Slashdot Mirror
Skepticism, Censorship And The Polygraph
George W. Maschke writes "Paul M. Menges, the federal polygraph examiner who teaches the countermeasure course at the Department of Defense Polygraph Institute, has written an article in the American Polygraph Association's quarterly journal, Polygraph, in which he calls for the criminalization of public speech about polygraph countermeasures (methods for passing or beating a polygraph examination). His proposal would ban books like AntiPolygraph.org's popular free e-book, The Lie Behind the Lie Detector. I have written a formal response to Mr. Menges' commentary."
Just copyright *truth* then these books become DMCA "copyright circimvention" technology.
"Eve of Destruction", it's not just for old hippies anymore...
If there are ways to defeat polygraphs, then what makes this DoD guy think that polygraphs are in any way valid?
The bad guys will just use those countermeasures. The good guys might 'fail' when they should have passed.
In other words, by attacking countermeasures, this guy is actually attacking the so-called "science" of polygraphs.
Too bad they can't ban my built-in fascism detector. It's going off right now.
If tits were wings it'd be flying around.
Criminalization of speech debunking tarot cards, psychic phenomenon, tea reading and other practices in the same category as the polygraph?
Sorry if that's stating the obvious, I'm not sure I understand your question.
It seems like the powers-that-be might not be happy if they knew that a not insignificant portion of their workfore was _aware_ of polygraph countermeasures and "the lie behind the lie detector". Then they might have to admit that polygraph testing is a fraud (or maybe they'd just dismiss us as those "nutty internet kooks").
Anyway, I'd like to see your comments/suggestions on this.
I remember seeing (in News of the Weird, I think) about some local cop that was taking criminals and putting their hands on a copy machine and claiming that it was a polygraph. He loaded the paper try with pages with "He's Lying" pre-printed on them. He'd ask you a question, hit the copy button, and there would be a page with an image of your hand and "He's Lying" written on it.
He apparently got a few confessions this way, but I believe they were overturned.
Anyways, let's not pretend that there's anything beyond Gilligan's Island science by calling them "polygraphs". They're lie detectors.
-- Don't Tase me, bro!
Well, if we know that polygraphs can be tricked, then why should we trust them? There's no way to know whether a polygraph subject knows the countermeasures or not. Hell, it's entirely possible he might figure out how to beat it on his own, without utilizing any banned information. Simply hoping that nobody will ever figure out how polygraphs work so that you can assume they're accurate is pretty stupid. I mean, we've (in the USA at least) banned drugs, machine guns, child porn, unauthorized copying, and all sorts of other things, and look how effective that's been. A few minutes of searching on the net and I can find enough banned data to put me in prison for a few thousand years. Adding polygraph info to the list isn't going to make it any harder to find.
Criminalizing information just doesn't work. And if you're relying on said criminalization for anything (accurate polygraphs, in this case), you're an idiot.
If you ever watch "Forensic Files", you'll see that whether someone passes or fails a polygraph examination has little to do with their guilt.
The people that are most likely to pass a poly are the total psychopaths who just don't care or have convinced themselves of their innocence. The father whose daughter has just disappeared will be so grief stricken that he'll fail a poly no matter what actually happened.
Now you fucking tell me. I just got out after serving 2 of a 3 year sentence. All this "beat the polygraph HOWTO" stuff is great, but I could have used a simple PICTURE of one. I thought it looked like a copy machine, but I wasn't sure.
One excellent and scientifically trustworthy source for polygraph information is from a committee put together by the National Academy of Sciences to study the scientific validity of the polygraph and related lie-detection methodologies, both in the lab and out in the real world. If you want to read the report, you can find it online through the NAS's publishing website.
Another excellent work on the uses and abuses of the polygraph is a book by David Lykken called "A Tremor in the Blood". Lykken is a well respected researcher in the field of physiological detection of deception, and has spent a lot of time trying to bring to light the troubling science behind the polygraph.
I love that story - the "lie detector" was a collander, which they put on the suspect's head (and yes it was 'wired' to the photocopier).
Google for "collander", "Baltimore" and "lie detector" for the full story. (In google groups, look in group a.f.u.)
This and more in the following book:
"Homicide, a year on the Killing Streets",
David Simon. ISBN 0-395-48829-X
YAW.
Your head of state is a corrupt weasel, I hope you're happy.
As informed people are aware, the polygraph is another example of officially endorsed psuedo-science. What ought to be outlawed is its use, not documentation that it is a fraud. For anyone who needs to know: to defeat a polygraph test, put a tack in your shoe and jab your toe with it for every other question or so. Anyone who tells you the polygraph is a useful device is either ignorant or part of the scam -- polygraph operators make a lot of money compared to most crackpots. Rather pathetic that the DoD is depending on it for our security, though not surprising.
Still, I wouldn't be surprised if they could show that polygraphs work "ok" on people who don't know how they work. Maybe they don't even care if they work, they just want to scare people into behaving because the fear polygraphs work. That could be the only reason they are used by DoD.
