- Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
A forum for free and open discussion of polygraph-related topics
Posted by SanchoPanza
- Oct 22, 2008, 09:45 AMA few days ago I made a statement indicating that the information in TLBTLD regarding the use of countermeasure was misleading at best.
Addressing Dr. Maschke, I wrote:
Here is what the NAS study had to say:
SanchoPanza
Addressing Dr. Maschke, I wrote:
Quote from: SanchoPanza on Oct 12, 2008, 01:58 PMThe dishonesty in your statement;Quotelies mainly in your failure to disclose what the examinee must really accomplish while sitting in a polygraph chair, in order to produce a singleindistinguishable response.
The countermeasures we've discussed produce physiological responses that are indistinguishable from those that polygraphers believe to be associated with truth-telling concerning the relevant issues
The main problem with your advice concerning manufacturing responses to comparison questions is that an examinee who has read your book still has no idea what data collected from his reactivity to relevant questions might look like on the day he is taking the test.
So in order have the remotest possibility of successfully using countermeasures he has to:
1. Read your book to the point that he believes he can accurately follow your instructions and if your techniques actually work, use them to
2. accurately mimic the physiological changes brought about by autonomic arousal and collected by several different sensor components while
3. blindly guessing how much of the technique must be applied in order to be enough to overshadow his reactivity to the relevant questions and how much would be too much in order to avoid suspicion brought about by their conspicuous appearance,
4. in comparison to data collected from a true autonomic reaction that
5. he can't see and
6. he can't suppress
7.and repeat the entire process on each comparison question in such a fashion that his manufactured reactions don't all look exactly alike or manufactured.
8. in the presence of a trained examiner
a.thoroughly familiar with the instrumentation of the polygraph,
b.considerable experience looking at collected data, and
c.training in detecting exactly the type of countermeasures you endorse,
9. while the data is being recorded for further review, analysis,and quality control if needed
10. Oh yes, and he has to listen to the questions too.
Does that sound as simple as you make it sound in your book? Looking for something easier to do? Try standing on top of three balanced bowling balls while juggling chain saws. While both might be possible it is unlikely a person would be successful at either just by reading a book about it
Here is what the NAS study had to say:
Quote
Authors such as Maschke and Williams suggest that effective countermeasure strategies can be easily learned and that a small amount of practice is enough to give examinees an excellent chance of "beating" the polygraph. Because the effective application of mental or physical countermeasures on the part of examinees would require skill in distinguishing between relevant and comparison questions, skill in regulating physiological response, and skill in concealing countermeasures from trained examiners, claims that it is easy to train examinees to "beat" both the polygraph and trained examiners require scientific supporting evidence to be credible. However, we are not aware of any such research[/i].
The Polygraph and Lie Detection (2003)
Board on Behavioral, Cognitive, and Sensory Sciences and Education (BCSSE)
Committee on National Statistics (CNSTAT) PG 147 (emphasis added)
SanchoPanza
Posted by Fair Chance
- Oct 12, 2008, 10:49 PMI think we are way off track of a polygraph discussion both pro or anti with discussion of genitals. While it might help the major networks during sweep weeks, it does little to promote a reasonable discussion.
Again, I would urge polygraph proponents to ignore all comments on this site if you are confident of your craft. There is no reason to negate a negative. You are only adding to the credibility of this site with every posting that is made. You are spending time responding to poor losers and liars. Let it go. If we are wrong, we will slowly fade away with time.
I will attest that this has to be one of the least censored sites regarding the posting of opposing points of views. How else could it get the extremely high hits from Google when you put in "polygraph" for a search engine. I would believe it when I put in "antipolygraph" because it is an antipolygraph site, clear and simple. I am always amazed how it ranks so high for a "polygraph" site. It is because so many proponents of the polgyraph keep posting here.
I would not want to be the "wind beneath the wings" of an anti-polygraph site by posting here if I were a proponent of the use of polygraphs.
A toast (tongue-in-cheek) to those who oppose my opinion.
Regards.
Again, I would urge polygraph proponents to ignore all comments on this site if you are confident of your craft. There is no reason to negate a negative. You are only adding to the credibility of this site with every posting that is made. You are spending time responding to poor losers and liars. Let it go. If we are wrong, we will slowly fade away with time.
