I took my Poly this morning and it went exactly as the book said it would. He told me this Flight/Fight story of a bank robbery and how I would have the Flight or Fight feeling. They truly are deceivers. I puckered during the control Q's and thought of flowing water and windy trees during revelant Q's. I saw straight thru the examiners bull. He really tried hard to convince me that he could tell if I was going to lie....Thanks to this site I passed! Beware and be informed if you are going to take the test soon!! The whole process was about 2 hrs. I admitted to "trying" weed during my Teens (70's) and to taking pens from the office. He also asked if I had looked up any info on the poly procedure...NOPE!!! He asked if I was familiar with the poly...YEP, TELL THE TRUTH AND ALL SHOULD GO WELL ( I replied)..HA HA. I played HIS game and won! Thanks a million for keeping us informed!!
You admitted to drug usage (according to your previous posts, this was undisclosed information) during your polygraph examination....how does that make you a "winner?"
I'd score this one for the examiner.
Quote from: Ray on Oct 13, 2004, 10:10 PMYou admitted to drug usage (according to your previous posts, this was undisclosed information) during your polygraph examination....how does that make you a "winner?"
I'd score this one for the examiner.
NOPE, Sorry Ray. Wrong answer !! If you gonna tell it to me, tell it right and know what you are saying is actual fact. If you MUST know, Prior to finding this site...I admitted MJ use on the initial application actually fearing the polygraph would show this, so there goes your "undisclosed theory" . I never said (or implied) that on a post and I would appreciate you reading my posts more carefully and not making up things. After I found this site it helped me to try to distingush between control Q's and Rev Q's However, your opinion actually means nothing to me but is welcomed...I passed the polygraph using advise from this site and the book..That was MY goal. I'm moving forward in this process with or without your blessings. Thanks to the help I've received here, it was indeed the examiners final "score" that passed me on the polygraph Ray, NOT YOURS! . Hope you had a nice day Ray!
Shieldsoon,
Congrats on passing the poly, like urself I have exprienced first hand how the poly operates and that following TLBTLD works. If I can offer you some advice not to reveal too much about your poly.Meaning to leave "specific" infomation about your poly to urself. As you can see polygraphers read this postings. "Ray" is probably a polygrapher and would love to try and DQ someone based on specifics left on these postings. Though it is unlikely, just be carefull:).
Anxiety
QuoteI was going to admit to small use in College
This was taken from your post the day before your polygraph. It appeared to me that you were unsure as to whether or not to admit to your past drug usage. My assumptions were made based on this information and I think they were very reasonable.
That being said, if you had no additional derogatory information in your past, how did you "beat" the polygraph? Perhaps you have some serious issues that you're hiding?
I think you have some issues Ray along with the other polygraphers that post on here. Maybe we should hook you up to the polygraph. But then again reading your past posts you prob would love that, because you sell yourself just short of Jesus himself. The polygraph is a joke just like your statements on here;meaningless and insignificant.
Anxiety
Quote from: Ray on Oct 14, 2004, 02:49 PM
how did you "beat" the polygraph?
What on earth are you talking about Ray...When did I ever say "I BEAT the Poly"? For God sake man READ MY WORDS and stop trying to read more than what I write. Indeed it is quite apparent that your narrowly thought out perceptions seem limited to your own narrow interpertations. Perhaps I'm getting a little too personal Ray , but this may be due to some underlying issues that are deep within you. Oh, and as far as your weak efforts to defend your earlier comments, it seems that your most recent comment speaks volumes into how you perceive , process and "assume" information that is placed before you. You know what happens when you "assume" I'm sure. As always and until your next reply, Have a nice day Ray!
Quote from: anxietyguy on Oct 14, 2004, 02:19 PMShieldsoon,
Congrats on passing the poly, like urself I have exprienced first hand how the poly operates and that following TLBTLD works. If I can offer you some advice not to reveal too much about your poly.Meaning to leave "specific" infomation about your poly to urself. As you can see polygraphers read this postings. "Ray" is probably a polygrapher and would love to try and DQ someone based on specifics left on these postings. Though it is unlikely, just be carefull:).
