- Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
A forum for free and open discussion of polygraph-related topics
Posted by 1904
- May 25, 2007, 09:51 AMQuote from: Lethe on May 25, 2007, 12:39 AM1904, the message is a parody of the arguments and obfuscation tactics employed by polygraphers. The sentiments expressed are designed to satirize the paltry lies told by polygraphers to protect their profession and the good that they believe it does.
Hey, I agree with you 100% --no 110% -- hey, possibly even 120%.
Even though I don't what the shite you're on about.
Posted by Lethe
- May 25, 2007, 12:39 AM1904, the message is a parody of the arguments and obfuscation tactics employed by polygraphers. The sentiments expressed are designed to satirize the paltry lies told by polygraphers to protect their profession and the good that they believe it does.
Posted by 1904
- May 22, 2007, 10:43 AMQuote from: Lethe on Apr 15, 2007, 01:36 PMYou people never cease to amaze me. Don't you realize that you're screwing yourselves over by indulging your curiosity in the polygraph? If you will think about it, you'll see that this is and must be so
REPLY: I THOUGHT ABOUT IT. I THOUGHT ABOUT IT AGAIN. THEN I CAME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT
I STILL DONT KNOW WHAT YOU'RE ON ABOUT.
Consider: does anyone go around lying for no reason at all? Except for genuinely disturbed people, no. And since the polygraph community, whatever else may be said of them, is not filled with sociopaths (REPLY: THIS IS A MATTER OF OPINION. I KNOW OF TWO INSTRUCTORS THAT I CONSIDER TO BE SOCIOPATHS. MEGALOMANIACAL BEHAVIOUR - TOTALLY DISRESPECTFUL OF OTHERS VIEWS - REGARD THEIR PEERS AS IDIOTS - ARE EXCESSIVELY BOASTFUL - PROJECT AN IMAGE OF SELF THAT IS IN CONTRAST TO THE ACTUAL SELF - BOASTFULLNESS EXTENDING TO LYING - RESENTFUL OF OTHERS SUCCESSES - ) - and since they have had ample time to reflect upon and refine their practice, we can conclude that they do indeed have a reason for all the lies that they tell. (REPLY: WHO? THE EXAMINERS) We do cost-benefit analyses just like anyone else does. Thanks to meddlers like Mr. Maschke, the cost of the deception (paid in, among other things, reduced confidence in the polygraph) is higher than it needs to be;( REPLY: WHEN LAST DID YOU USE MIND ALTERING DRUGS ? ) the benefit of the lies must be correspondingly higher than that cost in order for them to be useful. What, then, could possibly justify all of the lies? Why, only one thing: an increase in accuracy. (REPLY: IS THIS ONE OF THE LAWS OF THE UNIVERSE, OR JUST ON PLANET DWEEB ? ) That you have not realized this proves your folly. (REPLY: THANKS FOR THAT EINSTEIN )
Now, I will show you still more excellent things. Think about it: if a deceived subject produces a more accurate exam, it follows inevitably that a subject who is not deceived will produce a relatively less accurate exam. That is: if A > B then B < A (here A = "the accuracy of an examination of a deceived subject" and B = "the accuracy of an examination of a non-deceived subject"). (REPLY: I AGREE, BUT ALSO G > ABx-y~ WHEN B-A IS SYNTHESIZED AS BA{X-Y /AXIS} = BS. ) If you have nothing to hide on the polygraph, you want the exam to be as accurate as possible and therefore are harming yourself by learning about it. (REPLY: METHINKS YOU HAVE INDULGED IN THE ESSENCE OF THC ) (It also follows that if you do have something to hide you want it to be less accurate and could be helping yourself by becoming educated, but we can't admit that.) (REPLY: AND PRAY WHY NOT? YOU HAVE SPROUTED SO MUCH BS YOU MAY AS WELL ADMIT SOME VESTIGE OF TRUTH. )
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Apr 15, 2007, 02:27 PMPosted by Lethe
- Apr 15, 2007, 01:36 PMYou people never cease to amaze me. Don't you realize that you're screwing yourselves over by indulging your curiosity in the polygraph? If you will think about it, you'll see that this is and must be so.
