WHY LIE?

[retcopper]

George:

Correct me if I am wrong but didnt you at one time write that you agreed that some people come here because they are guilty of a crime and think they can get information to help them mislead their polygrapher. I think that many of those peole come here for that reason so why should any polygrapher post any information that would make our job a little more difficult?

Just becaue You think that DUI questions are a waste of time doesnt make it so. When I see misinformation posted here about "how to beat the test" I just smile and read on.

[EosJupiter]

George:

Correct me if I am wrong but didnt you at one time write that you agreed that some people come here because they are guilty of a crime and think they can get information to help them mislead their polygrapher. I think that many of those peole come here for that reason so why should any polygrapher post any information that would make our job a little more difficult?

Just becaue You think that DUI questions are a waste of time doesnt make it so. When I see misinformation posted here about "how to beat the test" I just smile and read on.

Retcopper,

The fact that the information posted on this website is a double edged sword is unfortunate but neccessary. It works the same way with a gun. Just because you own a weapon, doesn't mean your going out and commit a crime with it. The same goes for being knowlegeable about polygraphs. But all the while knowing that the information does have both benevolent and malevolent usages. I agree with a down side that unsavory and possible criminal intent is the reason some would come to this website. But the vast majority I firmly believe are those wronged by the polygraph and its unethical and immoral use. And these folks once knowlegeable will never fall for its use again. And the numbers grow bigger everyday on who comes to this website.

Regards ....

[G Scalabr]

I will tell you again, my department and many others want to make sure that we don't hire people who like to drive drunk.  DUI (of the "not caught" variety) is a routinely asked relevant question.  However, if you are so sure the question is indeed a control, then feel free to keep identifying it as such.

Nonombre, if what you say is true, your statement does nothing more than underscore what a truly unstandardized farce polygraphy is.

It is fact that many agencies including the FBI consider it an axiom that everyone who admits to driving at some point in his life and drinking alcohol at some point in his life has driven under the influence of alcohol (or at least has doubts he can make a truthful denial to this question). Thus, this is used as a "control" question, for comparing other questions to.

Now, you tell us that you are using this question--one that has been used by agencies like the FBI as a control question for years--the very same question as a relevant question? You do nothing other than help prove that polygraphy is an unstandardized fraud with assertions like this.

Perhaps we should leave it to readers of this thread can decide for themselves what we are dealing with—a standardized, scientific "test" (albeit an imperfect one), or a complete and total fraud.

I think I know what disinterested parties will conclude here—especially in light of things like a luminary who is lionized in the polygraph community being outed as a fake Ph. D. who received his "degree" from a diploma mill shut down by the federal government.

The emperor is buck naked, and has been for years.

[nonombre]

The emperor is buck naked, and has been for years.

Oh, how it must frustrate you that since the initiation of a website dedicated to the demise of polygraph, PDD testing in federal, state, and local government has instead grown by leaps and bounds...

Keep publishing guys, you are great for business...

Regards,

Nonombre

[Fair Chance]

Dear Nonombre,

I have been vocal many years ago that the use of the polygraph in federal quarters is increasing instead of decreasing.  My observation of the matter does not relate to the validity of the polygraph as much as the abdication of responsibility of federal managers and agencies.  No individual wants to be responsible for a bad hiring decision.  Let the "Polygraph" operators be responsible for decisions on security risk if they go bad.  The "5 to 10%" false positives are the calculated risk that are acceptable.

The false positives are having an effect on the finished product.  The system can afford it for now but I have the opinion that it cannot be sustained for more than three more years.  I will be around to see if you or I am correct in our observations.

Regards.

[George W. Maschke]

Mr. Maschke,

Look what you have done.  You definatively announce that a question about DUI on a polygraph exam is a control question (and should therefore be manipulated in some way.)  Yet when challenged, you defend yourself by saying: ..."I find it hard to believe...it's stupid to "waste" a relevant question on drunk driving."

Mr. Maschke, this is people's LIVES here.  You risk careers and futures by the "information" you so confidently provide (e.g., the identification of a test question by one type or another).  You then defend your "information" with purely subjective assertions such as ..."I find it hard to believe?"

