- Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
A forum for free and open discussion of polygraph-related topics
Posted by sackett
- Mar 11, 2008, 10:54 PMAND THE BEAT (MATRA) GOES ON!!!!!! 
Posted by notguilty1
- Mar 11, 2008, 07:15 PMQuote from: youj on Mar 11, 2008, 03:52 PMQuote from: youj on Mar 11, 2008, 03:45 PMQuote from: youj on Mar 10, 2008, 11:58 PMQuote from: youj on Mar 10, 2008, 11:02 PM"notguilty1",
No, we don't agree on much of anything. Because, you have no idea what you're talking about. Reading a few "talking points" on this site, regurgitating partial information and whining about your past does not make you qualified to argue or discuss polygraph with any level of accuracy or intelligence.
It does; however, open the door for a massive display of ignorance. Thanks! You are making my job extremely easy....
Sackett
Wrong AGAIN Sackett, You see I know first hand that Poly's are a scam.
You on the other hand, don't really know who you examined has told the truth or lied unless they confess. DO YOU??
I can't see how my personal experience ( and that of others) with Poligraphs can be an open door for a "massive display of ignorance"
other than it is more smoke screens for your "chosen profession" so that you can get more people to fall for the scam.
Where inocent people are failed and the liers just employ CM's.
"notguilty1",
you take one polygraph test (maybe 2); and now you're an expert!?
you read a few bullet points on this web site; now you're an expert!?
you hear "polygraph is a scam", and now you're an expert!?
you hear others with their tale of woe, being falsely accused of lying, ah ha! They too are false positives! So, now you're an expert!?
you read a book on how to beat the polygraph examiner; and again, now you're an expert!?
OK! You're an expert. How come you haven't passed any polygraph examinations; Mister Expert!?
Sackett
Sackett,
To the extent that notguilty1 understands that polygraph testing depends not on science, but trickery (with the polygraph operator lying to and otherwise deceiving the person being "tested"), and to the extent that you fail to grasp this fundamental truth, he is more knowledgeable about polygraphy than you are.
George,
Thanks for that I couldn't have said it better myself.
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Mar 11, 2008, 03:52 PMQuote from: youj on Mar 11, 2008, 03:45 PMQuote from: youj on Mar 10, 2008, 11:58 PMQuote from: youj on Mar 10, 2008, 11:02 PM"notguilty1",
No, we don't agree on much of anything. Because, you have no idea what you're talking about. Reading a few "talking points" on this site, regurgitating partial information and whining about your past does not make you qualified to argue or discuss polygraph with any level of accuracy or intelligence.
It does; however, open the door for a massive display of ignorance. Thanks! You are making my job extremely easy....
Sackett
Wrong AGAIN Sackett, You see I know first hand that Poly's are a scam.
You on the other hand, don't really know who you examined has told the truth or lied unless they confess. DO YOU??
I can't see how my personal experience ( and that of others) with Poligraphs can be an open door for a "massive display of ignorance"
other than it is more smoke screens for your "chosen profession" so that you can get more people to fall for the scam.
Where inocent people are failed and the liers just employ CM's.
"notguilty1",
you take one polygraph test (maybe 2); and now you're an expert!?
you read a few bullet points on this web site; now you're an expert!?
you hear "polygraph is a scam", and now you're an expert!?
you hear others with their tale of woe, being falsely accused of lying, ah ha! They too are false positives! So, now you're an expert!?
you read a book on how to beat the polygraph examiner; and again, now you're an expert!?
OK! You're an expert. How come you haven't passed any polygraph examinations; Mister Expert!?
Sackett
Sackett,
To the extent that notguilty1 understands that polygraph testing depends not on science, but trickery (with the polygraph operator lying to and otherwise deceiving the person being "tested"), and to the extent that you fail to grasp this fundamental truth, he is more knowledgeable about polygraphy than you are.
Posted by sackett
- Mar 11, 2008, 03:45 PMQuote from: youj on Mar 10, 2008, 11:58 PMQuote from: youj on Mar 10, 2008, 11:02 PM"notguilty1",
No, we don't agree on much of anything. Because, you have no idea what you're talking about. Reading a few "talking points" on this site, regurgitating partial information and whining about your past does not make you qualified to argue or discuss polygraph with any level of accuracy or intelligence.
It does; however, open the door for a massive display of ignorance. Thanks! You are making my job extremely easy....
Sackett
Wrong AGAIN Sackett, You see I know first hand that Poly's are a scam.
You on the other hand, don't really know who you examined has told the truth or lied unless they confess. DO YOU??