Consider: does anyone go around lying for no reason at all? Except for genuinely disturbed people, no. And since the polygraph community, whatever else may be said of them, is not filled with sociopaths and since they have had ample time to reflect upon and refine their practice, we can conclude that they do indeed have a reason for all the lies that they tell. We do cost-benefit analyses just like anyone else does. Thanks to meddlers like Mr. Maschke, the cost of the deception (paid in, among other things, reduced confidence in the polygraph) is higher than it needs to be; the benefit of the lies must be correspondingly higher than that cost in order for them to be useful. What, then, could possibly justify all of the lies? Why, only one thing: an increase in accuracy. That you have not realized this proves your folly.
Now, I will show you still more excellent things. Think about it: if a deceived subject produces a more accurate exam, it follows inevitably that a subject who is not deceived will produce a relatively less accurate exam. That is: if A > B then B < A (here A = "the accuracy of an examination of a deceived subject" and B = "the accuracy of an examination of a non-deceived subject"). If you have nothing to hide on the polygraph, you want the exam to be as accurate as possible and therefore are harming yourself by learning about it. (It also follows that if you do have something to hide you want it to be less accurate and could be helping yourself by becoming educated, but we can't admit that.)
Why can't you people simply trust us? We have completed 10 weeks of training in polygraphy, so we're experts, not you. Only polygraphers should be able to discuss, let alone make rules for, the polygraph. And, c'mon, if everybody is doing it, it can't be bad, can it? Don't listen to these other people who tell you that it is bad, look at all the police departments and federal agencies that use it. How could the government be wrong or do something immoral? Answer me that!
But, on second thought, perhaps it is best that uppity people find this website. They will learn how the polygraph really works and will therefore be less likely to pass their security clearances. And the last thing that we need are police officers and civil servants who obstinately insist on thinking for themselves. We need people working for the government who can say that they're "just following orders," not folks who are going to ask a lot of questions. This is another good that we get from the polygraph, it culls the applicant pool of people who are curious, who insist upon understanding matters that they are faced with, and who are pro-active about obtaining information. Heaven forbid that such people protect our streets or handle our nation's security since such are not easily controlled. An incompetent traitor is no danger, it is the competent men who must be watched and therefore immunity from the polygraph cannot be tolerated.
You must divorce yourselves from this naive attachment to "the Truth." What is truth? It is merely a tool, a means to an end. The truth is not good in and of itself, it's value comes only in what it brings. The truth is no better or worse than lies; they should both be judged by what they get for you. If lies can get you good things that the truth cannot, wield them with abandon! Whoever said "the truth shall set you free" was a total moron; I hope they strung him up! The truth is whatever is to your advantage; I declare that proudly and won't blush for saying so!
Following this logic, we see that freedom itself is also merely a means to an end. For example, if free speech allows for the continual improvement of the Polygraph Profession, it is good; insofar as it allows for the destruction thereof, it is bad. Again, nothing at all is good in and of itself, things are good only for what they can get for you. The only question then is whether truth or lies will get you further and the only answer is that lies, if told on a large enough scale, are stronger and more masterly than the truth. So don't only tell a lie, create a system of lies so colossal that no one would believe anyone could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Not just, "if you've ever broken the speed limit, you're the type of person who would betray your country," but "the polygraph is extremely accurate and even though we claim to encourage curiosity and probing questions about it, we won't answer any of them so simply turn off your brain and trust us in this matter, ignoring any contradictions that certain undesirable elements allege."
Now all has been written; here is the conclusion of the matter: nobody could possibly think for him- or herself, your only choice is who you let think for you. This being so, let the friends of the polygraph think for you, not the enemies thereof. I won't say that it is true or good that you should do this, only pragmatic; the pro-polygraph forces are much more powerful and able to do immeasurably more than the paltry foes meagerly opposing them.
