(https://antipolygraph.org/graphics/posters-ucla-1.jpg)
A key strategy in ending polygraph abuse, and ultimately bringing about the abolishment of polygraph screening, is to enlighten those whom our government would polygraph about "the lie behind the lie detector." College campuses are a key recruiting ground for agencies like the CIA, FBI, NSA, and others that subject applicants (and even interns) to this voodoo science. Thus, AntiPolygraph.org is beginning an intitiative to inform students on America's campuses
before their first seance with a polygraph chartgazer.
If you are a college student or faculty member, or if you live near a college campus, please print out and post copies of AntiPolygraph.org's posters in appropriate places on your campus. You can download them in a single PDF file here:
http://antipolygraph.org/publicity/campus-posters-all.pdf
On some posters, after printing, you should use scissors to create detachable strips at the bottom with AntiPolygraph.org's internet address.
Appropriate places for posting would include public message boards and kiosks in dormitories, student unions, and individual departments.
Advantages of this approach, which has the potential to reach many thousands nationwide, are that it is inexpensive and can be done with a high degree of anonymity: you needn't fear official retaliation.
Quote from: George W. Maschke on Dec 13, 2002, 03:03 AM
A key strategy in ending polygraph abuse, and ultimately bringing about the abolishment of polygraph screening, is to enlighten those whom our government would polygraph about "the lie behind the lie detector." College campuses are a key recruiting ground for agencies like the CIA, FBI, NSA, and others that subject applicants (and even interns) to this voodoo science. Thus, AntiPolygraph.org is beginning an intitiative to inform students on America's campuses before their first seance with a polygraph chartgazer.
If you are a college student or faculty member, or if you live near a college campus, please print out and post copies of AntiPolygraph.org's new poster in appropriate places on your campus. You can download it as a PDF file here:
http://antipolygraph.org/publicity/campus-poster-001.pdf
After printing, use scissors to create detachable strips at the bottom with AntiPolygraph.org's internet address.
Appropriate places for posting would include public message boards and kiosks in dormitories, student unions, and individual departments.
Advantages of this approach, which has the potential to reach many thousands nationwide, are that it is inexpensive and can be done with a high degree of anonymity: you needn't fear official retaliation.
Dear George M.,
I would guess the first place your poster will be seen is in a local pub covering the dartboard near the DOD polygraph school!
Regards.
QuoteA key strategy in ending polygraph abuse, and ultimately bringing about the abolishment of polygraph screening, is to enlighten those whom our government would polygraph about "the lie behind the lie detector." College campuses are a key recruiting ground for agencies like the CIA, FBI, NSA, and others that subject applicants (and even interns) to this voodoo science. Thus, AntiPolygraph.org is beginning an intitiative to inform students on America's campuses before their first seance with a polygraph chartgazer.
If you are a college student or faculty member, or if you live near a college campus, please print out and post copies of AntiPolygraph.org's new poster in appropriate places on your campus. You can download it as a PDF file here:
http://antipolygraph.org/publicity/campus-poster-001.pdf
After printing, use scissors to create detachable strips at the bottom with AntiPolygraph.org's internet address.
Appropriate places for posting would include public message boards and kiosks in dormitories, student unions, and individual departments.
Advantages of this approach, which has the potential to reach many thousands nationwide, are that it is inexpensive and can be done with a high degree of anonymity: you needn't fear official retaliation.
In addition to college (undergraduate) campuses, I would make sure that your poster finds it way to every law school in the country. Not only might this enlighten the students who will ultimately be confronted with polygraphy in their careers, it might stimulate discussion within the various school administrations and lead to law school review articles and formalized oral presentations and debates.
A new poster is now available for download:
http://antipolygraph.org/publicity/campus-poster-002.pdf
This poster, which states "Visit AntiPolygraph.org for the truth about lie detectors that the polygraph operators don't want you to know!" is targeted for a more general audience, and would be appropriate in a broader range of venues.
George...
I am excited about your plan.
I am already in the process of rigging up some schools where I live.
I truly believe that
antipolygraph.org advertisement
=
good things to come.
Sincerely,
Mission Polyban
Well congratulations George...if nothing else, at least you got MissionPoly-ban out of the parking lots and public restrooms. I was soooooooooooo pleased to hear that he has been "rigging up schools"...whatever that means! You have some good soldiers on your team George. Keep recruiting them like this!
