- Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
A forum for free and open discussion of polygraph-related topics
Posted by Twoblock
- Jan 30, 2006, 12:38 AMEosJupitor
Based on the reasons we both have posted plus many more, I don't think this thing will ever happen. My big concern is that, I bet, the R and D for this device was, in whole or in part, funded by government grants. If so, it makes about as much sense as a grant to study the sex habits of pissants.
The hardest thing that I have ever tried to do is to arouse people's ire at government waste and get them to help me do something about it. All agree that something should be done but, they had rather go to the bar for a beer than to write to their elected officials. If our congress received enough mail that says "rectify the corruption in Wash. D.C. or we will bring you home", then paying for that beer would be easier.
Based on the reasons we both have posted plus many more, I don't think this thing will ever happen. My big concern is that, I bet, the R and D for this device was, in whole or in part, funded by government grants. If so, it makes about as much sense as a grant to study the sex habits of pissants.
The hardest thing that I have ever tried to do is to arouse people's ire at government waste and get them to help me do something about it. All agree that something should be done but, they had rather go to the bar for a beer than to write to their elected officials. If our congress received enough mail that says "rectify the corruption in Wash. D.C. or we will bring you home", then paying for that beer would be easier.
Posted by EosJupiter
- Jan 29, 2006, 10:04 PMTwoBlock,
What I want to see is how they are going to minaturize the MRI down to being as portable as a polygraph. I did the reading and research today, just to add to this thread, on size, space, power, and mobility requirements needed to use an MRI. Lets just say that the only way they will implement this is they will have to have a semi or a fairly large office space, just to implement it. Power requirements alone are huge, your not going to get that level of power off of a 110V service. This whole thought of an MRI as a lie detector is great fodder for research, but lacks any chance of implementation do to physical and technology constraints. Besides I am sure the polygraph folks will also take a stand against this device just as it does with the CVSA. The articles are good reads, but again I believe they are fantasy.
Regards ...
What I want to see is how they are going to minaturize the MRI down to being as portable as a polygraph. I did the reading and research today, just to add to this thread, on size, space, power, and mobility requirements needed to use an MRI. Lets just say that the only way they will implement this is they will have to have a semi or a fairly large office space, just to implement it. Power requirements alone are huge, your not going to get that level of power off of a 110V service. This whole thought of an MRI as a lie detector is great fodder for research, but lacks any chance of implementation do to physical and technology constraints. Besides I am sure the polygraph folks will also take a stand against this device just as it does with the CVSA. The articles are good reads, but again I believe they are fantasy.
Regards ...
Posted by Twoblock
- Jan 29, 2006, 03:15 PMThe idea of a MRI accurately detecting deception, I find rather bizarre. Also, has there been research to determine the long term effect ,on one's mental health, of being in the tube for an hour or so in such a magnetic field? How about the required injection? Cruel and unusual punishment lawsuits? Probably. The cost? Unbearable. Only our tax supported institutions could afford it. Running our deficit higher? For sure. How much of our tax money has gone to private companies for R and D on this "fantastic" device? We'll never know. What a gravey train. They make money on R and D and then on the sale of the machine to our government agencies. All funded by our taxes. Think our congress is corrupt? I surely do.
In reality, where is the proof that brain activity distinguishes between truth or lies? I don't think there is any just like BP, heart rate and sweating is no solid proof that the hokygraph can detect lies.
In reality, where is the proof that brain activity distinguishes between truth or lies? I don't think there is any just like BP, heart rate and sweating is no solid proof that the hokygraph can detect lies.
Posted by s
- Jan 29, 2006, 01:54 AMPosted by Skeptic
- Jan 06, 2006, 12:19 AMJust a correction: the above should be Drew Richardson, not Bill Richardson. Formerly of the FBI.
Posted by Johnn
- Jan 05, 2006, 03:27 PMI wonder if we take fMRI's and are found to be truthful, if we can get some type of recompensation. I know it doesn't sound too friendly, but I really hated getting accused of lying.
Posted by Johnn
- Jan 05, 2006, 03:16 PMHere's an excerpt:
"The need for a better way to assess credibility was underscored by a 2002 report, The Polygraph and Lie Detection, by the National Research Council. After analyzing decades of polygraph use by the Pentagon and the FBI, the council concluded that the device was still too unreliable to be used for personnel screening at national labs. Stephen Fienberg, the scientist who led the evaluation committee, warned: "Either too many loyal employees may be falsely judged as deceptive, or too many major security threats could go undetected. National security is too important to be left to such a blunt instrument." The committee recommended the vigorous pursuit of other methods of lie detection, including fMRI. "
"The need for a better way to assess credibility was underscored by a 2002 report, The Polygraph and Lie Detection, by the National Research Council. After analyzing decades of polygraph use by the Pentagon and the FBI, the council concluded that the device was still too unreliable to be used for personnel screening at national labs. Stephen Fienberg, the scientist who led the evaluation committee, warned: "Either too many loyal employees may be falsely judged as deceptive, or too many major security threats could go undetected. National security is too important to be left to such a blunt instrument." The committee recommended the vigorous pursuit of other methods of lie detection, including fMRI. "
Posted by Johnn
- Jan 05, 2006, 03:14 PMYes, the article came out. Very informative. Here's the link:
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/14.01/lying.html
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/14.01/lying.html
Posted by Skeptic
- Jan 05, 2006, 12:06 AMQuote from: wayhigh on Mar 24, 2005, 08:42 PMhttp://www.livescience.com/041129_lie_detection.html
Apparently, fMRI's have recently been found by real scientists to show more areas of the brain are active during lies and deception than are active when a person is telling the truth.
What's that? Do I hear a knell for polygraphs?
WH
If I recall correctly, the work by Bill Richardson and others has shown that brain activity can indicate recognition, but not lying per se.
So, someone could show you a picture of the Antipolygraph.org web page and determine whether you'd seen it or something like it before. But they wouldn't be able to ask you whether or not you'd taken drugs in the last five years, and tell whether or not you're telling the truth.
Can anyone elaborate?
Posted by Johnn
- Jan 03, 2006, 12:36 AMThis week, Wired magazine is coming out with an article, "Don't Even Think About Lying" regarding fMRI's. http://www.wired.com/wired/
However, after my polygraph experience, I'm not sure I want to trust any lie detection machine. Previous to my polygraph, I did believe that the polygraph was scientifically valid. Anyhow, lets keep our eyes open.
However, after my polygraph experience, I'm not sure I want to trust any lie detection machine. Previous to my polygraph, I did believe that the polygraph was scientifically valid. Anyhow, lets keep our eyes open.
Posted by wayhigh
- Mar 24, 2005, 08:42 PMhttp://www.livescience.com/041129_lie_detection.html
Apparently, fMRI's have recently been found by real scientists to show more areas of the brain are active during lies and deception than are active when a person is telling the truth.
What's that? Do I hear a knell for polygraphs?
WH
Apparently, fMRI's have recently been found by real scientists to show more areas of the brain are active during lies and deception than are active when a person is telling the truth.
What's that? Do I hear a knell for polygraphs?
WH