I can't see how my personal experience ( and that of others) with Poligraphs can be an open door for a "massive display of ignorance"
other than it is more smoke screens for your "chosen profession" so that you can get more people to fall for the scam.
Where inocent people are failed and the liers just employ CM's.
"notguilty1",
you take one polygraph test (maybe 2); and now you're an expert!?
you read a few bullet points on this web site; now you're an expert!?
you hear "polygraph is a scam", and now you're an expert!?
you hear others with their tale of woe, being falsely accused of lying, ah ha! They too are false positives! So, now you're an expert!?
you read a book on how to beat the polygraph examiner; and again, now you're an expert!?
OK! You're an expert. How come you haven't passed any polygraph examinations; Mister Expert!?
Sackett
Posted by T.M. Cullen
- Mar 10, 2008, 11:58 PMQuoteReading a few "talking points" on this site, regurgitating partial information and whining about your past does not make you qualified to argue or discuss polygraph with any level of accuracy or intelligence.
Point noted.
How about the conclusions reached by the NAS report that for every would be spy the polygraph is able to "fail", hundreds of innocent people (pity wallowers as you call them) are FALSELY LABELED DECEPTIVE?
Was the NAS regurgitating partial information and unqualified to make such a conclusion?
Stop being deceptive.
QuoteDo you realize that "normal" people read this site looking for honest information?
I thought you said people only come here to "wallow in self pity"?
Posted by notguilty1
- Mar 10, 2008, 11:58 PMQuote from: youj on Mar 10, 2008, 11:02 PM"notguilty1",
No, we don't agree on much of anything. Because, you have no idea what you're talking about. Reading a few "talking points" on this site, regurgitating partial information and whining about your past does not make you qualified to argue or discuss polygraph with any level of accuracy or intelligence.
It does; however, open the door for a massive display of ignorance. Thanks! You are making my job extremely easy....
Sackett
Wrong AGAIN Sackett, You see I know first hand that Poly's are a scam.
You on the other hand, don't really know who you examined has told the truth or lied unless they confess. DO YOU??
I can't see how my personal experience ( and that of others) with Poligraphs can be an open door for a "massive display of ignorance"
other than it is more smoke screens for your "chosen profession" so that you can get more people to fall for the scam.
Where inocent people are failed and the liers just employ CM's.
Posted by sackett
- Mar 10, 2008, 11:02 PM"notguilty1",
No, we don't agree on much of anything. Because, you have no idea what you're talking about. Reading a few "talking points" on this site, regurgitating partial information and whining about your past does not make you qualified to argue or discuss polygraph with any level of accuracy or intelligence.
It does; however, open the door for a massive display of ignorance. Thanks! You are making my job extremely easy....
Sackett
No, we don't agree on much of anything. Because, you have no idea what you're talking about. Reading a few "talking points" on this site, regurgitating partial information and whining about your past does not make you qualified to argue or discuss polygraph with any level of accuracy or intelligence.
It does; however, open the door for a massive display of ignorance. Thanks! You are making my job extremely easy....
Sackett
Posted by notguilty1
- Mar 10, 2008, 08:57 PMQuote from: youj on Mar 09, 2008, 11:25 PMyouj,
[b]generally[/b] speaking, yes. BUT, every cases is just that, case by case. An evaluation should be done by the examiner before the examination to make sure the examinee is in fact fit. I've tested many who had various disorders that were not dysfunctional, others, I've had to say, "I'm sorry, but you're not fit."
Sackett
WOW finally I agree with Sackett. But... Since the test is unscientific and bascially a scam. What difference does it make who gets tested.
Since thier aim is a confession and not a test result per se. Than the only problem with testing a person with a "mental illness" is that any confession would be useless.
Thanks again Sackett for continuing helping in debunking the whole Poly scam.
Posted by sackett
- Mar 10, 2008, 03:57 PMlale,
You have certainly taken immaturity to a new level.
Do you actually think before you type? Do you realize that "normal" people read this site looking for honest information?
No, I didn't think so...
You have certainly taken immaturity to a new level.
Do you actually think before you type? Do you realize that "normal" people read this site looking for honest information?
No, I didn't think so...
Posted by LALE
- Mar 10, 2008, 12:14 PMYouj,
Polygraph examiners will test anything with an arm and a pulse.
Their mantra is:
Outdo, out test, out DI, outBS the rest.
Sackett The Kid is gonna get you.
The fastest poly gun in the West.
Polygraph examiners will test anything with an arm and a pulse.
Their mantra is:
Outdo, out test, out DI, outBS the rest.
Sackett The Kid is gonna get you.
