- Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
A forum for free and open discussion of polygraph-related topics
Posted by detector1012000
- Mar 17, 2006, 01:47 PMGeorge Maschke,
Further research reveals that David Lykken is an academic and has also conducted LABRATORY EXPEREMENTS utilizing the polygraph. During the experiments he did conduct polygraph examinations utilizing his methodology as well as established and researched methods utilized by agencies of his government. He also researched the Relevant Irrevelant type testing.
I was mistaken regarding David Lykken. I am not convinced regarding his overall motivation for the book he has written and revised. However I will continue lookiing at other resources and his current activities before posting further on this topic.
Further research reveals that David Lykken is an academic and has also conducted LABRATORY EXPEREMENTS utilizing the polygraph. During the experiments he did conduct polygraph examinations utilizing his methodology as well as established and researched methods utilized by agencies of his government. He also researched the Relevant Irrevelant type testing.
I was mistaken regarding David Lykken. I am not convinced regarding his overall motivation for the book he has written and revised. However I will continue lookiing at other resources and his current activities before posting further on this topic.
Posted by spark
- Mar 15, 2006, 03:48 AMGeorge,
I think your trying to hard to put some "posts" on your site here...rifling through them too quickly...I didn't say he made "vicious" attacks, nor do I think he did. He just mimicked the same old $hit you said earlier "vicious" "vicious" and "vicious." I'm glad you have locked arms with Mr Checkers....last I heard he is looking for a job and may be counting on a friend to hook him up. I am not going to take your word on his level of courtesy. Just like I don't take your "word" for being a false positive...how about this...prove it...ahhh, that's a little difficult now isn't it...lets just stick to the same old thing argument that's so much easier and just hope that whole "how do we know he's a false positive issue" is just disregarded.
.
I think your trying to hard to put some "posts" on your site here...rifling through them too quickly...I didn't say he made "vicious" attacks, nor do I think he did. He just mimicked the same old $hit you said earlier "vicious" "vicious" and "vicious." I'm glad you have locked arms with Mr Checkers....last I heard he is looking for a job and may be counting on a friend to hook him up. I am not going to take your word on his level of courtesy. Just like I don't take your "word" for being a false positive...how about this...prove it...ahhh, that's a little difficult now isn't it...lets just stick to the same old thing argument that's so much easier and just hope that whole "how do we know he's a false positive issue" is just disregarded.
.
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Mar 15, 2006, 03:32 AMQuote from: spark on Mar 15, 2006, 03:24 AMThat's right...we haven't met. But can you please come up with something that George hasn't spoon fed you with your "vicious" attacks. I am going to be frank...I think your a moron for posting that info on here...geez man, how are you ever going to pose a serious argument on this site after posting that crap. Like I originally posted, this "website" has took a serious hit in credibility because you...anyone who reads that knows why the hell your not hired...at least George and the rest of his goons still have a good story to tell....but now it is inferred they're just like you. Sour grapes.
I find Onesimus to be highly credible and intelligent, and, unlike yourself, courteous. You accuse him of having made "vicious" attacks, but he has made none (unlike yourself).
Posted by spark
- Mar 15, 2006, 03:24 AMThat's right...we haven't met. But can you please come up with something that George hasn't spoon fed you with your "vicious" attacks. I am going to be frank...I think your a moron for posting that info on here...geez man, how are you ever going to pose a serious argument on this site after posting that crap. Like I originally posted, this "website" has took a serious hit in credibility because you...anyone who reads that knows why the hell your not hired...at least George and the rest of his goons still have a good story to tell....but now it is inferred they're just like you. Sour grapes.
Posted by Onesimus
- Mar 15, 2006, 03:11 AMQuote from: spark on Mar 15, 2006, 02:30 AMBro, I'm not going to get in a tit for tat for you.
This is poly-speak for I'm going to make vicious, unsupported attacks on your character and don't want to be bothered by the facts.
QuoteYou post some "see ... see...I was wronged" letter that says you went in and refused to answer questions then spoke about playing checkers with kids, etc.
Again the facts are that NSA polygraph division's technical director agreed that what my previous agency said to me was inappropriate. In another thread I have posted the apology letter the other agency gave me. games.yahoo.com is a legal website.