"Torpedo"
You may fancy yourself a torpedo, but your sound signature is that of a squeaky bilge pump on a sinking ship.
;)
Love your little nautical dittys.....you lend a little humor to this very dry web site. I cannot wait to see how many of these little signs show up. I think it was Batman who was also looking forward to seeing them on telephone poles alonmg with rock bands. By the way, the bilge pumps are usually in the lower decks of the ship....near the brig...is that where you spent most of your time?
Torpedo,
You write:
Quote...Love your little nautical dittys.....you lend a little humor to this very dry web site...
Is your notion of a lively site a censored pro-polygraph one ???
I'm in the process of loading up a few colleges in the Illinois area that will reach 1000's upon thousands of eyes. One sits in the heart of Chicago.
I hope that others out there are dedicated enough to also take part in this "Get Out the Poster" campaign.
Hope to hear from others out there who are doing the same as me.
Peace
PS: Such a little thing to do and it will have such a dramatic impact!
Poster-Boy,
Thanks for your note! Although I do not know how many times, and in what places, AntiPolygraph.org posters have been posted, I can report that both of the posters thus far available have been downloaded hundreds of times each.
No Problem George...
Just wanted to let you know that I checked up on the posters I set up three days ago at a really nice local universtiy by my home...
I purposefully placed a ton in the building in which many criminal-justice students take classes, and I have some good news:
First, the posters are still up...nearly all of them.
Second, people have been taking the "antipolygraph.org" tag from them. So far, at least 10 tags are ripped off.
This is exactly what I wanted to happen: Get out the word.
And for each person who discovers Antipolygraph.org, just imagine all the people they will tell about the site who might be interested in a career that requires the polygraph...it is going to be a chain reaction!
Peace...
I will keep you informed.
Poster-Boy,
Your observation about a "chain reaction" in the dissemination of the truth about polygraphy is astute. At some point, this chain reaction is going to reach critical mass, and the polygraph house of cards will be blown away.
I have kept track of all the posters I put up, and it absolutely amazes me to see just how many people are interested in the polygraph. I have seen tag after tag ripped off, and it is undoubtedly evident that this site has become more popular within recent days.
I beg of any student who is aware of the campus poster initiative to take part in he program. Get the posters out and up at your school. The truth MUST be exposed. We cannot allow our government to continue to brainwash us into believing whatever they insist.
For those who are truly passionate about destroying polygraph usage in pre-job testing, it could be considered a disgrace to not help get out the word.
Take part in the REVOLUTION!
A check on the area college posters that I had posted showed that 6 had to be totally replaced. I posted them three sheets deep.
The word does get out there bit by bit. While I understand the suggestion made to me by certain LE agents that what we are doing is tantamount to climbing a greased mountain, they, and others, fail to realize that we already knew this fact and prepared accordingly.
The wheels of change move incredibly slow, but they do in fact move.
I further support the poster initiative, and suggest that more public places become infiltrated with them. It is when those of us out here who have no desire for any job in law enforcement or any financial gain to be made through either support of or submission to the polygraph that the wheel will gain momentum.
Best to all,
Seeker
I am so glad that you see your poster initiative as the great savior of mankind. How wrong you are. Quite frankly, I do not care if you think you are right because IMHO, you are not. Anyway, your excitement will no doubt be tempered as these same people whoa re allowing themselves to be led by you to performing countermeasures (after they read your "best-seller") and they do not get the job they seek...remember, they have to agree to take the examination...no one forces them to do it. These folks are going to sit down and try to get a job, and somehow your knowledge is going to dissaude thewm and they will lose that opportunity. Will they blame you?...I certainly hope so. Good luck on your campaign.
Quote from: Torpedo on Feb 07, 2003, 12:30 PMI am so glad that you see your poster initiative as the great savior of mankind. How wrong you are. Quite frankly, I do not care if you think you are right because IMHO, you are not. Anyway, your excitement will no doubt be tempered as these same people whoa re allowing themselves to be led by you to performing countermeasures (after they read your "best-seller") and they do not get the job they seek...remember, they have to agree to take the examination...no one forces them to do it. These folks are going to sit down and try to get a job, and somehow your knowledge is going to dissaude thewm and they will lose that opportunity. Will they blame you?...I certainly hope so. Good luck on your campaign.