Nonombre,

I am keenly aware (having experienced it first hand) that people's lives may be significantly changed based on the result of the fraudulent procedure that is polygraph screening. That's why this website exists.

You make a good point: the fact that using a relevant question about driving while under the influence as a relevant question, even as federal law enforcement agencies such as the FBI are using the same question as a probable-lie "control" question, is pretty stupid doesn't necessarily mean that a local law enforcement agency such as yours wouldn't do it.

For example, even the LAPD until recently used so vague a question as, "Based on your personal bias, have you ever committed a negative act against anyone?" as a relevant question. That's pretty stupid, but they did it.

So yes, I agree that it is possible that a question generally used as a probable-lie "control" question might nonetheless be used by some agencies as a relevant question.

Where is YOUR "double blind" study, Mr. Maschke?

The double-blind method is appropriate to studies of such questions as whether a test for deception works or not. But you wouldn't do a double-blind study to learn about polygraph formats themselves: instead, you would go to the polygraph literature, which is what we've done. For example, we know that the FBI uses a question about driving while under the influence of alcohol as a probable-lie "control" question because while we have reports from numerous applicants that this question is being asked, we also know that it is not one of the relevant questions included in DoDPI's "Law Enforcement Pre-Employment Test," the format used by all federal law enforcement agencies that rely on pre-employment polygraph screening.

I will tell you again, my department and many others want to make sure that we don't hire people who like to drive drunk.  DUI (of the "not caught" variety) is a routenely asked relevant question.

Perhaps, but let's be candid: as a polygrapher, you have an obvious motive to lie. Although I'm not accusing you of deception, any documentation of your above claim would be welcome.

However, if you are so sure the question is indeed a control, then feel free to keep identifying it as such.  Myself and other the other police police examiners will continue to clean up your mess.  We have for some time.

Examples?

Sorry sir, you know I am not going to provide you with examples of question types.

Since you're an anonymous examiner with an anonymous department, why not?

However, I will ask you again for the sake of people reading this site and taking for "gospel" the things you say.  PLEASE double check everything.  You have been wrong a lot lately.

Documentation, please?

Mr. Maschke, whether you care to believe it or not, you have hurt the unsuspecting with your arrogant assertions and the opinions you present as unmitigated fact.  I ask you again to check your sources, look at both sides, and consider all possibilities before you advise the naive to engage in behaviors for which you have to date refused to take responsibility for...

Regards,

Nonombre

Again, if you see anything posted here by me (or anyone else)  that you believe to be false or otherwise misleading, please feel free to point it out and to explain it. If there's something you'd rather not post publicly, feel free also to send me a private message through this board, or to give me a call via Skype, etc.

[gr8dad]

Wow!  Nonombre sure dodged all of Cesiums questions in a hurry on Aug. 7th.  Anyone notice that the only two people that really have a problem with this site are two people that have vested interest in the polygraph and the importance for the lies about it to continue?  Tell me this nonombre.  Why is it that almost all the psychology journals and science journals I read and psychologists and psychology professors I speak to tell me the same thing?  They have no reason to lie.  They have no vested interest either way.  They simply report what their SCIENTIFIC tests result indicate.  I am yet to find one that agrees that the polygraph has even one stitch of validity.  It is inadmissable in court for a reason.  Tell me this.  If a person fails a polygraph in a criminal case, why does the detective need a confession to confirm that the test is accurate?  Heck, why do they even need a judge, jury or evidence.  The way you talk, the polygraph is sufficient to replace all of them.  Look up the term psuedo-science and compare its characteristics to the polygraph.  They are a match made in heaven! I am a survivor of a criminal false positive result from a polygraph.  Fortunately, I was able to stand strong through the several hours of a lazy detective trying to get me to confess to something I did not do.  I was also able to collect more than enough evidence to prove my innocence.  So, dont try to tell me that your machine works!  You are a liar!  I know FIRST HAND that it DOES NOT and I will do whatever it takes to make sure that everyone I meet will never fall for your lies!