I will attest that this has to be one of the least censored sites regarding the posting of opposing points of views. How else could it get the extremely high hits from Google when you put in "polygraph" for a search engine. I would believe it when I put in "antipolygraph" because it is an antipolygraph site, clear and simple. I am always amazed how it ranks so high for a "polygraph" site. It is because so many proponents of the polgyraph keep posting here.
I would not want to be the "wind beneath the wings" of an anti-polygraph site by posting here if I were a proponent of the use of polygraphs.
A toast (tongue-in-cheek) to those who oppose my opinion.
Regards.
Posted by notguilty1
- Oct 12, 2008, 09:32 PMQuote from: SanchoPanza on Oct 12, 2008, 09:28 PMQuoteI for one, ( I can't speak for Dr. Maschke ) enjoy your amusing and pompous views.
"He's a pretty kid, too. I mean I don't know, I gotta problem if I should fuck him or fight him. ..."
Raging Bull, 1980
Careful TC he might think you are after his genitals too and I have to tell you//........ He's mine dam it and u can't have him
Posted by T.M. Cullen
- Oct 12, 2008, 09:28 PMQuoteI for one, ( I can't speak for Dr. Maschke ) enjoy your amusing and pompous views.
"He's a pretty kid, too. I mean I don't know, I gotta problem if I should fuck him or fight him. ..."
Raging Bull, 1980
Posted by notguilty1
- Oct 12, 2008, 09:02 PMQuote from: SanchoPanza on Oct 12, 2008, 05:30 PMDr. Maschke.
Casuistry, Really
All questions on a polygraph examination serve a significant purpose in the testing process and by definition are relevant whether they are officially labled as relevant questions or not. If you would actually read some of the peer reviewed research you constantly "cherry pick" you would know that each question serves a relevant purpose to the construct of the testing process.
I still refuse to be baited into doing your research for you. Are you lazy?
My credibility is shot? Don't make me laugh.
The opinion of Dr. George Maschke, a sex offender sheltering, terrorist aiding, egotistical, pseudo-intellectual advisor to criminals of all shapes and sizes, who hides from his rejection by the U.S. Government in the Netherlands, refusing to stop whining about being caught lying on one polygraph and trying to cheat on another polygraph, concerning my credibility doesn't bother me at all. Really it doesn't
I think you are simply trying to anger me into leaving this board because you know I speak the truth about Polygraph and Countermeasures. You claim to want the truth. You claim to speak the truth.
The simple fact is YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!
You may ban me anytime you wish, you can even delete my comments exposing your true character, but until such time as you do, I will come and go as I please. It's your board.
Sancho Panza
You continually expect Dr. Maschke to either ban you or somehow edit or delete your comments. Something he is never done.
If he was trying to anger you solely to "leave this board" he needn't do that since he could just ban you.
I for one, ( I can't speak for Dr. Maschke ) enjoy your amusing and pompous views.
Posted by notguilty1
- Oct 12, 2008, 08:56 PMQuote from: SanchoPanza on Oct 12, 2008, 08:08 PMNotguilty1 I would appreciate it if you would stop spending so much time thinking about whatever is located between my legs literally or figuratively.
Your lifestyle choices are, of course, a matter of you own personal preference, You are certainly entitled to live your life the way you wish, but I choose not to participate.
So, if you find your private thoughts returning to my genital area again whether as the fodder for artistic commentary or as the focus of some other deviant contemplation. Please stop.
Thank you
Sancho Panza
I will when you stop providing me with the "artistic fodder"
Posted by SanchoPanza
- Oct 12, 2008, 08:08 PMNotguilty1 I would appreciate it if you would stop spending so much time thinking about whatever is located between my legs literally or figuratively.
Your lifestyle choices are, of course, a matter of you own personal preference, You are certainly entitled to live your life the way you wish, but I choose not to participate.
So, if you find your private thoughts returning to my genital area again whether as the fodder for artistic commentary or as the focus of some other deviant contemplation. Please stop.
Thank you
Sancho Panza
Your lifestyle choices are, of course, a matter of you own personal preference, You are certainly entitled to live your life the way you wish, but I choose not to participate.