A curious set of inferences that do not (at least to me) appear to make any sense whatsoever. Why would someone, having been 'led by you [George?]' not get the job they are seeking?
Poster-Boy,
Thank you for your progress report. Visits to AntiPolygraph.org have indeed been increasing recently. I think a lot of people are curious about polygraphy -- even those who are not contemplating a job that requires a polygraph interrogation. As the National Academy of Sciences noted in its report on the polygraph and lie detection, there is a certain "mystique" associated with polygraphy. Of course, once one realizes what's actually going on behind the polygraph curtain, the wonderful wizards of polygraphy don't seem so wonderful anymore.
Like you, I encourage all to take part in this poster initiative. I wouldn't go so far as to characterize it as a "revolution" though. Rather, I see it as a public awareness campaign aimed at debunking polygraphy -- and ultimately abolishing it.
Seeker,
Thank you also for your progress report! I agree with you that college camuses are not the only suitable venue for the poster campaign. Do you have any particular kinds of places in mind?
Your law enforcement friends are right that what we are doing is a difficult undertaking, but it is certainly not futile. Indeed, we have already succeeded in reaching tens of thousands of people. This poster initiative gives us the potential to reach many times more people, and there is nothing the polygraph community can do to stop us. (This seems to irritate our friend, Torpedo.)
If anyone would like to submit a poster design for possible inclusion on the new Campus Poster Initiative (http://antipolygraph.org/posters.shtml) page, please send it to info@antipolygraph.org.
George:
Several places I have considered posting Antipolygraph.org posters are:
Laundry facilities in towns and cities that house higher learning campuses. There is nothing like having something to read while waiting on the dryers to finish. :)
Public libraries. This can also reach attorneys in my area, since a lot of them utilize the public libraries during breaks on court days.
Residential communities with community rooms wherein the residents are predominantly college students.
Citizen's Police Academies. They offer bullitin boards for citizens to post informative sites.
Firing ranges - of which we here in the South have quite a few.
This is just a few ideas that I have considered. I am sure there are many many more out there that are readily avaiable.
Regards,
A new poster (No. 4), that succinctly explains the difference between relevant and "control" questions, as well as how to beat a polygraph "test," is now available (click on the image to download):
(https://antipolygraph.org/publicity/campus-poster-004.jpg) (http://antipolygraph.org/publicity/campus-poster-004.pdf)
This poster does not include detachable tags and could alternatively be distributed as a flyer.
A few comments on the poster:
1. Spell check it please. Spelling errors makes the poster seem amateurish and tends to devalue the message.
2. The font usage would be better if the poster had only the "hook" (first portion) in bold and spaced out the chars for clarity.
At least I would be more likely to read it closer.
-Marty
Marty,
Thank you very much for your comments! I've fixed the spelling mistake (how embarrassing!), and have removed the "bold" style from the font of the main text. The font that it is set in (Impact) is pretty heavy to begin with. What do you think now? Is it okay, or still too heavy?
George
George.
Better. Still pretty heavy but better.
On another vein, the thing that most offends me about polygraph screening is that it actually puts the most honest individuals at the highest risk for being falsely labeled deceptive. Since most people think the polygraph nearly infallible, the initial reaction to the current poster is likely to be along the lines of "gee, here's a poster trying to help criminals or druggies" and this tends to color everything read after that - if anything at all.
I would recommend an approach that headlines something like: "Why Honest People Sometimes Fail the Polygraph" This then leads fewer people to dismiss the arguments out of hand and also generates less initial hostility to the information. I think this approach may also be key in getting this information more widely reported as it more effectively handles the "ethical question" strawman.
-Marty
Marty,
Thank you again for your thoughtful commentary. I have re-set the main text of Poster #4 in Helvetica (bold), which is less condensed than Impact. I've also set the title in initial caps instead of all caps, which will make it easier to read from a distance.
I'm not certain your premise that most people think the polygraph to be nearly infallible is correct. But clearly, too many do. The purpose of Poster No. 4 is to help shatter this public misperception of near infallibility by briefly explaining how a polygraph "test" can be beaten.
I agree that the title of this poster is likely to offend the sensibilities of some. But I believe that even more people will be intrigued by it, and pause to read further.
