- Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
A forum for free and open discussion of polygraph-related topics
Posted by chrismcphee33
- Jan 09, 2008, 02:47 PMQuoteIt amazes me that other supposed LEOs posting on this site can't see through the BS you spout. You came to this site to find out how to avoid a sexual area on an upcoming polygraph. Now you state you are going to tell the truth but still employ CM's to assure you pass the Polygraph.
Surprise surprsie, a polygrapher making sweeping statements and trying to bait. For anyone who is interested in the post where my sexual activity is discussed in a little bit more detail, go here:
https://antipolygraph.org/forum/index.php?topic=3795.msg27406#msg27406
QuoteYou act as if you now 'know it all' because you practiced with a BP cuff
I have an opinion after doing some research...so that makes me a know it all? If you and other polygrapher woudl answer direct questions, maybe I would get some actual information which opposes most of the views on this site....but time and time again polygraphers choose to avoid actually answering the tough questions.
Quoteplease return here after your polygraph and tell us all how you did
I will be happy to. I might pass, I might fail, I might use cm's, I might be falsy accused of lying, I might be falsy accused of using cm's...who knows....but I will come back an let you know how I did. This is about the fifth time you said this over the past two weeks to me...I appreciate your genuine concern.
Ms. Taylor, do you find any part of the statement below as wild or unsubstantiated?
If a polygraph was actually capable of detecting lies, then a one question test would be valid, such as: "Did you kill John Doe?"
A yes or no answer, and the poly is over, and spits out the results. Instead, the examiner first attempts to convince the examinee that the machine is a "lie detector" then falsely "tests" the examinee in a stim test, then presumes that the examinee is telling little white lies during the test on the control questions, but those are not relevant, and then on the relevant questions, the whole truth (or deception) is revealed. All of which can be altered if the examinee squeezes his butt muscles, does math in his head, bites his tongue or steps on a tack.
All this is done under the justification that "Well, no test is perfect". I submit a polygraph examination is not even a test, because there is no objective way to pass. One must receive a favorable "opinion" that he or she is being truthful or deceptive. One cannot "pass" an opinion.
Posted by nopolycop
- Jan 09, 2008, 02:13 PMQuote from: SanchoPanza on Jan 09, 2008, 01:57 PM
As for nopoly4me, I also don't care to engage in discussions with you as you just try to argue and bait. Someone recently asked for stats on if there really is a 75% failure rate on pre-employment exams. Yankeedog and I provided just the opposite and you tried to dissect that information. I can see why Sancho ignores you.
Well, wonders never end... Ms. Taylor the questions I ask which you and others refuse to answer are precisely the type of questions that, if left unanswered, exposes the polygraph for the sham that it is. The fact that you do not know how many people you "pass" were using countermeasures, exposes the truth. You don't know, and can't tell.
BTW, I have a lot of respect for polygraphers who choose to work with SO's on a daily basis, as the mere association leaves a stain that is difficult to wash out. I also have no problem or issue using the poly for SO's, because they should be in prison anyway, IMO.
Posted by Donna.Taylor
- Jan 09, 2008, 01:57 PMQuote from: SanchoPanza on Jan 09, 2008, 11:43 AMIn my limited experience posting on this site, it has already become obvious that polygraphers like SanchoPanza tend to make general sweeping statements about morality instead of answering questions. While they are writing these long drawn out responses, which include YELLING and exclaiming! they don't seem to realize that their avoidance of the actual questions is the most telling thing of all about their own understanding of the validity of the polygraph interrogation process.
Chris McPhee, as you now know I am retired LEO and a Polygraph Examiner for the past 7 years. It amazes me that other supposed LEOs posting on this site can't see through the BS you spout. You came to this site to find out how to avoid a sexual area on an upcoming polygraph. Now you state you are going to tell the truth but still employ CM's to assure you pass the Polygraph. You act as if you now 'know it all' because you practiced with a BP cuff. As I have stated previously, do what you plan to do; but, please return here after your polygraph and tell us all how you did. It's plain and simple.
Just remember what has been posted in the past. In a study that was published in 2007 (Dr. Honts & Wendy Alloway)..... The result-the book TLBTLD did not assist the guilty group to pass but did cause more of the innocent group to fail. This is completely opposite of what is stated at AP. Studying the countermeasures actually caused more innocents to fail without helping guilty to pass. For more details check out: Latest Study Indicates "Lie Behind the Lie Detector" Hurts Innocent, Doesn't Help Guilty (posted under AP polygraph policy - 12/7/01)
As for nopoly4me, I also don't care to engage in discussions with you as you just try to argue and bait. Someone recently asked for stats on if there really is a 75% failure rate on pre-employment exams. Yankeedog and I provided just the opposite and you tried to dissect that information. I can see why Sancho ignores you.