Anxiety
Food for thought...Thanks ,Well taken advise my friend!
"I played HIS game (polygraph) and won. " = I Beat the polygraph.
If you play a game (as you described it) and win, doesn't that mean you beat your opponent? Explain to me how I twisted your words.
Let me get back to my original point....The polygraph clearly worked in your case. In the application process, you admitted to drug use due to fear of detection on the polygraph. This is information that would probably not be detected in a background investigation.
My question to you is were you attempting to hide any serious issues on your polygraph? I'm not implying that you were....I'm just curious for the sake of our discussion.
Anxietyguy,
Feel free to jump in with your juvenile insults. You're amusing me.
Ray, don't worry about anxietyguy, I have been reading his posts for quite a long time. I am sure he is only about 12 years old. And I am glad to see you are back, I have been missing some adult conversation. And I think shieldsoon, is a name Gino is using to make people think he and George have a fan. Pretty lame.
Quote
My question to you is were you attempting to hide any serious issues on your polygraph? I'm not implying that you were....I'm just curious for the sake of our discussion.
You are very much so missing the point Ray! IT'S NOT ABOUT HIDING AN ISSUE OR LYING. No, I had no issue to hide. You see, I grew to realize that a person that comes in and tells the truth is just as likely to fail a poly as one that lies. The only admission I gave was due to my earlier blinded beliefs and ole folk tales of the great lie about the Poly...It can no more tell if a person is lying than a shoe can. Its the examinee's perception that gives it that power Ray, It can only monitor changes, not read minds. these changes do not mean that a person is being deceptive in each and every case. Examiners, however, have the power to assume that its indicative of deception with no actual proven base for this assumption other than just that..."assumption" based on a "reaction". The REAL lie here Ray is what the examiner is attempting to instill into the examinee...FEAR!! If you recall thats what this site is about! Folk like myself that have nothing to hide but have to face a machine that has some type of lie based legend behind it! This imperfect machine can help destroy a good reputation if one is not aware of the deception. I passed because I played the game and won...meaning (in my own words)...I outsmarted the examiner and his lie based legend and controlled the process while being honest. It has nothing to do with "beating" it! Thats street slang for a "con" game and to quote a former president, "I'm not a crook". It's not about lying Ray, Its about the imperfection of a machine that is being used despite it's proven shortcomings and the outright deception of its operators. Try not to put words in my mouth or tell me what I meant to write....I am the author of my own posts Ray! I stand by what I say and dare you or anyone else to explain me for me! I'm sure you will reply and I welcome it but please refrain from your constant urges to explain or "assume" what I meant. It only further proves my point about your personality and I have no time for senseless mind games. Have a good evening Ray!
Quote from: the-man on Oct 15, 2004, 12:42 AMRay, don't worry about anxietyguy, I have been reading his posts for quite a long time. I am sure he is only about 12 years old. And I am glad to see you are back, I have been missing some adult conversation. And I think shieldsoon, is a name Gino is using to make people think he and George have a fan. Pretty lame.
Maybe you should poly me "the-man" and see if I really am an adult. Though even if I told you my real age you prob would say I was deceptive.
Anxiety
QuoteI think shieldsoon, is a name Gino is using to make people think he and George have a fan
Try again.
Fans? I'm really not concerned about fans. Angry polygraph examiners? Now that's another story.
Reading posts from people such as you who are angry about the fact that we are exposing the trickery about polygraphy provides me with all of the satisfaction I could ever need from this site.
If countermeasures were as easily detectable as polygraphers claim, we wouldn't see a steady flow of posts here by polygraphers engaging in ad hominem attacks against George and I, attempting to scare people out of using countermeasures, etc.