Your suggested title "Why Honest People Sometimes Fail the Polygraph" is excellent (perhaps "often" would be better than "sometimes"), and I may use it in a forthcoming poster that would focus more on explaining "control" questions.
Quote from: George W. Maschke on Feb 21, 2003, 04:11 AM
I'm not certain your premise that most people think the polygraph to be nearly infallible is correct. But clearly, too many do.
Thanks for your kind words, George. I should clarify my presuppositions. By most, I mean in reference to the American Citizenry, rather than people who face a polygraph in the near term. Many of them, by dint of self interest, will discover much about the polygraph. My assumption, correct apparently, is that your goal is to elucidate the fraudulent components of the polygraph more broadly so as to increase the political pressure required to remove the polygraph from day to day application. In that regard one has to confront the widespread acceptance of the accuracy of polygraphy promulgated by the polygraphy industry. I have almost never found naive persons who did NOT believe that polygraphy was around 99% accurate.
In confronting this, my best advice is to understand the observations of Cialdini, PhD. (a compliance expert I keep running into who has focussed on mechanisms of influence). My suggestions were not meant to maximize the interest of someone who was trying to "beat" or even just feared the polygraph. They were to maximize the interest of readers of the poster more broadly since that is more likely to change the political mileu.
-Marty
A new AntiPolygraph.org poster (No. 6) is now available. Click on the image below to download it:
(https://antipolygraph.org/publicity/campus-poster-006.jpg) (http://antipolygraph.org/publicity/campus-poster-006.pdf)
With a new academic year upon us, now would be an opportune time to place posters in appropriate locations at a campus near you. :) All of the AntiPolygraph.org posters may now be downloaded in a single file here:
http://antipolygraph.org/publicity/campus-posters-all.pdf
George
Your little poster campaign doesn't seem to be catching on. I've yet to see one on any of the college campuses I've been to. Same goes for your bumper sticker ideas. Seems maybe you and a couple of your goof ball pals might have them and that's about it. Maybe you should channel your energies on something a little more positive than trying to take down polygraph with support from a bunch of pedophiles and other fine citizens. I'm sure you must cringe at some of the posters on this site. Have a great weekend. :)
Thank you, Saidme, for that resounding vote of confidence. Yes, I committed a sexual offense. Funny thing, I lost more than you'll probably ever have, and what I've regained is probably more than what you have now. Unless you are SES, which I doubt. Of course, I always have to answer yes to that question about ever having been convicted of a felony, and I have to register, which, for anyone who thinks that actually accomplishes anything, you are sorely mistaken.
By "other fine citizens," do you mean all the false positives who were screwed over by the junk science of polygraphy? Could you, would you, oh please, inform us ignorant masses what qualifies us to be something more worthy than "fine citizen?"
Saidme,
QuoteI'm sure you must cringe at some of the posters on this site.
Yep. George shakes his head in dismay every time he sees your nic, wondering what sort of useless drivel and lies you're posting this time. :D
Quote from: Saidme on Sep 19, 2003, 05:25 PMGeorge
Your little poster campaign doesn't seem to be catching on. I've yet to see one on any of the college campuses I've been to....
That you have not seen any AntiPolygraph.org posters (http://antipolygraph.org/posters.shtml) is no indication of the success of this initiative. Even with hundreds of participants, it would be unlikely that anyone visiting any particular college campus on any particular day would see one.
These posters are an easy, cost-effective way for those of us interested in polygraph reform to inform those most likely to face a pre-employment polygraph examinations
before their honesty and integrity is judged based on this pseudoscientific quackery.
Your gratuitous advice that I "channel [my] energies" elsewhere suggests that you are more concerned about the potential effectiveness of this initiative than you care to let on.
Quote from: Mr. Truth on Sep 19, 2003, 06:28 PMThank you, Saidme, for that resounding vote of confidence. Yes, I committed a sexual offense. Funny thing, I lost more than you'll probably ever have, and what I've regained is probably more than what you have now. Unless you are SES, which I doubt. Of course, I always have to answer yes to that question about ever having been convicted of a felony, and I have to register, which, for anyone who thinks that actually accomplishes anything, you are sorely mistaken.
Mr. Truth, I am troubled by the above portion of your response to SAIDME. Are you saying that the fact that you are required to register as sex offender posses no deterrent to you offending again, or do you just find it embarrassing to have to register?