So, if you find your private thoughts returning to my genital area again whether as the fodder for artistic commentary or as the focus of some other deviant contemplation. Please stop.
Thank you
Sancho Panza
Posted by notguilty1
- Oct 12, 2008, 06:27 PMQuote from: SanchoPanza on Oct 12, 2008, 02:37 PMMeangina, If you will go back and review notguilty1s posts you will find out that not only does he engage in frequent ad hominum attacks against me, you will find that my observations are accurate.
The only reason I respond to him at all is I don't want him to feel left out. As you can see he just posted a somewhat pornographic depiction with my name on it, but Dr. Maschke has thus far declined to censure his activity. I actually asked Dr. Maschke both publicly and privately to address his attacks. He has declined and therefore I no longer have any compunction regarding responding in kind and couldn't care less about your opinion on the matter.
My current response to him below should give you some idea of what it is actually like trying to communicate with him on an intelligent level. I hated standing at the top of that ladder.
Sancho Panza
Sancho, My attempt at trying to discuss this matter with an intelligent person ended a long time ago when I realized who I was dealing with. It has further been quelled by the realization that you are nothing more than a troll looking to feel superior behind your keyboard.
The picture with your screen name on it, ( not your real name) was not intended as pornography which most people viewing it would agree. It was simply a depiction of what is obviously going on with you.
A empty man holding, from what seems to be his "missing" manhood a shotgun to shoot at others, both figuratively and professionally.
I know this, in the mind of a shallow man is lost but I don't post to this site to please you.
The truth is inconvenient for you and your suggestion that you respond to me so I don't feel left out is preposterous.
I am the reason and common sense that you need to fight to keep your scam, or your trolling going.
If your arguments had any validity at all in fact you would have no need to waste your time with us here.
The posts here that confirm that this pseudo-science of yours is not accurate, consistent or in fact useful for deception detection are squashing your arguments on a daily basis and you have no one backing your views so you resort to attacks on these peoples intelligence, honesty and resolve to right a wrong.
Actually, the picture was not accurate at all since nothing on you can possibly be that big.
Peace my hollow man
Posted by SanchoPanza
- Oct 12, 2008, 05:30 PMDr. Maschke.
Casuistry, Really
All questions on a polygraph examination serve a significant purpose in the testing process and by definition are relevant whether they are officially labled as relevant questions or not. If you would actually read some of the peer reviewed research you constantly "cherry pick" you would know that each question serves a relevant purpose to the construct of the testing process.
I still refuse to be baited into doing your research for you. Are you lazy?
My credibility is shot? Don't make me laugh.
The opinion of Dr. George Maschke, a sex offender sheltering, terrorist aiding, egotistical, pseudo-intellectual advisor to criminals of all shapes and sizes, who hides from his rejection by the U.S. Government in the Netherlands, refusing to stop whining about being caught lying on one polygraph and trying to cheat on another polygraph, concerning my credibility doesn't bother me at all. Really it doesn't
I think you are simply trying to anger me into leaving this board because you know I speak the truth about Polygraph and Countermeasures. You claim to want the truth. You claim to speak the truth.
The simple fact is YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!
You may ban me anytime you wish, you can even delete my comments exposing your true character, but until such time as you do, I will come and go as I please. It's your board.
Sancho Panza
Casuistry, Really
All questions on a polygraph examination serve a significant purpose in the testing process and by definition are relevant whether they are officially labled as relevant questions or not. If you would actually read some of the peer reviewed research you constantly "cherry pick" you would know that each question serves a relevant purpose to the construct of the testing process.
I still refuse to be baited into doing your research for you. Are you lazy?
My credibility is shot? Don't make me laugh.
The opinion of Dr. George Maschke, a sex offender sheltering, terrorist aiding, egotistical, pseudo-intellectual advisor to criminals of all shapes and sizes, who hides from his rejection by the U.S. Government in the Netherlands, refusing to stop whining about being caught lying on one polygraph and trying to cheat on another polygraph, concerning my credibility doesn't bother me at all. Really it doesn't
I think you are simply trying to anger me into leaving this board because you know I speak the truth about Polygraph and Countermeasures. You claim to want the truth. You claim to speak the truth.
The simple fact is YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!