Each day, more and more people are visiting this site and learning the trickery behind polygraphy. The day is fast approaching when the ability of polygraphers to intimidate the uninformed into confessing (polygraphy's only real utility) is gone.
Quote from: Gino J. Scalabrini on Oct 15, 2004, 05:11 AM
Try again.
exposing the trickery about polygraphy provides me with all of the satisfaction I could ever need from this site.
Gino, if that plaigiarized, purloined, pile of crap satisifies you, you need some help. or maybe a job with the NY TIMES. And didn't you write an article prior to that in which you took the completely oppositive side of countermeasures? Didn't you actually say they didn't work?
"the-man,"
Please point out any passage(s) of The Lie Behind the Lie Detector (http://antipolygraph.org/lie-behind-the-lie-detector.pdf) that you honestly believe to be plagiarized, along with the unacknowledged source upon which you believe such to be based. I predict that you will not be able to point out even one...because there aren't any. But go ahead, prove me wrong, if you think you can. Your failure to do so will be a tacit admission on your part that your accusation was a baseless fabrication.
Your suggestion that Gino Scalabrini authored an article arguing that countermeasures do not work is patently absurd, and shows that you haven't done your homework.
;)
GEORGE, LET GINO SPEAK FOR HIMSELF. ::)
YOU HAVE ALREADY BEEN PROVEN TO BE A LIAR.
"the-man,"
I have formally challenged you to prove your accusation of plagiarism. Your initial unwillingness to do so suggests that you made up the accusation. Please put up or shut up.
Now you additionally claim that I have been "proven to be a liar." Please explain this allegation. What have I been proven to have lied about? And where is the proof to which you refer?
George, since you continue to insert yourself into the conversation between Gino and myself, and since Gino doesn't have the guts to answser withl the truth, I will speak to your "formal challenge", whatever the hell that means ..... but first I want you to study what the word means and see if you can see any sign of it it your work.
1. To use and pass off (the ideas or writings of another) as one's own.
2. To appropriate for use as one's own passages or ideas from (another).
v. intr.
To put forth as original to oneself the ideas or words of another.
And since you didn't dispute the fact that I also called it a purloined pile of shit, I guess we at least agree on that much.
::)
Maybe you should listen to your own advice regarding your posts about George and Gino. Although it is common for polygraphers to become confused with what is deception and what is the truth. Your claims that George is a liar hold as much validity that polygraphy is a [glb]profession.[/glb]
Quote from: the-man on Oct 15, 2004, 12:42 AMI am sure he is only about 12 years old. And I am glad to see you are back, I have been missing some adult conversation. .
That was one of your previous posts if you have forgotten allready which is possible, with your pea-brain capacity that you have presented to all of us here.
Anxiety
QuoteGeorge, since you continue to insert yourself into the conversation between Gino and myself, and since Gino doesn't have the guts to answser withl the truth
Or, perhaps I didn't happen to see your posts within the 6 or so hours that elapsed before you erroneously concluded that I lacked the fortitude to respond to you. Despite what you polygraphers may think, George and I don't sit at home 24/7 at the screen in front of this Web site. We both have jobs, families, etc. This is a part-time venture, essentially a hobby.
The only lack of guts with regard to AntiPolygraph.org is on the part of the multitude of polygraph examiners who visit this site each day. Nearly 1000 days have passed since former FBI Supervisory Special Agent and polygraph examiner Dr. Drew C. Richardson posted his Challenge to the Polygraph Community (https://antipolygraph.org/forum/index.php?topic=418.msg1942#msg1942) with respect to the claimed ability to detect countermeasures. Not a single person has stepped up to the mike in nearly three years. Now that's what I call cowardice.
QuoteAnd didn't you write an article prior to that in which you took the completely oppositive side of countermeasures? Didn't you actually say they didn't work?
No. At no time did I ever write such an article. You are mistaken. As a person who makes a career determining truthfulness vs. deception on the basis of polygraph charts, I'm sure you are used to be wrong whether you know it or not.