Yes, and yes. What deterrent effect has it had on anyone who has reoffended? Zero, from what I can see. If someone wants to reoffend, he or she is going to do so. There are people who reoffend knowing beforehand that a new offense will result in triple the penalty. Does that stop them? No. Being on the wrong side of the fence, so to speak, it is difficult to convey just how exasperating the registration requirement is, how it is so pointless because it is so ineffective as a deterrent. There are cases where it is useful - the multiple victim violent/repeat offender. For your typical offender, it is a waste of taxpayer dollars.
However, not wanting to hijack this thread, I'd still like to know what other "fine citizens" Saidme was referring to.
I attend a university with a Criminal Justice program--thus various federal and state agencies are often recruiting on campus. I'll make sure these are up as soon as possible.
My current intentions in terms of career center around analytical positions at one of the intelligence agencies--so this site has really been invaluable.
Thanks
Jeff,
Thank you very much for helping to spread the word about polygraph screening! (I'm also glad you've found this site to be interesting. You might wish to register on the message board.)
I've printed out two of the posters and put them in my police department. They've generated lots of questions from cops who had never heard of anyone having doubts about the polygraph.
Sergeant:
Very gutsy--I imagine you'll be voted employee of the month by your peers...lol. It's actually very surprising to learn how little a lot of cops know about the polygraph's invalidity. Good job!
Sergeant1107,
I'm glad to hear of your efforts and the results obtained to date with your poster distribution. That is exactly the sort of thing that is needed. Law enforcement officers are not stupid. Those NOT involved with the process (i.e., those other than polygraphers and the management who were involved in supporting polygraphy/the status quo as they rose through the ranks) will see "lie detection" polygraphy (particularly polygraph screening) for what it actually is (foolishness) when presented with all the facts. Are there national organizations such as the IACP (for executives/managers) for the working levels (the next managers/executives) that you feel this could/should be shared with? These are the people who need to be broadly reached with the message you are sharing in a narrow fashion via the posters. Regards....
On a recent visit to the UCLA campus, I had the opportunity to place some of AntiPolygraph.org's posters (http://antipolygraph.org/posters.shtml):
(https://antipolygraph.org/graphics/posters-ucla-1.jpg)
(https://antipolygraph.org/graphics/posters-ucla-2.jpg)
(https://antipolygraph.org/graphics/posters-ucla-3.jpg)
(https://antipolygraph.org/graphics/posters-ucla-4.jpg)
(https://antipolygraph.org/graphics/posters-ucla-5.jpg)
(https://antipolygraph.org/graphics/posters-ucla-6.jpg)
An anonymous contributor has kindly provided a Spanish translation of Poster #4, which explains how to beat a polygraph "test." Click on the image to download it:
(https://antipolygraph.org/publicity/campus-poster-004-spanish.jpg) (https://antipolygraph.org/publicity/campus-poster-004-spanish.pdf)
I just found out about this site today. I plan on posting these up next semester at my college, and maybe some others in Boston as well though!
find it interesting that the photo that you posted on 12/13/2002 is exactlyy the same photo you posted on 2/27/2007 referencing a "RECENT" trip to UCLA.
The trees are the same height, The foliage is the same, hmm even the little tear-off pieces are in exactly the same position.
This is either an astonishing coincidence or possibly an example of The Lie Behind The Lie Behind The Lie Detector.
Sancho Panza
Sancho Panza,
I don't speak for George, but I do notice in the 4th picture down in the 2/27/2006 (that you apparently have referenced in error as 2/27/2007) response that there is a poster entitled "The Defeat of Solidarity" dated 2/16/2006. Doing a Google search with the name of the talk and UCLA I find that such a talk did take place. You are a criminal investigator, yes?
Actually DREW the issue his his re-use of the same picture which was the ONLY picture used in his 2002 post and then posting it again leading people to believe that it was from a 2006 visit. Irrespective of whether or not he went to the campus in 2006. Saying that this picture was from a "RECENT visit is not true regardless of whether or not he actually went to the campus in 2006. I didn't say his entire post was a lie, just the picture. You are a former FBI agent aren't you? If one of your agents turned in the same surveillance photo twice and claimed they were taken years apart, what would you say? How would you react?
