- Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
A forum for free and open discussion of polygraph-related topics
Posted by Sergeant1107
- May 17, 2007, 11:28 AMQuote from: palerider on May 16, 2007, 11:33 PMI believe I've read your post that you are truthful and employ countermeasures as a sort of assumed "insurance" against a false positive.If you were directing this remark to me, I believe you have mistaken me for someone else. I have never used countermeasures. In fact, when I was failing my first three polygraphs despite telling the truth on all of them, I had no idea what countermeasures were.
Although I have no experience with countermeasures, I have no difficulty believing that they are effective when used properly. After my experiences in telling the truth and being told I was clearly lying I have no faith whatsoever in the accuracy of the polygraph or its utility in the detection of deception.
Posted by 1904
- May 17, 2007, 11:11 AMTo Palerider: You're a dreamer buddy. I'm also an APA certified examiner.
I can beat the test. So can you and you know exactly how it can be beaten.
If you dont - return to poly school and get a refund.
I can beat the test. So can you and you know exactly how it can be beaten.
If you dont - return to poly school and get a refund.
Posted by George W. Maschke
- May 17, 2007, 02:22 AMQuote from: palerider on May 16, 2007, 07:26 PMHonestly, I can't offer any scientific literature on field studies of this site's instant coffee version of countermeasure successes. All I know is that there are organic arousals, and artificial arousals----and distinguishing the two is very much like distinguishing steak from spam. I'm sorry. I have used the countermeasures prescribed on this site on my own instrument on a few occasions to see the *response magnitudes, and their corresponding *organic qualities. The end result is as natural a formation as Mt Rushmore. I seriously doubt that the posters on this site are the "Rich Littles "of polygram impressionism.
P.S. I suppose antiP claims that the t-shirts sold here are 100%, hand-weaved silk too.
You asserted that when a person employs countermeasures, such as those described in The Lie Behind the Lie Detector), "the 'pens' do a very funny thing." I asked you precisely what "funny thing" the polygraph pens do when a person employs countermeasures, and to back your answer with references to the relevant polygraph literature.
I take your post cited above as an admission that you cannot back your assertion with any reference to the polygraph literature. So please explain specifically what "funny thing" you believe the polygraph pens do when a person employs countermeasures.
Posted by palerider
- May 16, 2007, 11:33 PMI have never stated such arrogance---nor have I ever heard or read an examiner say as much. In the field, I see crude "Georgie" countermeasures approximately 1x bi-weekly. I believe I've read your post that you are truthful and employ countermeasures as a sort of assumed "insurance" against a false positive. I won't address such practice on my post now, but I'd rather address the liars who are trying to "beat" the test. With all due respect Serge, when my 3 year old smells of poopie, and denies such, I hardly need an admission from him. I have seen an occasional chart with great artificial tracings, but inconsistant in those artifacts. The test will usually be labeled as "inconconclusive w/suspected crude countermeasures." Such an incon. call is no different than if a person engaged in a sneezing fit during the test---not what you would consider sophisticated stuff, and maybe even accidental. Within the false logic of this site lies the premise that to create arousal patterns on certain questions but not others is like instructing someone to alter their handwriting every other word. It just reeks of fishiness [I know, a crude discription]. Remember, I have owned and toyed with several polygraph instruments on myself----not just having been tested on occasion. I have experimented with polygraph instruments on myself and colleagues in all manners of countermeasure experimentation. When some nitwit tries to explain to me how intrepid they are with CM's, you have to excuse my cynisism---------if you are completely honest with me here, ya gotta admitt that you suspect much fiction in the tales of success on this site. Of course I'm talking about people who claim to have gotten a false negative on their test as a result of TLBTLD crude countermeasures. The real way to beat a poly test is far more sophisticated, time consuming, expensive, and physiologically involved than mere crude tongue biting and cognitive distortions. This site is an insult to both sophisticated countermeasures, and also to tongues.
Posted by Sergeant1107
- May 16, 2007, 10:10 PMSo, countermeasures don't work because you have caught people using them before, and you feel comfortable assuming that you have caught 100% of the people who have attempted them, right?
Isn't that specious reasoning? You know that countermeasures don't work because you have caught people using them, and the reason you know you have caught everyone who attempted countermeasures is because countermeasures don't work.
Only the examinee knows if they have told the truth, and only the examinee knows if they used countermeasures. The examiner can offer an opinion as to truth or deception, but they cannot know. I'm sure in some cases countermeasure use is apparent, but in many instances I'm sure it is a matter of opinion for the examiner.
The truth is that the examiner has no idea how many people have successfully been deceptive and/or successfully used countermeasures. By definition, successful use of CM's go undetected. Also by definition, a deceptive person who passes their polygraph goes undetected.
Isn't a bit arrogant for any examiner to claim that no one has ever lied and passed one of their exams? Or that they have caught 100% of the people who attempted CM's?
Isn't that specious reasoning? You know that countermeasures don't work because you have caught people using them, and the reason you know you have caught everyone who attempted countermeasures is because countermeasures don't work.
Only the examinee knows if they have told the truth, and only the examinee knows if they used countermeasures. The examiner can offer an opinion as to truth or deception, but they cannot know. I'm sure in some cases countermeasure use is apparent, but in many instances I'm sure it is a matter of opinion for the examiner.
The truth is that the examiner has no idea how many people have successfully been deceptive and/or successfully used countermeasures. By definition, successful use of CM's go undetected. Also by definition, a deceptive person who passes their polygraph goes undetected.
Isn't a bit arrogant for any examiner to claim that no one has ever lied and passed one of their exams? Or that they have caught 100% of the people who attempted CM's?
