- Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
A forum for free and open discussion of polygraph-related topics
Posted by Doug Williams
- Jan 27, 2014, 09:15 AMQuote from: George_Maschke on Jan 25, 2014, 05:54 AMJohn R. Schwartz, who heads the U.S. Customs and Border Protection polygraph unit, claims in a memo to the American Polygraph Association that "sophisticated countermeasures can be routinely identified":
https://antipolygraph.org/blog/2014/01/25/cbp-polygraph-chief-john-r-schwartz-claims-sophisticated-countermeasures-can-be-routinely-identified/
However, Schwartz adduces no evidence to support this claim, and did not respond to a request for comment. Any input from knowledgeable sources would be welcome.
Describing my training as teaching "countermeasures" so liars can pass the polygraph "test" is the same thing as describing the polygraph as a "lie detector"! Both descriptions are PURE, UNADULTERATED BULLSHIT! The word "countermeasures" can only be used to describe polygraph chart manipulation by the subject of a polygraph "test" when two conditions are met: 1) The polygraph "test" must be proven to be 100% accurate and reliable as a "lie detector", and 2) the person is attempting to deliberately lie. There is never a case where BOTH of these conditions are met. In other words, you could only claim "countermeasures" are being used to thwart the polygraph operator's ability to detect deception IF the polygraph is able to detect deception accurately 100% of the time and that that deception would be detected were it not for the use of "countermeasures" by a person intent on being deceptive. But, since many people know that just telling the truth only works half the time - i.e. the US Supreme Court, and the NAS report, among others, saying it is no more accurate than the toss of a coin - then a prudent person would try to mitigate the very strong probability of being falsely branded as a liar by learning how to produce a "truthful" chart. That would not be using "countermeasures" - that would be using common sense!
Why do polygraph operators tell people not to research the polygraph before they take their test? It is very simple - the only way they can intimidate people with the polygraph is to keep them ignorant about how it works. When polygraph operators say I teach people "countermeasures" in order for them to "beat the test". I simply say, that's bullshit, because polygraph operators routinely call truthful people liars - and my technique is the only way for honest, truthful people to protect themselves from being falsely accused of lying. Go to the MEDIA page and watch the CBS 60 MINUTES investigative report I helped to produce and see the proof yourself - three out of three polygraph operators called three different truthful people liars on a crime that never even happened! You may also enjoy watching me prove THE LIE DETECTOR IS BULLSHIT on Showtime's PENN & TELLER: BULLSHIT!
So, let me emphasize this - I DON'T TEACH SO-CALLED "COUNTERMEASURES" - I simply teach people how to ALWAYS PASS by knowing how to show a perfect "truthful" polygraph chart! The word "countermeasures" is a word that has been misappropriated by polygraph examiners - it is used to describe what they say is a means to thwart their ability to detect deception. But polygraph operators have always maintained that they can tell when a person is using these so-called "countermeasures". If that is true, how can anyone use them "beat" the test? But, for the sake of argument, let me ask a few more pertinent questions: If people can indeed be taught to use "countermeasures" to "beat the test", wouldn't that prove the polygraph is not a "lie detector"? Does the validity and reliability of the polygraph test demand that the subjects of the test must be ignorant about how it works? If anyone could be taught how to produce and/or prevent a reaction on the polygraph at will, wouldn't that make the whole idea of a "lie detector" a fraud? And wouldn't polygraph operators have to admit their little machine is actually just a sick joke - and that the polygraph instrument is simply a prop used by an interrogator to frighten people into making admissions and confessions? And would it not be prudent for the government to quit wasting money on something that is nothing but a fraud and a con job? The fact is the answer to all these questions is a resounding YES!