He padded his post with a blatant falsehood. YOUR defense of his false behavior is just another example of The Lie Behind The Lie Behind The Lie Detector. Here is a man who blatantly mislead his readership and up pops Drew Richardson in defense of his falshood. What's more important THE TRUTH or making sure Mr. Mashke doesn't suffer any embarrassment for his behavior? Or is this another example of what might be refferred to as a JUSTIFIABLE LIE.
It doesn't really matter what you think of what he did. It is a plain simple fact that he represented the same picture as representing 2 visits over 3 years apart YES or NO?
Sancho Panza
Sancho Panza,
Clearly your reference to "RECENT" trip implied that you were suggesting that George had fabricated (or misrepresented the date of) a trip. When your poor research was revealed to be what it is, you are now left suggesting that George mistakenly included an old picture in with new pictures (2006) that clearly had an antipolygraph.org poster included. Give it up...you have no point to make.
Although many comments on this site are interesting, they aren't all that informative.
Question for George and Drew: Do either of you guys really understand the purpose of a pre-employment screening polygraph examination?
Yankeedog,
Admittedly I feel more comfortable characterizing the end result of pre-employment screening than I do the intent of its users. That result would include amongst other things: chaos in the application process, injustice for many individuals, and a denial of qualified personnel resources for utilizing agencies and governments.
Ok, Drew doesn't know. How 'bout you George?
Drew Richardson, I am not given to suggesting or implying anything. I pretty much say what I'm thinking. Your failure to understand is your deficiency not mine.
Answer the questions: If one of your agents turned in the same surveillance photo twice and claimed they were taken years apart, what would you say? How would you react?
Or would it be easier you for you to try to shift focus away from what I said by trying to spuriously interpret what I meant when my words were very clear in the first place.
My point was made on my first post. George Mashke posted a photograph from a 2002 post in a 2006 post indicating that it was taken on a more recent trip to UCLA. The photo speaks for itself. Look at it. George is the person who made both posts over 3 years apart. It can't be explained away, either he did it or he didn't. Reading his posts make it obvious he did.
I'm just the guy pointing out, The Lie Behind The Lie Behind The Lie Detector
You polygraph detractors always accuse examiners of lying,but constantly either refuse to acknowledge your own lies or attempt to justify them.
Sancho Panza
Quote from: George_Maschke on Dec 20, 2007, 05:34 PMfind it interesting that the photo that you posted on 12/13/2002 is exactlyy the same photo you posted on 2/27/2007 referencing a "RECENT" trip to UCLA.
The trees are the same height, The foliage is the same, hmm even the little tear-off pieces are in exactly the same position.
This is either an astonishing coincidence or possibly an example of The Lie Behind The Lie Behind The Lie Detector.
Sancho Panza
The picture in both posts is the same; I took it on the UCLA campus in February 2006. At the end of the first post in this thread, you'll find the annotation: « Last Edit: Oct 21st, 2006, 12:26pm by George W. Maschke ». I edited that first post so as to provide up front an illustration of how AntiPolygraph.org posters might be placed on college campuses.
Well I guess the untruth lies in posting a 2006 photo back in to a 2002 forum post and the private message that you sent to me on December 12, 2007 at 9:34 am that contained:
"You can fix the typo by clicking on the "Modify" button in your post. (Posts may be modified up to 72 hours after they are made.)"
wasn't exactly true then.
If our eagle-eyed FORMER agent didn't spot it when he rallied to your defense then someone might have gone back and typed that in AFTER our discussion began.
Sancho Panza
Quote from: yankeedog on Dec 21, 2007, 02:10 AMWell I guess the untruth lies in posting a 2006 photo back in to a 2002 forum post and the private message that you sent to me on December 12, 2007 at 9:34 am that contained:
"You can fix the typo by clicking on the "Modify" button in your post. (Posts may be modified up to 72 hours after they are made.)"
wasn't exactly true then.
The time limit for editing posts does not apply to forum moderators and in any event was implemented with regard to regular accounts only this year.
QuoteIf our eagle-eyed FORMER agent didn't spot it when he rallied to your defense then someone might have gone back and typed that in AFTER our discussion began.
Sancho Panza
Google's cache (http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:HwxCRq_ASmcJ:antipolygraph.org/cgi-bin/forums/YaBB.pl%3Fboard%3DAction%26action%3Ddisplay%26num%3D1039755839) of the post (retrieved by Google on 18 December 2007) provides independent confirmation that someone didn't.
