- Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
A forum for free and open discussion of polygraph-related topics
Posted by gelb disliker
- Dec 12, 2005, 05:17 AMOdin,
Was there actual name calling? or did it just feel like it? was it because of the frustrations of not being able to answer us in a logical or "trust me, I know what I'm talking about" fashion. We have been trying for you to get evidence of some of the allegations that you have put out here. But seems like you see it as superfluous, but facts are facts.
In your posts, it seems as if you are going to take out your anger and frustrations on the person taking any polygraph that you'll administer. I pity that person who even looks at you cross-eyed. I don't know if there are codes of ethics that polygraphers adhere to, but seemingly you will play the judge, the jury and the executioner.
Was there actual name calling? or did it just feel like it? was it because of the frustrations of not being able to answer us in a logical or "trust me, I know what I'm talking about" fashion. We have been trying for you to get evidence of some of the allegations that you have put out here. But seems like you see it as superfluous, but facts are facts.
In your posts, it seems as if you are going to take out your anger and frustrations on the person taking any polygraph that you'll administer. I pity that person who even looks at you cross-eyed. I don't know if there are codes of ethics that polygraphers adhere to, but seemingly you will play the judge, the jury and the executioner.
Posted by Skeptic
- Dec 12, 2005, 01:22 AMQuote from: ODIN on Dec 11, 2005, 09:16 PM
Your "facts" are very one sided as well, and very bias.
The most competent study done on this topic was done by the National Academy of Sciences. Are you accusing them of biased, one-sided results?
QuoteI have been far to busy responding to cowardly attacks and insults of children. I can back up these claims of personal attacks, even upon my apperance.
You haven't responded at all. You have made claims that you haven't backed up or retracted. Those are your claims; they've simply been quoted back to you.
QuoteThe Book is good so long as the readers have an insturment to perfect their new found knowladge.
I'll readily admit that having an instrument to practice on is helpful. However, I took three polygraphs with the NSA, employed countermeasures, and neither failed nor was accused of using countermeasures.
QuoteYour studies are just as one sided. You show me a study that says one thing, and I will show you a study that says another. I have found that studies mean nothing. ON BOTH SIDES.
A study isn't "one-sided" merely because its conclusions aren't what you like.
Studies by polygraphers clearly suffer from a potential conflict-of-interest confounds.
However, the National Academy of Sciences did the most comprehensive review of scientific studies on the polygraph. If you have evidence their report was "one-sided" or "biased", please present it.
If not, it looks like we have yet another unevidenced claim.
QuoteI never attacked one of you personally, but clearly skeptic didn't get hugged enough as a child, or maybe got hugged too much. Yes that was an attack.
I am very upset right now and am in more pain than any of you know.
I'm sorry to hear about it, and I had a very happy childhood, thanks for asking.
I'll readily admit that I'm fairly ruthless when it comes to debating polygraph examiners. The reason is really simple: a lot of people go through lots of pain due to the polygraph and polygraphy practicioners. These aren't harmless lies that we're talking about. Claims that the polygraph works, that polygraphers can detect countermeasures (one of the few ways people can protect themselves against the polygraph's capriciousness) do real harm to people.
That, my friend, is why I insist you back up your claims, or retract them. Because as long as I am posting on this site, such claims won't pass without challenge.
QuoteI think every one of us need to grow up and learn how to "talk" to eachother rather than sling insults. I should have ignored the insults and stuck with the research I have access to, but that would have done no good because it would have been deemed one sided.
I truly am sorry that you find it insulting when you are called upon to back up your own words. However, I think the average reasonable person can see that this isn't an unreasonable request.
QuoteNow if no one minds, I need to take care of an important family matter that is in need of my undivided attention.
Best of luck dealing with whatever you need to take care of. Personal tragedy strikes us all.
Posted by Skeptic
- Dec 12, 2005, 01:01 AMQuote from: polyfool on Dec 11, 2005, 11:45 PMIf I'm not mistaken, I believe TLBTLD instructs examinees to refrain from changing their breathing rate until the chest tubes are removed for the very reason that the examiner could still be recording in an attempt to recognize countermeasures.
Yes, it does specifically mention this. So properly-done countermeasures, as taught by TLBTLD, would deal with this.
During my three NSA polygraphs, I employed breathing countermeasures, including controlling my breathing while the tubes were on and apnea at certain points. At no point was I accused of employing countermeasures.