The fastest poly gun in the West.
Posted by sackett
- Mar 10, 2008, 11:46 AMyouj,
Ms or Mr Cullen is correct; that psychotic, schizophrenics, etc should not be tested. They have a lost contact with reality (like some of the "anti" posters on this site) and that could have an impact on the examinations accuracy. I personally will not test them unless their attending physician releases the examinee to do so.
Sackett
_________________________________________________________
George,
"...it should be borne in mind that polygraph "testing" has not been proven through peer-reviewed research to reliably differentiate between truth-telling and deception at better-than-chance levels under field conditions in people without a mental (or other) illness.
The "test" has no grounding in the scientific method. It's inherently biased against the truthful, and yet the deceptive can pass using simple countermeasures that polygraphers have no demonstrated ability to detect. In short, polygraph results are not to be relied upon, whether or not the examinee suffers from any illness. For a thorough debunking of polygraphy, see The Lie Behind the Lie Detector."
may i suggest you post your standard "mantra" on your main page. This will release you from the unnecessary obligation of repeatedly posting it everytime someone new comes here. Just an idea to save you some time.
Sackett
Ms or Mr Cullen is correct; that psychotic, schizophrenics, etc should not be tested. They have a lost contact with reality (like some of the "anti" posters on this site) and that could have an impact on the examinations accuracy. I personally will not test them unless their attending physician releases the examinee to do so.
Sackett
_________________________________________________________
George,
"...it should be borne in mind that polygraph "testing" has not been proven through peer-reviewed research to reliably differentiate between truth-telling and deception at better-than-chance levels under field conditions in people without a mental (or other) illness.
The "test" has no grounding in the scientific method. It's inherently biased against the truthful, and yet the deceptive can pass using simple countermeasures that polygraphers have no demonstrated ability to detect. In short, polygraph results are not to be relied upon, whether or not the examinee suffers from any illness. For a thorough debunking of polygraphy, see The Lie Behind the Lie Detector."
may i suggest you post your standard "mantra" on your main page. This will release you from the unnecessary obligation of repeatedly posting it everytime someone new comes here. Just an idea to save you some time.
Sackett
Posted by T.M. Cullen
- Mar 10, 2008, 04:15 AMPolygraphers are equal opportunity scam artists.
But if the person is "psychotic" and can't tell reality from fantasy, and lies, will that lie count against them and cause them to "fail"?
Then again, the truth-telling ability of the test is itself a fantasy, so it doesn't matter.
TC
But if the person is "psychotic" and can't tell reality from fantasy, and lies, will that lie count against them and cause them to "fail"?
Then again, the truth-telling ability of the test is itself a fantasy, so it doesn't matter.
TC
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Mar 10, 2008, 03:07 AMAlthough polygraph operators may be willing to polygraph persons with mental illnesses in some circumstances, it should be borne in mind that polygraph "testing" has not been proven through peer-reviewed research to reliably differentiate between truth-telling and deception at better-than-chance levels under field conditions in people without a mental (or other) illness.
The "test" has no grounding in the scientific method. It's inherently biased against the truthful, and yet the deceptive can pass using simple countermeasures that polygraphers have no demonstrated ability to detect. In short, polygraph results are not to be relied upon, whether or not the examinee suffers from any illness. For a thorough debunking of polygraphy, see The Lie Behind the Lie Detector (1 mb PDF).
The "test" has no grounding in the scientific method. It's inherently biased against the truthful, and yet the deceptive can pass using simple countermeasures that polygraphers have no demonstrated ability to detect. In short, polygraph results are not to be relied upon, whether or not the examinee suffers from any illness. For a thorough debunking of polygraphy, see The Lie Behind the Lie Detector (1 mb PDF).
Posted by sackett
- Mar 09, 2008, 11:25 PMyouj,
generally speaking, yes. BUT, every cases is just that, case by case. An evaluation should be done by the examiner before the examination to make sure the examinee is in fact fit. I've tested many who had various disorders that were not dysfunctional, others, I've had to say, "I'm sorry, but you're not fit."
Sackett
generally speaking, yes. BUT, every cases is just that, case by case. An evaluation should be done by the examiner before the examination to make sure the examinee is in fact fit. I've tested many who had various disorders that were not dysfunctional, others, I've had to say, "I'm sorry, but you're not fit."
Sackett
Posted by youj
- Mar 09, 2008, 08:25 PMif so, all types of mental illness? Are there any journal articles/studies as to what kinds of psychiatric illnesses polygraphs can not be used in, for instance stress disorders. Can it be used in stress disorders?