Posted by nopolycop
- Jan 09, 2008, 01:56 PMQuote from: SanchoPanza on Jan 09, 2008, 01:35 PMChrismcphee33 Your assumption that I am a polygrapher is based on what?
And I can't understand your support of Nopoly when he probably survived 30 years active duty puttiing the arm on merchants for freebies and cop discounts while radioing HQ that he was out of position to respond to anything dangerous and perjuring himself in court while padding his expenses or siphoning gas out of his agency car for his kids go-cart. Of course that's not an accusation, thats just an opinion isn't it?
Hey Mr. Maschke You decide Unsupported accusation or Statement of opinion?
Sancho Panza
Actually your opinion is ill-concieved and inaccurate, but I will admit to a free cup of coffee now and then back in the day when that was not considered a gratuity.
Posted by nopolycop
- Jan 09, 2008, 01:54 PMQuote from: SanchoPanza on Jan 09, 2008, 01:04 PMnopoly4me
WOW!!!
Many thanks for putting your life on the line for so many years in these dangerous times.
Good job
Thank-you Twoblock for your kind words. I will be the first to admit though, that my carreer hasn't been all that action packed, but there are a few times where the pucker factor was pretty high.
I frankly only brought up this aspect of my personal life to counter Sancho's holier than thou attitude. No cop has a corner on the integrity and honestly department.
What I find incomprehensible is the willingness to brand innocent applicants as liars, and denying them the opporunity to serve their community based on an arbitrary and capricious test such as the poly. It is no wonder that jobs go wanting for lack of applicants. When I started, there were a hundred applicants for every open job. The reverse is now true, and I believe the polygraph is responsible for a large part of that.
Posted by SanchoPanza
- Jan 09, 2008, 01:35 PMChrismcphee33 Your assumption that I am a polygrapher is based on what?
And I can't understand your support of Nopoly when he probably survived 30 years active duty puttiing the arm on merchants for freebies and cop discounts while radioing HQ that he was out of position to respond to anything dangerous and perjuring himself in court while padding his expenses or siphoning gas out of his agency car for his kids go-cart. Of course that's not an accusation, thats just an opinion isn't it?
Hey Mr. Maschke You decide Unsupported accusation or Statement of opinion?
Sancho Panza
And I can't understand your support of Nopoly when he probably survived 30 years active duty puttiing the arm on merchants for freebies and cop discounts while radioing HQ that he was out of position to respond to anything dangerous and perjuring himself in court while padding his expenses or siphoning gas out of his agency car for his kids go-cart. Of course that's not an accusation, thats just an opinion isn't it?
Hey Mr. Maschke You decide Unsupported accusation or Statement of opinion?
Sancho Panza
Posted by SanchoPanza
- Jan 09, 2008, 01:32 PMAgain Nopoly the only response I have for you is ...
Posted by Twoblock
- Jan 09, 2008, 01:04 PMnopoly4me
WOW!!!
Many thanks for putting your life on the line for so many years in these dangerous times.
Good job
WOW!!!
Many thanks for putting your life on the line for so many years in these dangerous times.
Good job
Posted by chrismcphee33
- Jan 09, 2008, 12:47 PMI forgot something in my previous post about polygraphers, like Sancho, not answering questions directly. I meant to also include that he/she also tends to revert back to prvious posts (ie: I have considerably more evidence that you are and exhibitionist and voyeur than you have that I am a polygrapher. ). You can repeat that 100 times, I have no issues with it because I have explained in more detail what I meant...if you really cared to know. Read over your previous post and it will; be very obvious just how much you avoid the actual questions. You act like you don't want to justify such questions with a response, yet you will respond to my statements about you yelling (ie. The use of different kinds of emphasis like the one you call yelling (which seems odd to me considering this board doesn't use sound).
You made a statement about nopoly making wild and unsubstantiated claims...I am just asking which of the claims he made, which I pasted in my previous post, are wild and unsubstantiated?
You made a statement about nopoly making wild and unsubstantiated claims...I am just asking which of the claims he made, which I pasted in my previous post, are wild and unsubstantiated?
Posted by nopolycop
- Jan 09, 2008, 12:27 PMQuote from: SanchoPanza on Jan 09, 2008, 11:37 AM
He has directly accused me of cowardice and brown nosing without basis. I have never said anything to anyone on this board that I would not happliy say to their face.
If NoPoly4me had the intestinal fortitude to make that comment to my face he would also need the agility to duck.
Sancho Panza
NOW it's getting FUN!
