Post reply

The message has the following error or errors that must be corrected before continuing:
Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.
Attachments: (Clear attachments)
Restrictions: 4 per post (4 remaining), maximum total size 192 KB, maximum individual size 64.00 MB
Uncheck the attachments you no longer want attached
Click or drag files here to attach them.
(Clear attachments)
Other options
Verification:
Please leave this box empty:
Type the letters shown in the picture
Listen to the letters / Request another image

Type the letters shown in the picture:
Type the third word in this sentence: 'The quick brown fox jumps.' (answer in lowercase):
Shortcuts: ALT+S post or ALT+P preview

Topic summary

Posted by orolan
 - Jun 13, 2003, 08:06 PM
Skeptic,
True, he is rather civil. After all, I have been called worse names than "idiot".
Posted by Skeptic
 - Jun 13, 2003, 07:46 PM
Quote from: orolan on Jun 13, 2003, 07:36 PMSkeptic,
If you'll read the thread in PCSOT, you'll see that the esteemed Mr. Saidme responded to my counter-arguments with a juvenile name-calling post, rather than refuting or conceding. Such conduct is not what a person would expect from a person who claims 25 years as a "professional". And he still refuses to refute the arguments. Besides, he has absolutely no sense of humor. What a drag his life must be.

Yeah, I saw it.  He has an unfortunate tendency to read hidden meaning into things with great certainty (perhaps a common trait among interrogators in general?).  And yes, I think he does owe you an apology for his initial comments to you, wherein he clearly misconstrued your statements.  

But at least compared with most of our polygrapher visitors, he's being fairly civil.

Skeptic
Posted by orolan
 - Jun 13, 2003, 07:36 PM
Skeptic,
If you'll read the thread in PCSOT, you'll see that the esteemed Mr. Saidme responded to my counter-arguments with a juvenile name-calling post, rather than refuting or conceding. Such conduct is not what a person would expect from a person who claims 25 years as a "professional". And he still refuses to refute the arguments. Besides, he has absolutely no sense of humor. What a drag his life must be.
Posted by George W. Maschke
 - Jun 13, 2003, 07:10 PM
lost,

For an explanation of how polygraph examinations are administered and scored, see Chapter 3 of The Lie Behind the Lie Detector.
Posted by Skeptic
 - Jun 13, 2003, 07:08 PM
You two just can't get along, can you?

Skeptic
Posted by Saidme
 - Jun 13, 2003, 06:45 PM
Orolan

You're still an idiot.
Posted by orolan
 - Jun 13, 2003, 06:24 PM
You read them the same way the polygrapher does. Pick up a pen, close both eyes, and randomly place x's on the chart. Open your eyes. The x's indicate deception.
Actually, that's not how they do it. But it is statistically as accurate ::)
Posted by lost
 - Jun 13, 2003, 06:01 PM
 ???      just wanting to know the truth.