Polygraph operators do not want to debate the validity of the polygraph as a "lie detector" because they will lose. And these con men certainly don't want to answer any of the questions I have posed! They know they cannot prove the polygraph is valid and reliable as a "lie detector", and they know they can't justify their actions - so they just say that people who get my training are all lying and are only doing research on the polygraph in order to "beat the test". Again, I say that is just BULLSHIT! I have spent almost forty years proving that the "lie detector" is just a myth, and it is common knowledge that just telling the truth only works half the time, so people are smart enough to know that they must LEARN HOW TO PASS or they will be falsely accused of lying. I don't teach any so-called "countermeasures"! I don't teach people how to "beat" the test! The fact is, people are getting my manual & video/DVD and my personal training because they are telling the truth and just want to make sure they pass - they know that just telling the truth doesn't work! The methods I teach are very simple. I just show people how to remain calm when answering a relevant question and how to produce a reaction when answering the control questions so as to always produce what the polygraph operators say is a "truthful chart".
Posted by Ex Member
- Jan 26, 2014, 03:20 PMcommon sense,
The masseter muscle can become enlarged if you are a gum chewer or tend to grind your teeth at night. But, I agree with you that this is not the optimum choice for CM's, but should not be discarded outright either.
I think the manufacturer of the fancy headset is just cashing in on polygraph operators' fear of countermeasures. They probably made a bundle off of the silly "butt pad" and see a market in such novelties.
The masseter muscle can become enlarged if you are a gum chewer or tend to grind your teeth at night. But, I agree with you that this is not the optimum choice for CM's, but should not be discarded outright either.
I think the manufacturer of the fancy headset is just cashing in on polygraph operators' fear of countermeasures. They probably made a bundle off of the silly "butt pad" and see a market in such novelties.
Posted by Common Sense
- Jan 26, 2014, 02:21 PMQuote from: George_Maschke on Jan 26, 2014, 04:57 AMCommon Sense,
Thank you for sharing your thoughts and experience with polygraph countermeasures. With respect to tongue-biting, the available research suggests that it is not detectable through physical observation.
Maybe it's just me, but when I look in the mirror and try to subtly bite my tongue, I can see my own jaws move. I assume the polygrapher and anyone else watching me can see it too.
Posted by Drew Richardson
- Jan 26, 2014, 09:33 AMGeorge,
I have no doubt that the "butt pad" sensors are sensitive as has been the case with motion detector bars, etc. over the last few decades.
Sensitivity is not the end-all-be-all though. It is a combination of both sensitivity and specificity which is required (as is the case for real scientific endeavors, e.g., forensic chemistry/toxicology, etc.) to be successful at analytical detection.
In that, I mean it is a much simpler task to produce a response, and say yes I can see it with this gizmo vs. the task of determining whether there is any response at all in an unknown field that might or might not include (physiologically and/or countermeasure-produced) signal and which does include a lot of noise.
The results of the first task are what you show the boss to indicate that you are doing something or what you present to he who doles out government research funds to keep the good times rolling.
The degree to which one is successful at the latter task is the measure of whether one is successful in detecting truth and falsehood in real life, and that is what has to be demonstrated, and which to my knowledge has not.
With regard to the countermeasure challenge that you mention in a separate post, the operational parameters are pretty clear and simple as well as the statistics which would be derived from simulated crime ground truth: accuracy in determining truthful and deceptive examinees, both those who have applied countermeasures and those who have not.
The conduct of the countermeasure challenge does not require my participation and could well have been performed many times over the last dozen years by the government proponents of lie detection. I would not be surprised to find that such is the case. No public response to the challenge will be forthcoming until those who would accept such challenge have convinced themselves through their own private efforts that they would likely and regularly prevail in taking up the challenge. Sound of crickets...
I have no doubt that the "butt pad" sensors are sensitive as has been the case with motion detector bars, etc. over the last few decades.
Sensitivity is not the end-all-be-all though. It is a combination of both sensitivity and specificity which is required (as is the case for real scientific endeavors, e.g., forensic chemistry/toxicology, etc.) to be successful at analytical detection.
In that, I mean it is a much simpler task to produce a response, and say yes I can see it with this gizmo vs. the task of determining whether there is any response at all in an unknown field that might or might not include (physiologically and/or countermeasure-produced) signal and which does include a lot of noise.
The results of the first task are what you show the boss to indicate that you are doing something or what you present to he who doles out government research funds to keep the good times rolling.
The degree to which one is successful at the latter task is the measure of whether one is successful in detecting truth and falsehood in real life, and that is what has to be demonstrated, and which to my knowledge has not.