I presume you are referring to the following comment:
"You probably survived by avoiding the hot calls, (like you avoid my posts) and getting into internal affairs as soon as you could brown nose enough brass."
Well, of course the above is not a direct accusation as you state, but instead couched as an opinion, which frankly was beneath my dignity and not worthy of a person with my intellectual prowess. I guess I got caught up in the moment, and for that I apologize. I find it curious and instructive though, that you actually don't deny it's truthfulness, but instead misdirect by stating that I directly accused you of avoiding hot calls and brown nosing your way into internal affairs. No, Sancho, I was just stating my opnion based on my 30 years of active duty police work, (I still carry a badge, BTW). You see, I have seen many people get to the top, (or at least a cushy ROAD* job such as internal affairs) on the backs of good cops and their carreers.
And, I have said nothing here that I wouldn't say to your face, or anyone elses face. I would welcome a personal meeting with anyone here. Perhaps Dr. Phil or Maury Povich could arrange it, it could be a very exhilerating experience for all, and extremely entertaining.
* ROAD means "Retired On Active Duty" for the non-police readers.
Gotta go now, I have a one o'clock court appearance.
Posted by SanchoPanza
- Jan 09, 2008, 12:25 PMQuote from: SanchoPanza on Jan 09, 2008, 11:52 AMnopoly wrote:First I was referring to his posts in general not the post you referenced although I wouldn't necessarily exclude it.
And, a polygrapher lying to the examinee isn't? The mere fact that you are hooked up to a machine that is called a lie detector is dishonest on it's face, because the machine cannot detect lies.
In fact, the last time I discussed the issue face to face with a polygrapher, he admitted that he cannot tell if a person is lying.
If a polygraph was actually capable of detecting lies, then a one question test would be valid, such as: "Did you kill John Doe?"
A yes or no answer, and the poly is over, and spits out the results. Instead, the examiner first attempts to convince the examinee that the machine is a "lie detector" then falsely "tests" the examinee in a stim test, then presumes that the examinee is telling little white lies during the test on the control questions, but those are not relevant, and then on the relevant questions, the whole truth (or deception) is revealed. All of which can be altered if the examinee squeezes his butt muscles, does math in his head, bites his tongue or steps on a tack.
All this is done under the justification that "Well, no test is perfect". I submit a polygraph examination is not even a test, because there is no objective way to pass. One must receive a favorable "opinion" that he or she is being truthful or deceptive. One cannot "pass" an opinion.
Sancho:
What part of nopoly's post are the wild and unsubstantiated claims? Could you also tell me which parts are of baiting nature?
If I responded to the above, wouldn't that really be responding to Nopoly? Go back and read the part where I clearly stated "I have decided that Nopoly's wild unsubstantiated claims and the baiting nature of his posts are unworthy of further response." Do I need to resort to capital letters and yellow highlights to get you to read that? If there is some part of that statement you are unable to comprehend, please describe it as best you can and I will try to explain even though the language was sufficiently plain that further explanation would probably make someone accuse me of condescension.
The idea that simply regurgitating his post somehow makes it yours is just a bit silly. Someone might possibly even call it plagiaristic.
Sancho Panza
Posted by SanchoPanza
- Jan 09, 2008, 12:08 PMChrismcphee33 Your assumption that I am a polygrapher is based on what?
I have considerably more evidence that you are and exhibitionist and voyeur than you have that I am a polygrapher.
You just can't seem to acknowledge the possibility that intellectually curious individuals can research polygraph without eventually worshipping at the George Mashcke antipolygraph shrine.
You criticize statements that promote honesty truth and integrity when you came to this forum attempting to learn how to avoid being honest and truthful about your admitted embarrassing sexual behavior in your upcoming polygraph test.
The vast majority of your questions attempt to establish an avenue of credibilty that you can use to justify your intended attempt to alter the results of that test.
You have my answer to that question. There is no moral and ethical justification for using countermeasures of any kind.
Asking the quesion over and over changing the words of the questions without changing the substance of the question is unlikely to elicit an different response.
The use of different kinds of emphasis like the one you call yelling (which seems odd to me considering this board doesn't use sound)is just an attempt at emphasising that "hey you've heard this answer before" or to call attention to a particular point. Your repeated asking of the same questions over and over after you have received responses is just an indication you refuse to read the response or that you are refusing to acknowledge a response because it doesn't tell you what you want to hear.
Sancho Panza
I have considerably more evidence that you are and exhibitionist and voyeur than you have that I am a polygrapher.
You just can't seem to acknowledge the possibility that intellectually curious individuals can research polygraph without eventually worshipping at the George Mashcke antipolygraph shrine.