QuoteAnd since you didn't dispute the fact that I also called it a purloined pile of shit, I guess we at least agree on that much.
Or, he neglected to dignify your comments with a response.
Quotebut first I want you to study what the word means and see if you can see any sign of it it your work.
1. To use and pass off (the ideas or writings of another) as one's own.
2. To appropriate for use as one's own passages or ideas from (another).
v. intr.
To put forth as original to oneself the ideas or words of another.
No, we don't see any sign of plagiarism. So, since you are the one advancing this argument, please enlighten us. As George said,
Please point out any passage(s) of The Lie Behind the Lie Detector that you honestly believe to be plagiarized, along with the unacknowledged source upon which you believe such to be based. Put up, or shut up.The Lie Behind the Lie Detector is well-referenced. In the areas where we drew upon the prior work of others, we provided full text citations.
I'm not exactly sure what the definition is for plagiarism is in the diploma mills that a number of luminaries in the polygraph field appear to have gotten their degrees from. In accredited academic institutions, however, mentioning something that others have written before and properly citing a source is the bedrock of all non-fiction writing. It most certainly is not plagiarism.
So once again, back up your baseless claims or go pound sand.
Quote from: Gino J. Scalabrini on Oct 16, 2004, 02:56 AM
George and I don't sit at home 24/7 at the screen in front of this Web site. We both have jobs, families, etc. This is a part-time venture, essentially a hobby.
Perhaps you and George should take up another "hobby", maybe mud wrestling......
;D
Maybe you should keep your sexual fantasies to yourself, Your kind of marriage is not yet recognized ;).........
PS: as Dimas says "see ya in the discarded post"
QuotePerhaps you and George should take up another "hobby", maybe mud wrestling......
Wishful thinking. Regrettably for you and the other polygraph examiners who wish we would walk away from what we are doing here, it's not going to happen.
Both George, myself and the others involved with this site would rather spend our time helping others protect themselves from potential damage to their reputations caused by polygraphy. Besides, as I said before, I get a special pleasure out of knowing just how angry I make people like yourself (as almost anyone who has submitted to one of these "tests" knows, polygraphers are not the most docile lot).
Your scam is being exposed. You are powerless to stop it—there is no way that the AntiPolygraph.org genie is going back into the bottle. Every time an applicant walks in, you know very well that you are second-guessing yourself. Is he telling the truth when he says that he knows nothing about polygraphy? Or, is he trying his hardest to keep from laughing as you knowingly lie to him with your "explanations of how things work?" Unfortunately, you will never know...
Quote from: Gino J. Scalabrini on Oct 16, 2004, 11:07 PM
Is he telling the truth when he says that he knows nothing about polygraphy? Or, is he trying his hardest to keep from laughing as you knowingly lie to him with your "explanations of how things work?" Unfortunately, you will never know...
I know it was hard to contain myself, seeing that the exam went EXACTLY how it was stated in TLBTLD. Actually I laughed all the way home. It doesn't stop there I still get a chuckle when I see polygraphers such as "the-man" post on here. I will continue to do my part in helping expose polygraphy for what it is. Sorry this angers you "little-man".
Gino, you and George are obviously suffering from delusions of grandeur. Get back on your meds. And anxietyguy, it's your bedtime son.
Quotethe man: Gino, you and George are obviously suffering from delusions of grandeur. Get back on your meds. And anxietyguy, it's your bedtime son.
Resorting to ad hominem attacks when you are getting crushed on the facts? You couldn't possibly be "I Smell BS" registered under another name, could you?
If you can't hang with the big dogs, perhaps you should get back up on the porch, little angry doggie.
"the-man" has been banned for violation of AntiPolygraph.org's posting policy (https://antipolygraph.org/forum/index.php?topic=1791.msg13605#msg13605).
these people face bigger problems than the poly... :o