With regard to the countermeasure challenge that you mention in a separate post, the operational parameters are pretty clear and simple as well as the statistics which would be derived from simulated crime ground truth: accuracy in determining truthful and deceptive examinees, both those who have applied countermeasures and those who have not.
The conduct of the countermeasure challenge does not require my participation and could well have been performed many times over the last dozen years by the government proponents of lie detection. I would not be surprised to find that such is the case. No public response to the challenge will be forthcoming until those who would accept such challenge have convinced themselves through their own private efforts that they would likely and regularly prevail in taking up the challenge. Sound of crickets...
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Jan 26, 2014, 07:19 AMQuote from: Arkhangelsk on Jan 26, 2014, 07:05 AMQuote5. Squeezing Your Anus - You sit on a seat sensor.The polygraph machines knows when you squeeze your butt, wiggle your butt, or pass gas.Bad idea.George,
Are any data available on the efficacy of these "butt pads?"
No studies have been published in this regard. I have seen numerous polygraph charts from instruments that have such sensor pads, though, and they do seem to be highly sensitive. The tracing typically undulates in sync with the examinee's breathing.
Posted by Ex Member
- Jan 26, 2014, 07:05 AMQuote5. Squeezing Your Anus - You sit on a seat sensor.The polygraph machines knows when you squeeze your butt, wiggle your butt, or pass gas.Bad idea.George,
Are any data available on the efficacy of these "butt pads?"
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Jan 26, 2014, 04:57 AMCommon Sense,
Thank you for sharing your thoughts and experience with polygraph countermeasures. With respect to tongue-biting, the available research suggests that it is not detectable through physical observation.
However, the Lafayette Instrument Company, a major supplier of polygraph equipment, is now marketing a $525 headphone system that it purports can detect tongue biting:
There is no published research documenting this device's ability to detect tongue-biting as a countermeasure, and I don't know what agencies, if any, may have adopted its use.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts and experience with polygraph countermeasures. With respect to tongue-biting, the available research suggests that it is not detectable through physical observation.
However, the Lafayette Instrument Company, a major supplier of polygraph equipment, is now marketing a $525 headphone system that it purports can detect tongue biting:
QuoteLafayette Instrument announces the availability of the Masseter Headphone System (MHS), a unique approach to detecting facial and jaw movements during a polygraph examination.
The Masseter Headphone System is designed to detect and record movements in the Masseter muscle of the mandibular region during the recording phase of a polygraph examination, sensing activities of the tongue, clenching of teeth, and other jaw-line actions. The Headphones are fitted with highly sensitive transducers that allow for on-screen observation and recording of Masseter muscle activity.
The MHS provides high-quality sound, a comfortable fit, and listening/audio-recording versatility. Issues with outside distractions and examiner's voice fluctuation are mitigated by the system's ability to play prerecorded questions through the noise suppressing headphones. This reduction in outside stimulus will aid the examinee's concentration on the exam.
The Model 76879HM includes connections for the LX5000 only. For more information about the Model 76879HM-C (for the LX4000), view the RELATED PRODUCTS tab.
There is no published research documenting this device's ability to detect tongue-biting as a countermeasure, and I don't know what agencies, if any, may have adopted its use.
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Jan 26, 2014, 04:14 AMQuote from: Drew_Richardson on Jan 25, 2014, 10:53 AMGeorge,
As you point out, if the document claims were anything more than bluff and bluster, it would certainly be in the polygraph community's interest to present (publicly and loudly proclaim) the evidence for such with the likely result that countermeasure attempts would be diminished if not altogether stopped in the face of certain detection.
Although I can think of a couple of other things to add to your list of indirect evidence that this document is nothing more than the usual smoke and mirrors and aggrandizement on the part of the polygraph community's leadership for the encouragement and motivation of the greater peanut gallery, it is not such that still leads me to believe counter-countermeasure efforts are largely unproductive.
It is also not that I am convinced that would be teachers of polygraph countermeasures are inherently smarter or more skilled than those who would detect such countermeasures... Certainly the latter community is much larger than the former and would, no doubt, include some of the best talent government money could buy.