Quotethen in a different post you bragged about being called a molester, child porn downloader etc.
I never bragged about this. But the polygraphers on this site sure seem to love making these types of accusations against people they've never met.
Quoteso you can someday forget about getting an entrusted position, without, of course, displaying you can in fact be trusted.
I already have an entrusted position. I was cleared with my first two agencies.
Posted by spark
- Mar 15, 2006, 02:30 AMQuote from: Onesimus on Mar 14, 2006, 04:47 PM
In case this isn't obvious to everyone, when you log onto http://games.yahoo.com , there are people of all ages playing games on the site. Simply create a table, and someone under the age of 18 may join it. Sit at a random table, and your partner may be under the age of 18.
Normal people are capable of interacting with minors both on and off the internet without treating them as sex objects.
People often assume their own faults are present in others as well. Spark's assumption of wrongdoing raises questions about his own character, not mine.
Bro, I'm not going to get in a tit for tat for you. You post some "see ... see...I was wronged" letter that says you went in and refused to answer questions then spoke about playing checkers with kids, etc., then in a different post you bragged about being called a molester, child porn downloader etc.,....come on man...sour grapes. You didn't get what you want because you either have some "issues" that you have yet to accept accountability for and/or you chose not to fully cooperate with the process, though you were some 1st round draft pick or something...live with it. Maybe George has a position for you on his site where you can log on every day and post "yea...yea..yea.." so you can someday forget about getting an entrusted position, without, of course, displaying you can in fact be trusted. Another one of George's "we say so" "false positives" with what appears to be some serious issues that still need resolving.
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Mar 15, 2006, 01:51 AMQuote from: detector1012000 on Mar 14, 2006, 06:48 PM"For an in depth understanding about the polygraph and even how to beat it at its own game, read the book Tremor in the Blood by David T. Lykken. Mr. Lykken was a twenty year veteran polygraph administrator but finally could no longer justify the use of this voodoo piece of bullshit. This is book well worth the reading. "
The above is a statement about Lykken describing him as a twenty year veteran polygraph administrator and can be found under a heading of Break the law and get away with it on the web.
If Lykken was not a polygraph examiner, how would he have properly investigated polygraph. He was trained in polygraph and experimented in many areas with polygraph. It is my understanding that he administered numerous polygraph examinations. If I am mistaken, I will do further research and admit I am in error, I am only using what I have found on the web, I have no personal knowledge of this individual, only what I have read.
For more authoritative information than that which you quoted above (which is to be found here), see the following Wikipedia article about Dr. Lykken and the sources cited therein:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_T._Lykken
Posted by detector1012000
- Mar 14, 2006, 06:48 PM"For an in depth understanding about the polygraph and even how to beat it at its own game, read the book Tremor in the Blood by David T. Lykken. Mr. Lykken was a twenty year veteran polygraph administrator but finally could no longer justify the use of this voodoo piece of bullshit. This is book well worth the reading. "
The above is a statement about Lykken describing him as a twenty year veteran polygraph administrator and can be found under a heading of Break the law and get away with it on the web.
If Lykken was not a polygraph examiner, how would he have properly investigated polygraph. He was trained in polygraph and experimented in many areas with polygraph. It is my understanding that he administered numerous polygraph examinations. If I am mistaken, I will do further research and admit I am in error, I am only using what I have found on the web, I have no personal knowledge of this individual, only what I have read.
The above is a statement about Lykken describing him as a twenty year veteran polygraph administrator and can be found under a heading of Break the law and get away with it on the web.
If Lykken was not a polygraph examiner, how would he have properly investigated polygraph. He was trained in polygraph and experimented in many areas with polygraph. It is my understanding that he administered numerous polygraph examinations. If I am mistaken, I will do further research and admit I am in error, I am only using what I have found on the web, I have no personal knowledge of this individual, only what I have read.
Posted by Onesimus
- Mar 14, 2006, 04:47 PMQuote from: spark on Mar 14, 2006, 02:44 AMNonombre,
Good post...they don't want to hear it, if they keep repeating the same things to themselves it makes it "all better." I can tell you one thing that isn't said..."lets go logon and play checkers with the preteens...or I hope I don't end up in that big sting from D.C. I saw on Dateline TV with those guys going to that boy's house.....then again, if I do, I will blame it on the injustices of the world and say the TV crew entrapped me." Then I can create a "website" and invite all my other checker playing minions to join and we can all talk about the last time we saw Elvis and UFO's. It will be great.