Quote from: yankeedog on Dec 20, 2007, 08:51 PMYankeedog,
Admittedly I feel more comfortable characterizing the end result of pre-employment screening than I do the intent of its users. That result would include amongst other things: chaos in the application process, injustice for many individuals, and a denial of qualified personnel resources for utilizing agencies and governments.
Drew, interesting choice of words that you would characterize the polygraph application process as "chaos"---a first for these eyes, and I am being sincere.
What begs the question is that many of us are keenly aware that you are heavily invested in FMRI as a forensic tool, along with your business partner(s). It should come as no suprise that your opinions of polygraph remain activily negative (your previous testimony(s) PLUS your new business venture), especially since your company is seeking to replace the current modalities of lie and memory detection, respectively. I have high regard for that, as I feel that
any tool that does a better job at "catching bad guys" is welcome. I would very much like to know how things are going on the forefront of that technology. A second question would be; when do you expect your research and others to become activated and the fmri to be readily used as a screening device, if at all? Thanks.
Well I guess the untruth lies in posting a 2006 photo back in to a 2002 forum post.
Please forgive me for questioning your credibility but surely you can understand why someone might doubt the truthfulness of someone who co-wrote a book that repeatedly tells the reader it is OK to lie and deliberately conceal information.
Sancho Panza
Eric,
Addressing a few of your comments in no particular order:
1. My reference to chaos was in connection to the application process in general and not with polygraph screening in particular. I do not contest nor doubt your surprise at the notion. It is perfectly conceivable to me that the chaos introduced by polygraphy would be felt by the end-consumer seeking to hire employees and human resources personnel seeking to facilitate this process and not by oblivious polygraphers who are more or less finished with the process with the provision of any error they may have introduced into the process. This is particularly true in large agencies where these groups of people are likely administratively (if not geographically) widely separated.
2. Although I performed nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) experiments in the world of analytical chemistry before there was such a thing as functional magnetic resonance imagining (fMRI), I have had no involvement in the latter in its various purported applications in the world of psychophysiology.
3. The dependent measure which you have confused for fMRI and which I am involved with is event related potential (ERP) measurement in general and more specifically the P300 response as it relates to the detection of concealed information. I am not involved in any sort of lie detection work. I do not see any reason to believe that any dependent measure or combination of dependent measurements will ever lead to reliable lie detection.
4. My various criticisms of lie detection began at least a decade prior to my formal and financial relationship to P300 work. I have and continue to be a proponent of concealed information testing whether it be using the channels of the standard polygraph and a GKT format or other measures (e.g., P300, fMRI or other) with other more sophisticated concealed information testing formats.
5. The application of pre-employment polygraph screening is little more than a poorly constructed fishing expedition. No technology (i.e., combination of dependent measures) that I am ever associated with will be offered as an alternative to present polygraph channels for such purposes. The application is fatally flawed--it will not work with anyone's old or new technology. That which I am presently associated with and which you allude to will be used for two purposes (it does have other potential applications in the medical and advertising worlds) in the context that we are speaking: (1) concealed information testing regarding specifically known-to-have-occurred events (e.g., crimes) and (2) determination of group associations (e.g., Does this person have specific knowledge of training, methods, organizational hierarchy that would indicate an association with Al Qaeda, etc?).
6. I'm with you on "catching bad guys." I presume you are with me on not wanting to catch good guys and gals in the virtual net designed for the aforementioned bad guys. I will be literally and figuratively away for much of the time between now and the new year (so not available for much back and forth discussion) but will be happy to resume at that point. Regards and happy holidays...
Quote from: yankeedog on Dec 21, 2007, 11:50 AMEric,
Addressing a few of your comments in no particular order:
1. My reference to chaos was in connection to the application process in general and not with polygraph screening in particular. I do not contest nor doubt your surprise at the notion. It is perfectly conceivable to me that the chaos introduced by polygraphy would be felt by the end-consumer seeking to hire employees and human resources personnel seeking to facilitate this process and not by oblivious polygraphers who are more or less finished with the process with the provision of any error they may have introduced into the process. This is particularly true in large agencies where these groups of people are likely administratively (if not geographically) widely separated.