It really comes down to this...I believe that the normal examinee physiology as displayed at the time of score-able responses and in the absence of countermeasures during a polygraph examination has greater variation than exists with (and will include) score-able responses produced as a result of well-executed countermeasures.
Although a different subject, the substantial variation previously referred to in the last paragraph is also consistent with a lack of diagnostic validity for lie detection in the absence of countermeasures.
Drew,
Thanks for sharing these thoughts. I think the polygraph community could benefit greatly by taking to heart the latter points you raise.
What I find particularly interesting about John Schwartz's claim that sophisticated countermeasures can be routinely detected is the extent to which he is engaging in self-delusion. His claim is, after all, directed not toward lowly job applicants, but to senior members of the polygraph community.
Perhaps Schwartz would be willing to stand up to your polygraph countermeasure challenge (which has now gone some 12 years without a single taker)?
Posted by Ex Member
- Jan 26, 2014, 12:10 AMProperly executed countermeasures are impossible to detect because the body will react in the same way whether the stimulus originates externally (from the voice of the charlatan) or internally (within the mind).
If I spring one from watching a sexy girl on the beach or later at night nurturing the memory, the girth is the same.
If I spring one from watching a sexy girl on the beach or later at night nurturing the memory, the girth is the same.
Posted by Common Sense
- Jan 25, 2014, 01:28 PMLet's use some common sense here regarding polygraph countermeasures. TLBTLD describes these primary physical countermeasure methods:
1. Tongue Biting - If the polygraph victim...err...candidate doesn't do this discretely, it is possible the polygrapher can see his/her mouth moving. It is also possible that the camera(s) in the room have high resolution and can zoom in on the candidate's face and detect mouth movements. Hence, the candidate can be caught easily if they screw up. Bad idea.
2. Breathing Pattern Changes - There are pneumatic tubes placed around your chest to measure breathing. These tubes are very sensitive. If you screw up your breathing manipulation countermeasure just the slightest (like not holding your breath correctly), the tube sensors may detect it. I mean your breathing is being measured. I wouldn't chance this. Bad idea.
3. Mental Thoughts - There is no machine, no doctor, no sensors, no psychic, no magician, nobody that can read your thoughts. People that claim they can are just entertainers or con artists. Only God knows what you are thinking. So you can use mental thoughts to excite and calm yourself as needed during the control, relevant, irrelevant questions. It is easy to pull this off with practice. BEST IDEA!
And other rumors from movies and such also mention:
4. Putting a Nail/Tack in Shoe - Sometimes you put your feet on a floor pad sensor. And again, the cameras in the room and the polygrapher may spot your toes wiggling abnormally. Plus, do you want to walk around with a tack in your shoe all that time you are in the polygraph building before you take your poly? Bad idea.
5. Squeezing Your Anus - You sit on a seat sensor. The polygraph machines knows when you squeeze your butt, wiggle your butt, or pass gas. Bad idea.
The best countermeasures are mental ones. I can tell you from experience. I was able to beat my FBI polygraph with mental countermeasures. I had also been though the polygraph game before and so I knew how it worked, plus I read TLBTLD, so I was no stranger to this. That along with being on my best behavior, cooperating and playing the stupid game, and making the polygrapher think I was a good guy with nothing to hide. The impression you give from your behavior is also very important, so that you get on the polygrapher's good side. I will bet my life and life savings (all two dollars) that nobody can detect mental countermeasures. If you can read my thoughts, prove it!
To beat your poly, use mental countermeasures only. Trust me. This is your safest bet and it works like a charm.
1. Tongue Biting - If the polygraph victim...err...candidate doesn't do this discretely, it is possible the polygrapher can see his/her mouth moving. It is also possible that the camera(s) in the room have high resolution and can zoom in on the candidate's face and detect mouth movements. Hence, the candidate can be caught easily if they screw up. Bad idea.
2. Breathing Pattern Changes - There are pneumatic tubes placed around your chest to measure breathing. These tubes are very sensitive. If you screw up your breathing manipulation countermeasure just the slightest (like not holding your breath correctly), the tube sensors may detect it. I mean your breathing is being measured. I wouldn't chance this. Bad idea.