You may ban me anytime you wish, you can even delete my comments exposing your true character, but until such time as you do, I will come and go as I please. It's your board.
Sancho Panza
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Oct 12, 2008, 04:25 PMQuote from: SanchoPanza on Oct 12, 2008, 01:58 PMDr. Maschke, You are playing a "label game" attempting to mislead people into believing that you are promoting honesty. "Relevant Question" is a label used by polygraphers to identify those questions that directly address the matter under investigation. Could a better label be found? Yes probably, but that is the one they chose. Polygraphers used to refer to "comparison questions" as "control questions" until they arrived at a new consensus regarding that label, but many polygraphers still use the old terminology even though "Control Questions" don't really "control" anything or provide a "control" in the strictest scientific terminology . "Neutral questions" used to be called "Irrelevant Questions" even though they are not at all irrelevant to the process. Once again it appears that a consensus among examiners brought a change in terminology, although the purpose of the question and its relevance to the overall process hasn't changed.
I'm not playing any "label game." The relevant questions are the ones that are of true concern. I've never advocated that persons seeking positions of public trust should answer these questions dishonestly.
QuoteAll that being said every question on a polygraph examination has relevance because they all have a significant and demonstrable bearing on the testing process. Thus every question on the test addresses a relevant issue whether or not it is labeled as a "Relevant Question". Intentionally attempting to manufacture misleading responses to any question on a polygraph test is dishonest. Your book is full of evidence that proves that you are trying to justify encourage, condone and also trying to instruct people in the mechanics of successfully lying on polygraph tests. Do I really have to go back and cut and paste ALL of those quotes again? Talk about being knowingly dishonest, you co-wrote the book
The Lie Behind the Lie Detector does not encourage people to lie about relevant issues. Your suggestion that all questions are "relevant" is an exercise in casuistry.
QuoteSo if you want to say that you have never advised people to lie to questions bearing the label" Relevant Question" OK. Because I think you are well aware that it is impossible to suppress an authentic reaction.
Indeed, I've never advised people to answer relevant questions untruthfully.
QuoteBut for to claim that youQuotehave never advised anyone to lie about relevant issues during the course of a polygraph examinationis patently false.
Relevant issues are those addressed by the relevant questions in a polygraph examination. Again, I've never advised anyone to answer such questions untruthfully.
QuoteThe dishonesty in your statement;QuoteThe countermeasures we've discussed produce physiological responses that are indistinguishable from those that polygraphers believe to be associated with truth-telling concerning the relevant issueslies mainly in your failure to disclose what the examinee must really accomplish while sitting in a polygraph chair, in order to produce a single indistinguishable response.
The main problem with your advice concerning manufacturing responses to comparison questions is that an examinee who has read your book still has no idea what data collected from his reactivity to relevant questions might look like on the day he is taking the test.
So in order have the remotest possibility of successfully using countermeasures he has to:
1. Read your book to the point that he believes he can accurately follow your instructions and if your techniques actually work, use them to
2. accurately mimic the physiological changes brought about by autonomic arousal and collected by several different sensor components while
3. blindly guessing how much of the technique must be applied in order to be enough to overshadow his reactivity to the relevant questions and how much would be too much in order to avoid suspicion brought about by their conspicuous appearance,
4. in comparison to data collected from a true autonomic reaction that
5. he can't see and
6. he can't suppress
7.and repeat the entire process on each comparison question in such a fashion that his manufactured reactions don't all look exactly alike or manufactured.
8. in the presence of a trained examiner
a. thoroughly familiar with the instrumentation of the polygraph,
b. considerable experience looking at collected data, and
c. training in detecting exactly the type of countermeasures you endorse,
9. while the data is being recorded for further review, analysis, and quality control if needed
10. Oh yes, and he has to listen to the questions too.
Does that sound as simple as you make it sound in your book? Looking for something easier to do? Try standing on top of three balanced bowling balls while juggling chain saws. While both might be possible it is unlikely a person would be successful at either just by reading a book about it
Sancho Panza
Your argument that trying to successfully use countermeasures is like an impossible juggling task is undermined by peer-reviewed research in which half of test subjects succeeded in beating the polygraph with no more than 30 minutes of instruction. And even experienced polygraph examiners could not detect the countermeasures used. Citations are provided in The Lie Behind the Lie Detector.