You criticize statements that promote honesty truth and integrity when you came to this forum attempting to learn how to avoid being honest and truthful about your admitted embarrassing sexual behavior in your upcoming polygraph test.
The vast majority of your questions attempt to establish an avenue of credibilty that you can use to justify your intended attempt to alter the results of that test.
You have my answer to that question. There is no moral and ethical justification for using countermeasures of any kind.
Asking the quesion over and over changing the words of the questions without changing the substance of the question is unlikely to elicit an different response.
The use of different kinds of emphasis like the one you call yelling (which seems odd to me considering this board doesn't use sound)is just an attempt at emphasising that "hey you've heard this answer before" or to call attention to a particular point. Your repeated asking of the same questions over and over after you have received responses is just an indication you refuse to read the response or that you are refusing to acknowledge a response because it doesn't tell you what you want to hear.
Sancho Panza
Posted by chrismcphee33
- Jan 09, 2008, 11:52 AMnopoly wrote:
And, a polygrapher lying to the examinee isn't? The mere fact that you are hooked up to a machine that is called a lie detector is dishonest on it's face, because the machine cannot detect lies.
In fact, the last time I discussed the issue face to face with a polygrapher, he admitted that he cannot tell if a person is lying.
If a polygraph was actually capable of detecting lies, then a one question test would be valid, such as: "Did you kill John Doe?"
A yes or no answer, and the poly is over, and spits out the results. Instead, the examiner first attempts to convince the examinee that the machine is a "lie detector" then falsely "tests" the examinee in a stim test, then presumes that the examinee is telling little white lies during the test on the control questions, but those are not relevant, and then on the relevant questions, the whole truth (or deception) is revealed. All of which can be altered if the examinee squeezes his butt muscles, does math in his head, bites his tongue or steps on a tack.
All this is done under the justification that "Well, no test is perfect". I submit a polygraph examination is not even a test, because there is no objective way to pass. One must receive a favorable "opinion" that he or she is being truthful or deceptive. One cannot "pass" an opinion.
Sancho:
What part of nopoly's post are the wild and unsubstantiated claims? Could you also tell me which parts are of baiting nature?
And, a polygrapher lying to the examinee isn't? The mere fact that you are hooked up to a machine that is called a lie detector is dishonest on it's face, because the machine cannot detect lies.
In fact, the last time I discussed the issue face to face with a polygrapher, he admitted that he cannot tell if a person is lying.
If a polygraph was actually capable of detecting lies, then a one question test would be valid, such as: "Did you kill John Doe?"
A yes or no answer, and the poly is over, and spits out the results. Instead, the examiner first attempts to convince the examinee that the machine is a "lie detector" then falsely "tests" the examinee in a stim test, then presumes that the examinee is telling little white lies during the test on the control questions, but those are not relevant, and then on the relevant questions, the whole truth (or deception) is revealed. All of which can be altered if the examinee squeezes his butt muscles, does math in his head, bites his tongue or steps on a tack.
All this is done under the justification that "Well, no test is perfect". I submit a polygraph examination is not even a test, because there is no objective way to pass. One must receive a favorable "opinion" that he or she is being truthful or deceptive. One cannot "pass" an opinion.
Sancho:
What part of nopoly's post are the wild and unsubstantiated claims? Could you also tell me which parts are of baiting nature?
Posted by chrismcphee33
- Jan 09, 2008, 11:43 AMIn my limited experience posting on this site, it has already become obvious that polygraphers like SanchoPanza tend to make general sweeping statements about morality instead of answering questions. While they are writing these long drawn out responses, which include YELLING and exclaiming! they don't seem to realize that their avoidance of the actual questions is the most telling thing of all about their own understanding of the validity of the polygraph interrogation process.
Posted by SanchoPanza
- Jan 09, 2008, 11:37 AMQuote from: SanchoPanza on Jan 09, 2008, 11:00 AMSancho's last response to nopoly is very telling indeed...
THANK YOU Chrismcphee33 I have decided that Nopolys wild unsubstantiated claims and the baiting nature of his posts are unworthy of further response. He appears to lack the ability for logical discussion and chooses instead to toss wild accusations that are without foundation.
You will probably notice, as I have, that the polygraphers on this board have started ignoring ignoring him as well. You'll need to ask them why. Surley if you have actually read his posts you don't think that is due to the intelligent nature of his commentary.
He has directly accused me of cowardice and brown nosing without basis. I have never said anything to anyone on this board that I would not happliy say to their face.
If NoPoly4me had the intestinal fortitude to make that comment to my face he would also need the agility to duck.
So based on all of that I choose not to respond to his comments.
So What?
Sancho Panza