~Spark
In case this isn't obvious to everyone, when you log onto http://games.yahoo.com , there are people of all ages playing games on the site. Simply create a table, and someone under the age of 18 may join it. Sit at a random table, and your partner may be under the age of 18.
Normal people are capable of interacting with minors both on and off the internet without treating them as sex objects.
People often assume their own faults are present in others as well. Spark's assumption of wrongdoing raises questions about his own character, not mine.
Posted by NSAreject
- Mar 14, 2006, 04:45 PMthey masturbate a bit more, than the rest of us...
Posted by NSAreject
- Mar 14, 2006, 04:28 PMQuoteNSA polygraph division's technical director also preferred Ad Hominem "arguments" over arguments based on substance. He specifically attacked Drew Richardson, George Maschke, and NSAReject from this site. He gave various reasons why I should not listen to any of these people, but did not refute anything any of them stated on this website.
I guess this means, I am on NSA's list of disgruntled IC employees !
Posted by polyscam
- Mar 14, 2006, 04:15 PMQuote from: spark on Mar 14, 2006, 02:44 AMNonombre,
Good post...they don't want to hear it, if they keep repeating the same things to themselves it makes it "all better." I can tell you one thing that isn't said..."lets go logon and play checkers with the preteens...or I hope I don't end up in that big sting from D.C. I saw on Dateline TV with those guys going to that boy's house.....then again, if I do, I will blame it on the injustices of the world and say the TV crew entrapped me." Then I can create a "website" and invite all my other checker playing minions to join and we can all talk about the last time we saw Elvis and UFO's. It will be great.
~Spark
Nice, checkers are now a conduit for pedophilia? And while I do not believe polygraphy equates to pedophilia, the latter being much more abhorent, neither is a "good" thing.
Detector1012000 wrote:
QuoteDr. Lykken was a polygraph examiner/psychologist that was disinchanted with polygraph because the industry would not accept his method of testing and could not replicate his studies. Bening offended he went on the offensive and, much the same as you, decided polygraph had no validity or reliability. I discount most of his findings due to his motivation.
According to Dr. Lykken, with whom I have briefly conversed, he has never been a polygraph examiner, rather a lifetime academic. Also, the polygraph community has not rejected his preferred method of testing - Guilty Knowledge Testing. According to examiners I have spoken with this method is utilized.
Posted by Onesimus
- Mar 14, 2006, 03:50 PMQuote from: detector1012000 on Mar 14, 2006, 03:36 PMDr. Lykken was a polygraph examiner/psychologist that was disinchanted with polygraph because the industry would not accept his method of testing and could not replicate his studies. Bening offended he went on the offensive and, much the same as you, decided polygraph had no validity or reliability. I discount most of his findings due to his motivation.
NSA polygraph division's technical director also preferred Ad Hominem "arguments" over arguments based on substance. He specifically attacked Drew Richardson, George Maschke, and NSAReject from this site. He gave various reasons why I should not listen to any of these people, but did not refute anything any of them stated on this website.
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Mar 14, 2006, 03:42 PMQuote from: detector1012000 on Mar 14, 2006, 03:36 PMDr. Lykken was a polygraph examiner/psychologist that was disinchanted with polygraph because the industry would not accept his method of testing and could not replicate his studies. Bening offended he went on the offensive and, much the same as you, decided polygraph had no validity or reliability. I discount most of his findings due to his motivation.
Respectfully, you are wildly mistaken. Dr. Lykken was never a polygraph examiner. Your attack on his motivation (rather than his arguments) is based on a false premise.
Posted by detector1012000
- Mar 14, 2006, 03:36 PMDr. Lykken was a polygraph examiner/psychologist that was disinchanted with polygraph because the industry would not accept his method of testing and could not replicate his studies. Bening offended he went on the offensive and, much the same as you, decided polygraph had no validity or reliability. I discount most of his findings due to his motivation.