Sancho Panza, your credibility is spent. You destroyed it with your deliberate lie about the existence of published studies showing that countermeasures like those outlined in The Lie Behind the Lie Detector. You know there are no such studies. How did you ever think you could get away with such an outrageous falsehood? You might get away with saying such a thing to examinees in your polygraph suite who won't risk contradicting you. But such an outrageous lie won't fly here.
Posted by SanchoPanza
- Oct 12, 2008, 02:37 PMMeangina, If you will go back and review notguilty1s posts you will find out that not only does he engage in frequent ad hominum attacks against me, you will find that my observations are accurate.
The only reason I respond to him at all is I don't want him to feel left out. As you can see he just posted a somewhat pornographic depiction with my name on it, but Dr. Maschke has thus far declined to censure his activity. I actually asked Dr. Maschke both publicly and privately to address his attacks. He has declined and therefore I no longer have any compunction regarding responding in kind and couldn't care less about your opinion on the matter.
My current response to him below should give you some idea of what it is actually like trying to communicate with him on an intelligent level. I hated standing at the top of that ladder.
Sancho Panza
The only reason I respond to him at all is I don't want him to feel left out. As you can see he just posted a somewhat pornographic depiction with my name on it, but Dr. Maschke has thus far declined to censure his activity. I actually asked Dr. Maschke both publicly and privately to address his attacks. He has declined and therefore I no longer have any compunction regarding responding in kind and couldn't care less about your opinion on the matter.
My current response to him below should give you some idea of what it is actually like trying to communicate with him on an intelligent level. I hated standing at the top of that ladder.
Sancho Panza
Posted by SanchoPanza
- Oct 12, 2008, 01:58 PMDr. Maschke, You are playing a "label game" attempting to mislead people into believing that you are promoting honesty. "Relevant Question" is a label used by polygraphers to identify those questions that directly address the matter under investigation. Could a better label be found? Yes probably, but that is the one they chose. Polygraphers used to refer to "comparison questions" as "control questions" until they arrived at a new consensus regarding that label, but many polygraphers still use the old terminology even though "Control Questions" don't really "control" anything or provide a "control" in the strictest scientific terminology . "Neutral questions" used to be called "Irrelevant Questions" even though they are not at all irrelevant to the process. Once again it appears that a consensus among examiners brought a change in terminology, although the purpose of the question and its relevance to the overall process hasn't changed.
All that being said every question on a polygraph examination has relevance because they all have a significant and demonstrable bearing on the testing process. Thus every question on the test addresses a relevant issue whether or not it is labeled as a "Relevant Question". Intentionally attempting to manufacture misleading responses to any question on a polygraph test is dishonest. Your book is full of evidence that proves that you are trying to justify encourage, condone and also trying to instruct people in the mechanics of successfully lying on polygraph tests. Do I really have to go back and cut and paste ALL of those quotes again? Talk about being knowingly dishonest, you co-wrote the book
So if you want to say that you have never advised people to lie to questions bearing the label" Relevant Question" OK. Because I think you are well aware that it is impossible to suppress an authentic reaction.
But for to claim that you
The dishonesty in your statement;
The main problem with your advice concerning manufacturing responses to comparison questions is that an examinee who has read your book still has no idea what data collected from his reactivity to relevant questions might look like on the day he is taking the test.
So in order have the remotest possibility of successfully using countermeasures he has to:
1. Read your book to the point that he believes he can accurately follow your instructions and if your techniques actually work, use them to
2. accurately mimic the physiological changes brought about by autonomic arousal and collected by several different sensor components while
3. blindly guessing how much of the technique must be applied in order to be enough to overshadow his reactivity to the relevant questions and how much would be too much in order to avoid suspicion brought about by their conspicuous appearance,
4. in comparison to data collected from a true autonomic reaction that
5. he can't see and
6. he can't suppress
7.and repeat the entire process on each comparison question in such a fashion that his manufactured reactions don't all look exactly alike or manufactured.