Posted by ODIN
- Dec 12, 2005, 12:20 AMQuote from: gelb disliker on Dec 11, 2005, 11:25 PMOdin said "Most of the boneheads that read your book don't know that sometimes the box is still running after the test is over. Then the breathing rate changes dramaticly from 13 cpm to 19 cpm in amp and rate, breathing countermeasures are clearly being performed. "
so is the test really over? is it being deceptive to tell the applicant that the test is over and you still go on to measure the breathing rates? could it be that the breathing level changes due to the fact that anxiety and nervousness is less noticeable because of the finality of the test?
"boneheads" name calling may be childish too.
Yes it is. I won't lie.
But when I see that someone is going to "play the game" then they should expect I will play my game to catch them. There is nothing unethical about it.
Nervousness is one thing but deep gulps of air are obvious, and got deeper for certain contraols. I caught him with that stunt in the second chart by inserting an irrelevant just before the last control of the test that he was going to distort the chart.
In the two charts it was the same controls consistantly, and on the third chart when he knew the game was up he stopped doing it. He has not been the only one.
"boneheads" name calling may be childish too"
I figured I would stoop to all your levels.
You hate me because I am an examiner, I hate people that pull countermeasures because of you guys. You guys should feel bad. I give most I catch at counter measures a second chance.
No more.
I see now most of you show us no kindness or understanding, just hate and bitterness. It's time people attemping countermeasures are shown the same intolerance. Everytime I see it I will nail them to the cross.
got to go, see everyone in a few days.
Remember all God still loves you, though I do not.
See bitterness is a two way stree, but I bet you will tell me I am out of line and leave your own alone unadmonished.
Posted by ODIN
- Dec 12, 2005, 12:01 AMQuote from: polyfool on Dec 11, 2005, 11:45 PMGelb,
I agree. One would think most people's breathing would change when the test is over due to the simple fact that the test is stressful even for truthful examinees.
If I'm not mistaken, I believe TLBTLD instructs examinees to refrain from changing their breathing rate until the chest tubes are removed for the very reason that the examiner could still be recording in an attempt to recognize countermeasures.
Yes, but they forget that or can't keep it up. Other times they just plain slip up.
I will agree that the breathing rate will change to a degree. However, when this change is so dramatic that it is obvious to a child what is going on, it's easy to tell what the person is doing.
I hade one guy that was so overdoing it, his galvo was matching the deap breaths he was taking. Then when I released the cuff and his amp and rate went down about 50 - 70% (I kid you not.) I damn near laughed my ass off at him. It was that obvious. BTW, I did get an admision that he learned that "on some web sight".
I also got an admission on the issue he was being tested on. I felt bad for the kid, he got caught up with the wrong croud.
Thanks for your kind reply. This is how things are debated
Posted by polyfool
- Dec 11, 2005, 11:45 PMGelb,
I agree. One would think most people's breathing would change when the test is over due to the simple fact that the test is stressful even for truthful examinees.
If I'm not mistaken, I believe TLBTLD instructs examinees to refrain from changing their breathing rate until the chest tubes are removed for the very reason that the examiner could still be recording in an attempt to recognize countermeasures.
I agree. One would think most people's breathing would change when the test is over due to the simple fact that the test is stressful even for truthful examinees.
If I'm not mistaken, I believe TLBTLD instructs examinees to refrain from changing their breathing rate until the chest tubes are removed for the very reason that the examiner could still be recording in an attempt to recognize countermeasures.
Posted by gelb disliker
- Dec 11, 2005, 11:25 PMOdin said "Most of the boneheads that read your book don't know that sometimes the box is still running after the test is over. Then the breathing rate changes dramaticly from 13 cpm to 19 cpm in amp and rate, breathing countermeasures are clearly being performed. "
so is the test really over? is it being deceptive to tell the applicant that the test is over and you still go on to measure the breathing rates? could it be that the breathing level changes due to the fact that anxiety and nervousness is less noticeable because of the finality of the test?
"boneheads" name calling may be childish too.
so is the test really over? is it being deceptive to tell the applicant that the test is over and you still go on to measure the breathing rates? could it be that the breathing level changes due to the fact that anxiety and nervousness is less noticeable because of the finality of the test?
"boneheads" name calling may be childish too.
Posted by ODIN
- Dec 11, 2005, 09:16 PMQuote from: gelb disliker on Dec 11, 2005, 05:52 AMOdin,
why do you come on this discussion board just to throw one-sided views to us, expecting for us to believe everything you say? are you from the APA just to goad us? you come on, say something, we ask for proof, then POOF! you're gone!
you've gone as far as researching textbooks on polygraph (albeit one-sided) telling us how it can be used by lawyers, courts etc. why don't you show us in your books what the polygraph does to law-abiding citizens seeking employment all the while telling the truth , then found DI at the hands of most examiners? does your books show that side of the equation? or does it only aggrandize the polygraph examiner and his machine?
we are still awaiting your response to the amazing ways that you can catch people in using CM controls.