3. Mental Thoughts - There is no machine, no doctor, no sensors, no psychic, no magician, nobody that can read your thoughts. People that claim they can are just entertainers or con artists. Only God knows what you are thinking. So you can use mental thoughts to excite and calm yourself as needed during the control, relevant, irrelevant questions. It is easy to pull this off with practice. BEST IDEA!
And other rumors from movies and such also mention:
4. Putting a Nail/Tack in Shoe - Sometimes you put your feet on a floor pad sensor. And again, the cameras in the room and the polygrapher may spot your toes wiggling abnormally. Plus, do you want to walk around with a tack in your shoe all that time you are in the polygraph building before you take your poly? Bad idea.
5. Squeezing Your Anus - You sit on a seat sensor. The polygraph machines knows when you squeeze your butt, wiggle your butt, or pass gas. Bad idea.
The best countermeasures are mental ones. I can tell you from experience. I was able to beat my FBI polygraph with mental countermeasures. I had also been though the polygraph game before and so I knew how it worked, plus I read TLBTLD, so I was no stranger to this. That along with being on my best behavior, cooperating and playing the stupid game, and making the polygrapher think I was a good guy with nothing to hide. The impression you give from your behavior is also very important, so that you get on the polygrapher's good side. I will bet my life and life savings (all two dollars) that nobody can detect mental countermeasures. If you can read my thoughts, prove it!
To beat your poly, use mental countermeasures only. Trust me. This is your safest bet and it works like a charm.
Posted by Drew Richardson
- Jan 25, 2014, 10:53 AMGeorge,
As you point out, if the document claims were anything more than bluff and bluster, it would certainly be in the polygraph community's interest to present (publicly and loudly proclaim) the evidence for such with the likely result that countermeasure attempts would be diminished if not altogether stopped in the face of certain detection.
Although I can think of a couple of other things to add to your list of indirect evidence that this document is nothing more than the usual smoke and mirrors and aggrandizement on the part of the polygraph community's leadership for the encouragement and motivation of the greater peanut gallery, it is not such that still leads me to believe counter-countermeasure efforts are largely unproductive.
It is also not that I am convinced that would be teachers of polygraph countermeasures are inherently smarter or more skilled than those who would detect such countermeasures... Certainly the latter community is much larger than the former and would, no doubt, include some of the best talent government money could buy.
It really comes down to this...I believe that the normal examinee physiology as displayed at the time of score-able responses and in the absence of countermeasures during a polygraph examination has greater variation than exists with (and will include) score-able responses produced as a result of well-executed countermeasures.
Although a different subject, the substantial variation previously referred to in the last paragraph is also consistent with a lack of diagnostic validity for lie detection in the absence of countermeasures.
As you point out, if the document claims were anything more than bluff and bluster, it would certainly be in the polygraph community's interest to present (publicly and loudly proclaim) the evidence for such with the likely result that countermeasure attempts would be diminished if not altogether stopped in the face of certain detection.
Although I can think of a couple of other things to add to your list of indirect evidence that this document is nothing more than the usual smoke and mirrors and aggrandizement on the part of the polygraph community's leadership for the encouragement and motivation of the greater peanut gallery, it is not such that still leads me to believe counter-countermeasure efforts are largely unproductive.
It is also not that I am convinced that would be teachers of polygraph countermeasures are inherently smarter or more skilled than those who would detect such countermeasures... Certainly the latter community is much larger than the former and would, no doubt, include some of the best talent government money could buy.
It really comes down to this...I believe that the normal examinee physiology as displayed at the time of score-able responses and in the absence of countermeasures during a polygraph examination has greater variation than exists with (and will include) score-able responses produced as a result of well-executed countermeasures.
Although a different subject, the substantial variation previously referred to in the last paragraph is also consistent with a lack of diagnostic validity for lie detection in the absence of countermeasures.