Are polygraphs used anywhere besides the united states?
Here in Australia, to my knowledge, the courts don't consider polygraphs to have any credibility and the general attitude is that their use by american authorities is a little bizarre.
Maybe it would be good to post a link to the actual article, instead of just a rebuttal by the person who was attacked!
I love that story.
So people laugh at those guys and then turn around and think somebody is guilty because they "failed" a polygraph test. The irony is that the copy machine works every bit as well as a polygraph and uses the same method - deception.
Are we using the same Google?
My ISP has an Aussie domain,
so even gggle.com gets me to
www.google.com.au
In any case, we got NIL when
searching for those words as:
collander Baltimore "lie detector"
What are we missing?
"Anyways, let's not pretend that there's anything beyond Gilligan's Island science by calling them "polygraphs". They're lie detectors."
Isn't "polygraph" more accurate. These machines don't really detect lies, they just graph breathing and heartrate and stuff. I think that we're on the same side here, but "lie detector" is the term that seems completely false to me.
All of you out there that have not yet read "The lie behind the Lie Detector" really, really should. Its free. And it is very informative. It will probably piss you off though to find out that anyone ever uses these things after you know how they are supposed to work.
Ok briefly: They ASSUME that you lie and/or feel badly about something that most people do, like "Have you every cheated on a test?" and then if you don't react less to the pertinent question (i.e.: Are you a member of Al-Qaeda?) you fail. Inconslusive is also usually treated the same as fail. So if you REALLY never cheated on a test or if you tell the truth "Yes I cheated on a test" and you dont' feel bad about it, then you are screwed. It seems inconceivable that the ef bee eye still uses polygraph.
Don't moderate flamebait as Troll. Know the difference or you will be Meta-moderated.
The more I think about this the madder I get. Can you imagine the argument brought before the judge? "Your Honor, I'd like to have the factual and scholastic discussions that would normally be protected by our free speech guarantees quashed because they threaten our ability to use a totally unreliable and unscientific interrogation system to trick people into confessing. The false confidence in the system is vital to law enforcement and anti-terrorism interests. False positives are unfortunate but acceptable and any discussion of the weaknesses of polygraphs serves no good purpose."
And in my dream the Judge says: "The polygraph system is completely without merit and denies citizens of their civil rights. Motion denied."
Don't moderate flamebait as Troll. Know the difference or you will be Meta-moderated.
Silly.....
Stupid....
Untrue....
Psuedo-Science? how about non-science.
things to think during the control questions:
OMG THEY'RE GONNA KILL ME, HOLY CRAP I LEFT THE OVEN ON WHY DO I ALWAYS GETPICKED ON I KNOW I"M GONNA FAIL. CRAP CRAP CRAP THAT GUY HAS A GUN I JUST KNOW IT:
And voila funky butt control question.... make sure you actually fear those things.... but make sure you put an undue amount of stress upon yourself when they ask you your name etc...
Hmm, if they ban 'methods for passing a polygraph test' - does that include being innocent?
Then why are you so mad?
I'm mad because there is a chance the judge will say "Yes, these are vital tools." I'm mad because polygraphs are asinine, and people are trying to use laws to protect/promote them.
Don't moderate flamebait as Troll. Know the difference or you will be Meta-moderated.
Yeah, sorry, my directions are crap.
The magic words are all there, but you need to use the right combination in the right place.
The story that mentions Baltimore is the story that calls it "Xerox polygraphy", for example.
Google groups was the intended search - group alt.folklore.urban (that's what a.f.u was supposed to mean).
Sorry,
YAW.
Your head of state is a corrupt weasel, I hope you're happy.
This has been widely known outside the US for ages, which is why nobody uses them there. See http://www.skepdic.com/polygrap.html for a thorough discussion.
If they ask if you've ever cheated on a test answer yes, just don't tell them that it's the lie detector test that you're cheating on.
I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.
I've been told that one of the people behind the lie detector was the creator of Wonder Woman, Charles Moulton. Does anybody know if it's true?
So then the department which runs the polygraph testing notices a statistically significant uptick in the number of subjects that admit that they have been possibly exposed to (and compromised by) poly countermeasures. Uh oh. A memo is drafted which details this phenomena. Meanwhile a dedicated reporter for the Washington Post, who just happens to have an inside source at the FBI, comes across the memo and writes an article about some internet radicals trying to subvert the FBI during these trying times (terrorists, you know). Suddenly, something that was only minutes ago a boring old fact now becomes newsworhty! First the Post runs the story, then Newsweek devotes a cover to the issue and 60 Minutes does an expose. Then the Senate Judiciary Committee takes up the issue. A bill is drafted, passed by both houses, and signed by the Prez. Ta, da! Problem solved. Chalk up another victory for those freedom loving geeks on the 'Net!