8. in the presence of a trained examiner
a. thoroughly familiar with the instrumentation of the polygraph,
b. considerable experience looking at collected data, and
c. training in detecting exactly the type of countermeasures you endorse,
9. while the data is being recorded for further review, analysis, and quality control if needed
10. Oh yes, and he has to listen to the questions too.
Does that sound as simple as you make it sound in your book? Looking for something easier to do? Try standing on top of three balanced bowling balls while juggling chain saws. While both might be possible it is unlikely a person would be successful at either just by reading a book about it
Sancho Panza
All that being said every question on a polygraph examination has relevance because they all have a significant and demonstrable bearing on the testing process. Thus every question on the test addresses a relevant issue whether or not it is labeled as a "Relevant Question". Intentionally attempting to manufacture misleading responses to any question on a polygraph test is dishonest. Your book is full of evidence that proves that you are trying to justify encourage, condone and also trying to instruct people in the mechanics of successfully lying on polygraph tests. Do I really have to go back and cut and paste ALL of those quotes again? Talk about being knowingly dishonest, you co-wrote the book
So if you want to say that you have never advised people to lie to questions bearing the label" Relevant Question" OK. Because I think you are well aware that it is impossible to suppress an authentic reaction.
But for to claim that you
Quotehave never advised anyone to lie about relevant issues during the course of a polygraph examinationis patently false.
The dishonesty in your statement;
QuoteThe countermeasures we've discussed produce physiological responses that are indistinguishable from those that polygraphers believe to be associated with truth-telling concerning the relevant issueslies mainly in your failure to disclose what the examinee must really accomplish while sitting in a polygraph chair, in order to produce a single indistinguishable response.
The main problem with your advice concerning manufacturing responses to comparison questions is that an examinee who has read your book still has no idea what data collected from his reactivity to relevant questions might look like on the day he is taking the test.
So in order have the remotest possibility of successfully using countermeasures he has to:
1. Read your book to the point that he believes he can accurately follow your instructions and if your techniques actually work, use them to
2. accurately mimic the physiological changes brought about by autonomic arousal and collected by several different sensor components while
3. blindly guessing how much of the technique must be applied in order to be enough to overshadow his reactivity to the relevant questions and how much would be too much in order to avoid suspicion brought about by their conspicuous appearance,
4. in comparison to data collected from a true autonomic reaction that
5. he can't see and
6. he can't suppress
7.and repeat the entire process on each comparison question in such a fashion that his manufactured reactions don't all look exactly alike or manufactured.
8. in the presence of a trained examiner
a. thoroughly familiar with the instrumentation of the polygraph,
b. considerable experience looking at collected data, and
c. training in detecting exactly the type of countermeasures you endorse,
9. while the data is being recorded for further review, analysis, and quality control if needed
10. Oh yes, and he has to listen to the questions too.
Does that sound as simple as you make it sound in your book? Looking for something easier to do? Try standing on top of three balanced bowling balls while juggling chain saws. While both might be possible it is unlikely a person would be successful at either just by reading a book about it
Sancho Panza
Posted by notguilty1
- Oct 12, 2008, 12:11 PMHey Sancho
All I can say for you is........ here's a picture for your ego!
All I can say for you is........ here's a picture for your ego!
Posted by meangino
- Oct 12, 2008, 12:03 PMQuote from: SanchoPanza on Oct 12, 2008, 10:52 AMNotguilty1 I would like to addess your intelligence.
Presuming it actually exists. do you have any idea where it might be currenltly located? .
Sancho Panza
Sancho, like most polygraphers on this board you all too frequently resort to these ad hominem attacks against anyone who challenges you to debate.
I suggest you mount your donkey, Rucío, and ride off into the sunset.
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Oct 12, 2008, 11:40 AMQuote from: SanchoPanza on Oct 12, 2008, 10:43 AMThat's rich Dr. Maschke YOU of all people calling me dishonest.
You promote dishonesty with every egotistical beath you take. "It is hard to say which of the two we ought most to lament,--the unhappy man who sinks under the sense of his dishonesty, or him who survives it." You certainly fall in the latter category.
I almost wish I had known you when you were alive
Sancho Panza
Sancho Panza,
I have never advised anyone to lie about relevant issues during the course of a polygraph examination. And unlike you, I have never lied, or attempted to mislead others, about polygraphy.