Consider: does anyone go around lying for no reason at all? Except for genuinely disturbed people, no. And since the polygraph community, whatever else may be said of them, is not filled with sociopaths and since they have had ample time to reflect upon and refine their practice, we can conclude that they do indeed have a reason for all the lies that they tell. We do cost-benefit analyses just like anyone else does. Thanks to meddlers like Mr. Maschke, the cost of the deception (paid in, among other things, reduced confidence in the polygraph) is higher than it needs to be; the benefit of the lies must be correspondingly higher than that cost in order for them to be useful. What, then, could possibly justify all of the lies? Why, only one thing: an increase in accuracy. That you have not realized this proves your folly.
Now, I will show you still more excellent things. Think about it: if a deceived subject produces a more accurate exam, it follows inevitably that a subject who is not deceived will produce a relatively less accurate exam. That is: if A > B then B < A (here A = "the accuracy of an examination of a deceived subject" and B = "the accuracy of an examination of a non-deceived subject"). If you have nothing to hide on the polygraph, you want the exam to be as accurate as possible and therefore are harming yourself by learning about it. (It also follows that if you do have something to hide you want it to be less accurate and could be helping yourself by becoming educated, but we can't admit that.)
Why can't you people simply trust us? We have completed 10 weeks of training in polygraphy, so we're experts, not you. Only polygraphers should be able to discuss, let alone make rules for, the polygraph. And, c'mon, if everybody is doing it, it can't be bad, can it? Don't listen to these other people who tell you that it is bad, look at all the police departments and federal agencies that use it. How could the government be wrong or do something immoral? Answer me that!
But, on second thought, perhaps it is best that uppity people find this website. They will learn how the polygraph really works and will therefore be less likely to pass their security clearances. And the last thing that we need are police officers and civil servants who obstinately insist on thinking for themselves. We need people working for the government who can say that they're "just following orders," not folks who are going to ask a lot of questions. This is another good that we get from the polygraph, it culls the applicant pool of people who are curious, who insist upon understanding matters that they are faced with, and who are pro-active about obtaining information. Heaven forbid that such people protect our streets or handle our nation's security since such are not easily controlled. An incompetent traitor is no danger, it is the competent men who must be watched and therefore immunity from the polygraph cannot be tolerated.
You must divorce yourselves from this naive attachment to "the Truth." What is truth? It is merely a tool, a means to an end. The truth is not good in and of itself, it's value comes only in what it brings. The truth is no better or worse than lies; they should both be judged by what they get for you. If lies can get you good things that the truth cannot, wield them with abandon! Whoever said "the truth shall set you free" was a total moron; I hope they strung him up! The truth is whatever is to your advantage; I declare that proudly and won't blush for saying so!
Following this logic, we see that freedom itself is also merely a means to an end. For example, if free speech allows for the continual improvement of the Polygraph Profession, it is good; insofar as it allows for the destruction thereof, it is bad. Again, nothing at all is good in and of itself, things are good only for what they can get for you. The only question then is whether truth or lies will get you further and the only answer is that lies, if told on a large enough scale, are stronger and more masterly than the truth. So don't only tell a lie, create a system of lies so colossal that no one would believe anyone could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Not just, "if you've ever broken the speed limit, you're the type of person who would betray your country," but "the polygraph is extremely accurate and even though we claim to encourage curiosity and probing questions about it, we won't answer any of them so simply turn off your brain and trust us in this matter, ignoring any contradictions that certain undesirable elements allege."
Now all has been written; here is the conclusion of the matter: nobody could possibly think for him- or herself, your only choice is who you let think for you. This being so, let the friends of the polygraph think for you, not the enemies thereof. I won't say that it is true or good that you should do this, only pragmatic; the pro-polygraph forces are much more powerful and able to do immeasurably more than the paltry foes meagerly opposing them.