Your "facts" are very one sided as well, and very bias.
I have been far to busy responding to cowardly attacks and insults of children. I can back up these claims of personal attacks, even upon my apperance.
I am not in the mood for this right now people.
Before I leave to handle a family situation I will leave you with this.
Most of the boneheads that read your book don't know that sometimes the box is still running after the test is over. Then the breathing rate changes dramaticly from 13 cpm to 19 cpm in amp and rate, breathing countermeasures are clearly being performed.
The Book is good so long as the readers have an insturment to perfect their new found knowladge.
That is all you will get as far as how I get those performing countermeasures. there are other ways, but that is all you will get.
Your studies are just as one sided. You show me a study that says one thing, and I will show you a study that says another. I have found that studies mean nothing. ON BOTH SIDES.
Enough for a while, right now I just want to get through this very hard time in my life. I am not running and will answer every question, as if it will matter because anything I come up with will be "one sided" and thus not good enough.
That is clearly how you avoid debate. That is clear.
I never attacked one of you personally, but clearly skeptic didn't get hugged enough as a child, or maybe got hugged too much. Yes that was an attack.
I am very upset right now and am in more pain than any of you know.
I think every one of us need to grow up and learn how to "talk" to eachother rather than sling insults. I should have ignored the insults and stuck with the research I have access to, but that would have done no good because it would have been deemed one sided.
No specifics to those one sided studies studies have been addressed, because you can't prove them wrong without referring to your one sided studies, then I respond with my one sided studies and it becomes a never ending fight.
I don't have it in me after last night for a fight like that.
Now if no one minds, I need to take care of an important family matter that is in need of my undivided attention. I do hope that is not one sided of me. Any further insults would just be classless right now. I hope you guys are bigger than that, but I won't expect it.
It will tell me what kind of people you are.
Now excuse me I have a plane to catch.
Posted by gelb disliker
- Dec 11, 2005, 05:52 AMOdin,
why do you come on this discussion board just to throw one-sided views to us, expecting for us to believe everything you say? are you from the APA just to goad us? you come on, say something, we ask for proof, then POOF! you're gone!
you've gone as far as researching textbooks on polygraph (albeit one-sided) telling us how it can be used by lawyers, courts etc. why don't you show us in your books what the polygraph does to law-abiding citizens seeking employment all the while telling the truth , then found DI at the hands of most examiners? does your books show that side of the equation? or does it only aggrandize the polygraph examiner and his machine?
we are still awaiting your response to the amazing ways that you can catch people in using CM controls.
why do you come on this discussion board just to throw one-sided views to us, expecting for us to believe everything you say? are you from the APA just to goad us? you come on, say something, we ask for proof, then POOF! you're gone!
you've gone as far as researching textbooks on polygraph (albeit one-sided) telling us how it can be used by lawyers, courts etc. why don't you show us in your books what the polygraph does to law-abiding citizens seeking employment all the while telling the truth , then found DI at the hands of most examiners? does your books show that side of the equation? or does it only aggrandize the polygraph examiner and his machine?
we are still awaiting your response to the amazing ways that you can catch people in using CM controls.
Posted by EosJupiter
- Dec 11, 2005, 05:44 AMTo all the anti-polygraph distinguished posters:
It appears our polygrapher ODIN, by estimation and analysis must be a young and newly annointed polygrapher. Long on breath, questionable on patience, and short of fact. His exuberance and ranting to any challenge gives him away, Myself having asked many questions and gotten nothing back in return. His links are to other polygraphers references and inputs, who by definition have a vested interest in perpetuating the lie that is the polygraph.
ODIN
Your more than welcome to keep posting but I truly suggest that if you wish to be listened to, that you start by posting facts. Otherwise if you haven't noticed the principles of this website are ignoring you. I intend to do the same.
Good luck in your hunt to catch countermeasures, For you will only get them if you are lucky, Exceptionally lucky.
Regards
It appears our polygrapher ODIN, by estimation and analysis must be a young and newly annointed polygrapher. Long on breath, questionable on patience, and short of fact. His exuberance and ranting to any challenge gives him away, Myself having asked many questions and gotten nothing back in return. His links are to other polygraphers references and inputs, who by definition have a vested interest in perpetuating the lie that is the polygraph.
ODIN
Your more than welcome to keep posting but I truly suggest that if you wish to be listened to, that you start by posting facts. Otherwise if you haven't noticed the principles of this website are ignoring you. I intend to do the same.
Good luck in your hunt to catch countermeasures, For you will only get them if you are lucky, Exceptionally lucky.
