On the lighter side

[T.M. Cullen]

During an employee screening polygraph test, the polygrapher asks the test subject whether he has "Ever told a lie".  

The test subject anwsers in the affirmative.  

"Okay", says the polygrapher, "what lie did you tell?"

"I TOLD MY FRIEND I BELIEVED IN THE VALIDITY OF POLYGRAPH TESTS!!!!"  

[pailryder]

Oh, Larry,
 You are so funny!  

[sackett]

During an employee screening polygraph test, the polygrapher asks the test subject whether he has "Ever told a lie".  

The test subject anwsers in the affirmative.  

"Okay", says the polygrapher, "what lie did you tell?"

"I TOLD MY FRIEND I BELIEVED IN THE VALIDITY OF POLYGRAPH TESTS!!!!"  

Larry,

Here's a different angle which I take when confronted by a "non-believer."  

I don't care if you believe in polygraph or not.  Why?  Because it doesn't matter whether you believe in polygraph or not for it to work; IT WORKS either way!

Sackett

[T.M. Cullen]

I don't care if you believe in polygraph or not.  Why?  Because it doesn't matter whether you believe in polygraph or not for it to work; IT WORKS either way!

If a person is truthful, yet fails, then the test didn't work.

When Aldrich Ames passed the test while he was spying for the soviets, the test didn't work.

[sackett]

Yes, yes, I know.  You and all the other false positives out there....

Then, you quote an (alleged) false negative. :-?  Are you really sure he passed??? Or could it be that due to his rank, position and access level,  the examiner's couldn't believe the results?  No, that couldn't possibly fall in line with your mantra, could it?  I'm sure you and Al are good friends and he told you all about it.

Oh Boy....!

Sackett

[LALE]

Y

 Are you really sure he passed??? Or could it be that due to his rank, position and access level,  the examiner's couldn't believe the results?  

Thanks for clearing that one up. I think that many people have for long deduced that there are situational factors that play a part in the final call.
So Sackett, tell us who you passed due to rank / seniority / internal politics etc. Is it a long list ?

[sackett]

Y

 Are you really sure he passed??? Or could it be that due to his rank, position and access level,  the examiner's couldn't believe the results?  

Thanks for clearing that one up. I think that many people have for long deduced that there are situational factors that play a part in the final call.
So Sackett, tell us who you passed due to rank / seniority / internal politics etc. Is it a long list ?

The answer is none.

See, this is the reason I rarely get personal.  Reason?  I don't really know anyone on this board well enough.  And, no-one on the board has the first clue to my background, etc.  If you did, you and some of the other ignorant (used to explain a lack of knowledge) posters would never say some of the crap that is spewed here about me.

Sackett

[T.M. Cullen]

My guess is that you're an independent polygrapher, probably have your own office in the midwest somewhere, maybe St. Louis.  Been in the profession for a long time, probably since the 80's.  Which explains you entrenched position.  And why you  so keen in not having the polygraph exposed.

But that's just a hunch.

[sackett]

My guess is that you're an independent polygrapher, probably have your own office in the midwest somewhere, maybe St. Louis.  Been in the profession for a long time, probably since the 80's.  Which explains you entrenched position.  And why you  so keen in not having the polygraph exposed.

But that's just a hunch.

"polyf",

BAD GUESS!  But what does it matter to either of us?

"Not wanting polygraph exposed?"  Then what the hell do you think I'm doing here and on polygraphplace?!  Otherwise, I've got enough friends...

Sackett

[notguilty1]

My guess is that you're an independent polygrapher, probably have your own office in the midwest somewhere, maybe St. Louis.  Been in the profession for a long time, probably since the 80's.  Which explains you entrenched position.  And why you  so keen in not having the polygraph exposed.

But that's just a hunch.

"polyf",

BAD GUESS!  But what does it matter to either of us?

"Not wanting polygraph exposed?"  Then what the hell do you think I'm doing here and on polygraphplace?!  Otherwise, I've got enough friends...

Sackett

Sackett, what you are doing here is trying to patch-up all the holes in your "science" and rather poorly I might add.
Why else would someone in a "proven" business be so hell bent on logging on to an anti site EVERY DAY ??

[sackett]

"notguilty1",

I'm not here to patch anything up!  As far as your opinion of my effort and success in my non-adventure to "patch" things up, it is afterall, your opinion.

Further, you will notice I do not feel the need to hide behind a moniker, pseudo-name or another's name in order to make some rediculous point about your standing or non-standing in life.

I have never hidden my opinions or feelings and I try VERY hard not to attack those who would attack me, simply because of my beliefs regarding polygraph.   From what I've seen, the people who have failed their examinations and post here have nothing to gain from or lose by expressing their opinion except the comfortability of anonymity.

Finally, why do you feel the need to point out my frequency on this board.  Are you suggesting I'm not welcome here?  

Sackett

[EJohnson]

"no guilt"
I see examiners coming here as sort of like this analogy;

Say the most omnipresent website about automotive mechanics was produced and populated by people proclaiming that automechanics are all thieves, and their "Scantool (r)"---(the main computer used by modern technicians to indicate system problems)---although not perfect by anymeans----was repeatedly called a "money prop" used for unnecessary and costly exploration. After a while. mechanics would grow tired of all the unchallenged, inductive thoughts, and constant smear upon a square profession that ultimately helps people and even saves lives on occasion. Examiners are here on occasion to keep the HS down to a mere stench, rather than a plague.

Your silly little opinion, while it is your right, is annoying, wrong, and worthy of rebuttal when it is within the limits of sanity.

Am I clear about that point?

[notguilty1]

"no guilt"
I see examiners coming here as sort of like this analogy;

Say the most omnipresent website about automotive mechanics was produced and populated by people proclaiming that automechanics are all thieves, and their "Scantool (r)"---(the main computer used by modern technicians to indicate system problems)---although not perfect by anymeans----was repeatedly called a "money prop" used for unnecessary and costly exploration. After a while. mechanics would grow tired of all the unchallenged, inductive thoughts, and constant smear upon a square profession that ultimately helps people and even saves lives on occasion. Examiners are here on occasion to keep the HS down to a mere stench, rather than a plague.

Your silly little opinion, while it is your right, is annoying, wrong, and worthy of rebuttal when it is within the limits of sanity.

Am I clear about that point?

When poligraghers use thier "science" to ruin peoples carriers or to smear thier good name. Then the stench is bad enough.
Polys don't work to detect lies which is what poligraphers use the test to detremine regardless of what flip- floppong Sackett does on the matter.

[sackett]

"notguilty1",

where have I ever "flip-flopped" on anything?

If you have a point to make, make it!  If not, wait until you have at least an intellectual opinion, before espousing knowledge of things you clearly are ignorant of...With your posting record, I would be  

Sackett

[notguilty1]

Sackett!! My posting record is 100 % I am convinced that polys are not effective in detecting lies!!
You on the other hand said that "no poligrapher ever said that poligraphs detect lies" when I told you what my poligrapher said to me you said " I don't care what your poligrapher said"
Even though you stated that you continue to declare that poligraphs work...... flip folp flip flop flip flopppp.