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Jan 25, 2014, 05:54 AMJohn R. Schwartz, who heads the U.S. Customs and Border Protection polygraph unit, claims in a memo to the American Polygraph Association that "sophisticated countermeasures can be routinely identified":
https://antipolygraph.org/blog/2014/01/25/cbp-polygraph-chief-john-r-schwartz-claims-sophisticated-countermeasures-can-be-routinely-identified/
However, Schwartz adduces no evidence to support this claim, and did not respond to a request for comment. Any input from knowledgeable sources would be welcome.
https://antipolygraph.org/blog/2014/01/25/cbp-polygraph-chief-john-r-schwartz-claims-sophisticated-countermeasures-can-be-routinely-identified/
However, Schwartz adduces no evidence to support this claim, and did not respond to a request for comment. Any input from knowledgeable sources would be welcome.
Posted by defenderofpeoplesrights
- May 27, 2011, 06:11 AMPeople like User (Daddy-O) who is obviously a poligrapher are upset because they "KNOW" they are losing there "Cash Cow" and will "Lie" to ANY possible peak they can just to keep the polygraph in use. Well I got news for you. whether you like it or not, Your "polygraph" will soon be trashed. Face it, Its people like you who just make excuses and have no regard for human life. People like you have no heart. Its people like George Maschke who make an awesome difference in the world. I thank George Maschke for protecting the rights of people all over this world NO MATTER WHAT CRIME THEY Have committed.
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Sep 06, 2007, 01:04 AMHere is another technique that some polygraph examiners are using to deter countermeasure use. The idea is to trick the examinee into thinking that the examiner will "know what it looks like on the charts" if the examinee employs countermeasures.
The polygrapher will ask a question series similar to the following:
1. When I say "now," please curl your toes for the count of three and stop. "Now."
2. When I say "now," please take three shallow breaths and return to normal. "Now."
3. When I say "now," please take three breaths slightly deeper than normal and return to normal. "Now."
4. When I say "now," please take several fast shallow breaths as if panting like a dog and return to normal. "Now."
5. When I say "now," please take three breaths each slightly deeper than the last and return to normal. "Now."
6. When I say "now," please push down gently with your left arm for the count of three and stop. "Now."
7. When I say "now," please tighten your sphincter muscle for the count of three and stop. "Now."
Upon completion, the polygrapher will tell the subject, "That worked well! I now know what is normal for you and what it looks like if you do these things intentionally. Obviously we don't want to see any of these things done intentionally as we go through the testing process."
The polygrapher will then proceed with the remainder of the polygraph examination. If you are planning to use countermeasures to reduce the risk of a false positive outcome, don't be fooled by this ruse.
The polygrapher will ask a question series similar to the following:
1. When I say "now," please curl your toes for the count of three and stop. "Now."
2. When I say "now," please take three shallow breaths and return to normal. "Now."
3. When I say "now," please take three breaths slightly deeper than normal and return to normal. "Now."
4. When I say "now," please take several fast shallow breaths as if panting like a dog and return to normal. "Now."
5. When I say "now," please take three breaths each slightly deeper than the last and return to normal. "Now."
6. When I say "now," please push down gently with your left arm for the count of three and stop. "Now."
7. When I say "now," please tighten your sphincter muscle for the count of three and stop. "Now."
Upon completion, the polygrapher will tell the subject, "That worked well! I now know what is normal for you and what it looks like if you do these things intentionally. Obviously we don't want to see any of these things done intentionally as we go through the testing process."
The polygrapher will then proceed with the remainder of the polygraph examination. If you are planning to use countermeasures to reduce the risk of a false positive outcome, don't be fooled by this ruse.
Posted by triple x
- Feb 11, 2007, 04:42 AMdigithead,
I have argued this issue for years since I joined this message board. Polygraph examiners like to claim that they possess the uncanny ability to gaze into the charts and identify a natural response from an artificial augmented [cm] response. I would sure like to know how one could tell a response on a chart caused by mental countermeasure versus a response from fear, anger, embarrassment, etc.
triple x
I have argued this issue for years since I joined this message board. Polygraph examiners like to claim that they possess the uncanny ability to gaze into the charts and identify a natural response from an artificial augmented [cm] response. I would sure like to know how one could tell a response on a chart caused by mental countermeasure versus a response from fear, anger, embarrassment, etc.
triple x