Regards
Posted by Skeptic
- Dec 11, 2005, 03:36 AMQuote from: gelb disliker on Dec 10, 2005, 09:34 PMOdin,
the link to your article touts " In 1997, the American Polygraph Association(www.polygraph.org) published a compendium of research studies on the validity and reliability of polygraph examinations conducted since 1980. Ansley, summarizing its content regarding field examinations (real tests, not simulations), wrote the following:
Researchers conducted 12 studies of validity following 3,174 field examinations, producing an average accuracy of 98 percent. Researchers conducted 11 studies involving the reliability ,f independent analyses (one examiner reviewing another's charts) of 1,609 sets of charts from field examinations confirmed by independent evidence, producing an accuracy of 92 percent.
James Bassett has been a polygraph examiner in private practice since 1972. He is a full member of the American Polygraph Examination and maintains an office in downtown Cincinnati. He can be reached at (513) 421-9604 or on the web at www.theftstopper.com
funny thing is, it is written by a polygraph examiner! can you get anymore self serving?
I'll simply note that the APA's findings (which, as you note, have a vested interest in promoting the polygraph) are at odds with those of the National Academy of Sciences.
Posted by Skeptic
- Dec 11, 2005, 03:15 AMQuote from: ODIN on Dec 10, 2005, 09:38 PMhttp://users.rcn.com/jonmarin/Polygraph1.htm
You keep posting that, that is good. I am doing further reaseach on everything.
I will be distracted by you no further.
Translated
I am done with you, although I will answer each issue. I will find it amusing of your response.
And I will find it surprising if you actually address them, since all you continue to do is avoid backing up your claims.
1) Claims that states without the polygraph for Law Enforcement jobs tend to have higher corruption in Law Enforcement
2) Claims that those who use countermeasures have something to hide
3) Claims that you can detect countermeasures.
Please back up these statements, or retract them.
QuoteAs far as me proving I have caught countermeasures in the past, that would expose my identity thus puting my job at risk.
No thank you.
I suppose you think we haven't heard such excuses before.
Polygraphers claiming they can detect countermeasures, then making excuses as to why they won't prove their claims, are a dime a dozen around here, bud.
Either prove your claims or retract them.
QuoteI will hide behind the same vail that some of you do.
Or am I not worthy of that same right?
Since the others who "hide behind a veil" of secrecy have already admitted they can't prove their claims, it seems to me you're claiming special priviledges here.
Proving your claims as regards countermeasures would be easy: take up the Polygraph Countermeasure Challenge. It's structured and scientific in its approach, and you should have no good reason not to do so. Otherwise, retract your claims.
QuoteYour further responses will go unread. Thank you for your time.
No problem. My responses are directed mainly at our esteemed readers, who I will continue to remind that you have made claims that you won't (and evidently can't) back up, and won't retract.
Polygraphers continue to be their own worst enemies.
Posted by gelb disliker
- Dec 11, 2005, 12:11 AMOdin,
Please continue with your links. They are much more informative than the conjectures and speculations that you post. Those textbooks that you get your articles from are very one-sided. Well, of course that they would be, all written by polygraph examiners.
Thank you in advance for future links.
Please continue with your links. They are much more informative than the conjectures and speculations that you post. Those textbooks that you get your articles from are very one-sided. Well, of course that they would be, all written by polygraph examiners.
Thank you in advance for future links.
Posted by ODIN
- Dec 10, 2005, 09:43 PMOh yea.
How it the "law suit" going with the FBI?
Funny how I can't find it on file at the court.
How it the "law suit" going with the FBI?
Funny how I can't find it on file at the court.
Posted by ODIN
- Dec 10, 2005, 09:38 PMhttp://users.rcn.com/jonmarin/Polygraph1.htm
You keep posting that, that is good. I am doing further reaseach on everything.
I will be distracted by you no further.
Translated
I am done with you, although I will answer each issue. I will find it amusing of your response.
As far as me proving I have caught countermeasures in the past, that would expose my identity thus puting my job at risk.
No thank you.
I will hide behind the same vail that some of you do.
Or am I not worthy of that same right?
Your further responses will go unread. Thank you for your time.
Have a nice day
"Sir" :-/
You keep posting that, that is good. I am doing further reaseach on everything.
I will be distracted by you no further.
Translated
I am done with you, although I will answer each issue. I will find it amusing of your response.
As far as me proving I have caught countermeasures in the past, that would expose my identity thus puting my job at risk.
No thank you.
I will hide behind the same vail that some of you do.
Or am I not worthy of that same right?
Your further responses will go unread. Thank you for your time.
Have a nice day
"Sir" :-/