilt

xenonman wrote on Jun 1^st, 2017 at 7:29am:


I will have no part of racism.  If he is dirty, prove it with facts, not an assumption of race.  No good comes from assuming a mans character by race or religion.

Joe McCarthy wrote on Jun 2^nd, 2017 at 12:18am:


ROTFLMAO!

Pour yourself another one, Honest Joe.

Would you care to make a wager as to what percentage of the votes I'll receive for president-elect?

Think it over and get back to us.

And then, state how accurate a run-of-the-mill maintenance PCSOT "test" is, followed by citations of studies in peer-reviewed scientific journals that support your claim.

Joe McCarthy wrote on Jun 1^st, 2017 at 2:30am:


Is a "lace curtain Irishman" similar to a "two-toilet Irishman"? 

xenonman wrote on Jun 2^nd, 2017 at 3:54am:


World hates a smarts, except me.   Nice one.  ^5

wow, unlike dan you pay attention.  I knew there was a reason I liked ya.   

Having said that, the busing issue, was more a race issue than that of disdain for those who, "made it" out of places like, Old Colony and a like.   

Even then, it wasn't would out resentment or disdain.  It was a term received for people who forgot their roots, and thought their shit didn't stink, and also for those born with a silver spoon in their mouths.   

Or at least that is how I saw terms like that used.

Dan, talks of struggle of demanding that the APA be more transparent, reliable, accountable, or fair.  Fact is, he has done ZERO to actually put his neck on the chopping block for his so called "ideals."  He has risked nothing, and knows nothing, about what it is like to actually put your neck out for those ideals, and to be made to suffer for doing so.   

Dan puts on a good show, but what he is really good at, is convincing people that he is a hero, by virtue of being brave, or by standing up to the big bad polygraph establishment; when he can't even come to an APA conference and look people in the eye, while he spouts out the garbage that he does.

He has never once, "stood up to them" directly, and at any great risk or peril.  He has never challenged the establishment in a real way. He has never once, to my recollection, sat before any governmental committee and demanded toughing regulations or licensing.  He has never once looked into the eyes of his adversaries and taken them on, eye to eye, man to man.   

He has never outed any real corruption in the industry, on his own, and offered up any proof other than quoting AP or NAS or offered up any direct or damning evidence to support his claims; unless you count ad hominem argumentation (he is awesome at that).  He's also good at ridding the coattails of those who have.   

When it's time to put up or shut up, Dan is MIA.  That is a fact.  He's happy to sit on the hill and survey the battlefield, but cowers at fighting in the trenches.   

All he does, and counts as victory, is ask the same questions over and over; claim no answer has been made; when an answer is offered; it's just not an answer that fits his narrative.  All while, and in an effort to avoid answering any real questions himself.

He has avoided, fair, unbiased, and independent debate, not once, but twice now.  Simply because the moderators will control every aspect of the debate, other than opening statements, closing statements, and their answers to the questions.   

He fails to understand, that if he is running for office, he is the one looking for a position.  It's not up to others to persuade him to let them vote for his ass, it is up to him to persuade the voter to vote for his ass.  But he wants to continue with this delusional belief that people will vote for someone who wants to put them out of business.

Ask Hillary how well that worked with the Coal Miners.

All and all, Dan will do everything he can to actively avoid the debate he asked for, and actively avoid giving any substantive answer to any relevant question, without avoiding it by engaging in clear thinking distortions and attempts to control the narrative with accusations, false claims, lies, and ad hominem argumentation.   

He is welcome to prove me wrong, and he will be given an opportunity soon to do so.

Be careful what you wish for Dan, you just might be getting it.   

I gave the best polygraph challenge in polygraph history, withe REAL consequences, not just bragging rights.  SO don't preach to me about polygraph challenges.   

Here's an idea, you're a polygraph examiner, why don't YOU step up big man?  You won't, because like you just proved in your response, you aren't good at stepping up.

You call me an apologist.  I will answer that charge, after you answer, actually answer some questions.  I say this, because my answer will come from YOUR answers.

But cowards will do what cowards will do huh Dan.  You're good at asking the questions, but bad about answering.   

I sleep just fine at night knowing.... well never mind, you haven't answered my questions or my statements yet. 

You are not controlling the narrative anymore Dan. 

Stop being a pussy and back up what you say