Posted by Twoblock
- May 16, 2007, 09:42 PMOrganic = BS
Artificial = BS
Are you telling us that you can distinguish between the two BS's? If so, you have one hell of a smeller or taster. Maybe there is a difference in the texture when you rub it between your thumb and fingers.
Artificial = BS
Are you telling us that you can distinguish between the two BS's? If so, you have one hell of a smeller or taster. Maybe there is a difference in the texture when you rub it between your thumb and fingers.
Posted by palerider
- May 16, 2007, 07:26 PMHonestly, I can't offer any scientific literature on field studies of this site's instant coffee version of countermeasure successes. All I know is that there are organic arousals, and artificial arousals----and distinguishing the two is very much like distinguishing steak from spam. I'm sorry. I have used the countermeasures prescribed on this site on my own instrument on a few occasions to see the *response magnitudes, and their corresponding *organic qualities. The end result is as natural a formation as Mt Rushmore. I seriously doubt that the posters on this site are the "Rich Littles "of polygram impressionism.
P.S. I suppose antiP claims that the t-shirts sold here are 100%, hand-weaved silk too.
P.S. I suppose antiP claims that the t-shirts sold here are 100%, hand-weaved silk too.
Posted by Sergeant1107
- May 16, 2007, 10:58 AMQuote from: palerider on May 16, 2007, 12:56 AMDo the countermeasures in TLBTLD STILL work??? They NEVER worked buddy. This site is hilarious. I am an examiner----a less than perfect polygrapher with a less than perfect instrument. The gentlemen on this site will tell you that the countermeasures work, but when you are attempting to fire off your routine, the "pens" do a very funny thing. If you want to beat a polygraph, than you should purchase an instrument and practice for about 2 months non-stop. This technique can be very effective. You can't learn to be a millionaire off of a website, and you sure can't beat a polygraph without sensory deprivation and repetitive bio-feedback coupled with auto-hypnotic suggestion. I give 3 tests a day, 6 days a week. The countermeasures in THE FIELD are sad. Perhaps the "success" stories are meant to motivate you to buy an official antipolygraph.com t-shirt.By definition, you would not know of any person who successfully used countermeasures during any polygraph you have given. You would only know of the people who unsuccessfully attempted countermeasures.
Do you honestly believe that however many people you believe you have caught using countermeasures are the only people to have ever used countermeasures?
Posted by George W. Maschke
- May 16, 2007, 05:22 AMQuote from: palerider on May 16, 2007, 12:56 AMDo the countermeasures in TLBTLD STILL work??? They NEVER worked buddy.
Not so. In peer-reviewed studies by Charles Honts and others, some 50% of test subjects fooled the polygraph using similar countermeasure techniques after receiving a maximum of 30 minutes of training. See citations in the bibliography of The Lie Behind the Lie Detector.
QuoteThis site is hilarious. I am an examiner----a less than perfect polygrapher with a less than perfect instrument.
Not only are you and your polygraph "less than perfect," your "test" has no scientific basis whatsoever.
QuoteThe gentlemen on this site will tell you that the countermeasures work, but when you are attempting to fire off your routine, the "pens" do a very funny thing.
Precisely what "funny thing" do the polygraph pens do when a person employs countermeasures? Please back your answer with references to the relevant polygraph literature.
QuoteIf you want to beat a polygraph, than you should purchase an instrument and practice for about 2 months non-stop. This technique can be very effective. You can't learn to be a millionaire off of a website, and you sure can't beat a polygraph without sensory deprivation and repetitive bio-feedback coupled with auto-hypnotic suggestion.
Again, the available peer-reviewed research suggests that much less than two months of non-stop practice is required to fool the polygraph. As mentioned earlier, half of countermeasure subjects fooled the polygraph after a maximum of 30 minutes of training. And the countermeasures were undetectable.
QuoteI give 3 tests a day, 6 days a week. The countermeasures in THE FIELD are sad. Perhaps the "success" stories are meant to motivate you to buy an official antipolygraph.com t-shirt.
Neither you nor any other polygraph examiner has ever demonstrated the ability to reliably detect the kinds of countermeasures described in The Lie Behind the Lie Detector. The free availability of accurate information on how to fool your invalid test evidently disturbs you. Since you cannot cite any scientific research to support your position, you attempt to sow fear, uncertainty, and doubt (FUD). Caveat emptor.
Posted by palerider
- May 16, 2007, 12:56 AMDo the countermeasures in TLBTLD STILL work??? They NEVER worked buddy. This site is hilarious. I am an examiner----a less than perfect polygrapher with a less than perfect instrument. The gentlemen on this site will tell you that the countermeasures work, but when you are attempting to fire off your routine, the "pens" do a very funny thing. If you want to beat a polygraph, than you should purchase an instrument and practice for about 2 months non-stop. This technique can be very effective. You can't learn to be a millionaire off of a website, and you sure can't beat a polygraph without sensory deprivation and repetitive bio-feedback coupled with auto-hypnotic suggestion. I give 3 tests a day, 6 days a week. The countermeasures in THE FIELD are sad. Perhaps the "success" stories are meant to motivate you to buy an official antipolygraph.com t-shirt.
Posted by George W. Maschke
- May 15, 2007, 12:10 AMThe "control question test" (CQT) remains the most widely used polygraph technique in law enforcement pre-employment polygraph screening, and yes, the countermeasures described in The Lie Behind the Lie Detector are still effective against the CQT.
Posted by polycrap32123
- May 13, 2007, 10:59 PMI am applying to a local law enforcement agency and i wanted to know if the control test is still being used for law enforcement and if the countermeasures in the lie behind the lie detector still work?