2. Although I performed nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) experiments in the world of analytical chemistry before there was such a thing as functional magnetic resonance imagining (fMRI), I have had no involvement in the latter in its various purported applications in the world of psychophysiology.
3. The dependent measure which you have confused for fMRI and which I am involved with is event related potential (ERP) measurement in general and more specifically the P300 response as it relates to the detection of concealed information. I am not involved in any sort of lie detection work. I do not see any reason to believe that any dependent measure or combination of dependent measurements will ever lead to reliable lie detection.
4. My various criticisms of lie detection began at least a decade prior to my formal and financial relationship to P300 work. I have and continue to be a proponent of concealed information testing whether it be using the channels of the standard polygraph and a GKT format or other measures (e.g., P300, fMRI or other) with other more sophisticated concealed information testing formats.
5. The application of pre-employment polygraph screening is little more than a poorly constructed fishing expedition. No technology (i.e., combination of dependent measures) that I am ever associated with will be offered as an alternative to present polygraph channels for such purposes. The application is fatally flawed--it will not work with anyone's old or new technology. That which I am presently associated with and which you allude to will be used for two purposes (it does have other potential applications in the medical and advertising worlds) in the context that we are speaking: (1) concealed information testing regarding specifically known-to-have-occurred events (e.g., crimes) and (2) determination of group associations (e.g., Does this person have specific knowledge of training, methods, organizational hierarchy that would indicate an association with Al Qaeda, etc?).
6. I'm with you on "catching bad guys." I presume you are with me on not wanting to catch good guys and gals in the virtual net designed for the aforementioned bad guys. I will be literally and figuratively away for much of the time between now and the new year (so not available for much back and forth discussion) but will be happy to resume at that point. Regards and happy holidays...
Fascinating stuff.
I will be considerate of your holiday time. I am aware of the differences between p300 and fmri, I made an oversight by confusing the two. I do appreciate the fact that you recognize that the GKT polygraph test is a very accurate means to knowledge detection (so to speak.) I loathe the thoughts of innocent people being falsly accused also, and to paint polygraph examiners as thoughtless, mindless predators as many in this realm often do is rediculous.
Yes, I want the bad guys caught.
I was not intentionally referring your past antipolygraph testimonies and your new career avenue in P300 Memory Detection as being chronologically overlapping. Apologies.
I do believe it is telling that in all the peripheral career choices, you pursued an up and coming concealed memory detector. Sounds like fun, and hard work pioneering such things.
Can you state here any anecdotal or empirical information regarding the ease of which to engage in countermeasures with the P300 equipment?
P.S. I no longer administer polygraph tests, so I really am objectively fascinated by P300 waveforms, and their potential. :)
Happy Holidays!
Eric
Mr. Richardson,
Fascinating stuff.
I will be considerate of your holiday time. I am aware of the differences between p300 and fmri, I made an oversight by confusing the two. I do appreciate the fact that you recognize that the GKT polygraph test is a very accurate means to knowledge detection (so to speak.) I loathe the thoughts of innocent people being falsly accused also, and to paint polygraph examiners as thoughtless, mindless predators as many in this realm often do is rediculous.
Yes, I want the bad guys caught.
I was not intentionally referring your past antipolygraph testimonies and your new career avenue in P300 Memory Detection as being chronologically overlapping. Apologies.
I do believe it is telling that in all the peripheral career choices, you pursued an up and coming concealed memory detector. Sounds like fun, and hard work pioneering such things.
Can you state here any anecdotal or empirical information regarding the ease of which to engage in countermeasures with the P300 equipment?
P.S. I no longer administer polygraph tests, so I really am objectively fascinated by P300 waveforms, and their potential.
Happy Holidays!
Eric
George,
OMG! You're going to cause them to fail before they even take the test!
The less subjects know about the test, the better off they'll be.
It's best they come in with a fresh and empty mind.
Trust me, polygraphers are there TO HELP THEM!
Don't cause the subjects to prejudge the process.
They are in GOOD HANDS.
The polygraphers are NOT there to TRICK anyone!
I don't know where you got that idea.
And I don't understand why ANYONE would find this post "sarcastic".
A new poster is available. We encourage all who can to print out some copies and place them in appropriate locations. An image is attached, but the poster itself can be downloaded as a PDF file here:
https://antipolygraph.org/publicity/campus-poster-008.pdf