In 1997 I stole a few car stereo's ( yes it was dumb ) and when a * friend * told the cops because I wouldn't take him along to steal, I was questioned, I denied it ( obviously ) was then given a polygraph test and passed even though I lied. They said the only thing I was untruthful about was not knowing who did it. I decided to turn it around on the guy who snitched on me and he failed but was innocent. I figure either I am just an awesome liar, he was a poor truth teller or the test is fake
There are two ways to beat a lie detector test, one being MUCH easier than the other:
1. When you answer the questions with a lie, fully believe that lie to be the truth!
2. At the beginning all the way through the test, stub your toe or step on a tack. The detector will read your stress as high throughout, and become inconclusive.
The lie detector test is a glorified heart monitor/etc. All it does is measure changes based on your answers. It doesn't even hold up in court as evidence.
When Aldrich Ames was asked how he beat the lie detector twice in the CIA as a soviet mole, he told them his soviet contacts gave him simple advice: Get a good nights sleep, arrive early, be confident and friendly with the examiner and try to stay calm. The truth is that the polygraph is a lie, it's a psychological tool that interrogators used to intimidate you into giving a confession. You're at a huge psychological disadvantage when you think they can read your mind.
I have beaten a poligraph 3 times. I was put on probation for a crime in which i wont say what it was and was subject to a poligraph every 6 months. i wasnt supposed to drink, or be out past 9 pm but i did all the things i wasnt supposed to do. and then i lied about them and at the end of my probation term i was releases with a more than satisfactory completion!
@Laborer1 hey lessen you fuk dont bulshit ppl i have been through test 2 time fuking couldnt do noth the test is fuking perfect. fuking hate shit like u who never took it and bs everyone like a ass who got to know. u know. u know. u know shit
Polygraphs are so ridiculous..... Imagine, they ask you "Does this look familiar?" and show you a picture of a murder scene with a dead body that's been stabbed...
How many times haven't we seen that in movies!?!? And when you watch a movie your heart rate and pulse goes up... duuhh...
Or they ask you if you shot a person... Umm, hello; FPS games anyone??
Those memories -- movies and games -- are imprinted in the subconscious.
this bullshit. i had a polyram test and I pass it. i just got horney n thought racist thoughts when it cames to questions for some reason i was able to distract the answer.
you gotta piss off the instructor, make the instructor really mad like; answer each question with a question, ask the instructor questions that the instructor ask's you, OR when you go in to take your test get no sleep at all the night before that way and pop a sleeping pill before the test that way, youll be to tired to be nervous , thats right youll be to tired to be nervous.
@bigpoppa800: I wonder if every answer you give is a lie how they would tell the difference? I guess that is why they have you answer a certian way to the first few questions. A bit off topic but I heard somewhere that if you but a cucumber up your anus [dont laugh], you will think about the pain and not the test and you will pass.
Its 100% about the Heisenberg theory, in that the fact that you observe something you change its outcome.
For example; if you are performing your job task at peak efficiency you will have NO problem. However if you have the POS bossman that looks over your shoulder you are more likely to screw-up cause of the nervousness factors.
I do not know if you can pass it xereskyle; but if you ask the pope if GOD exists and he say YES, and then an athesist the say NO; then who is telling the truth?
Its all about what you truly believe to be the truth and the persons involved, and how the person giving the test can modify the post test questions to say you were a liar.
@tiko1531: Then that would be agnostic in that 'there is not enough evidence' or 'i'm not entirely convinced'. Athesim is the rejection of the existance of any type of God, Diety, Ghost, Entity, or otherwise. I have met true atheists and right off the back they said NO.
@bmwsux4 Agnosticism and atheism aren't mutually exclusive. Agnosticism and gnosticism go to what you know, while theism and atheism would go to what you believe. You could be an agnostic atheist, someone who doesn't claim to know whether there's a god, but doesn't believe (What I am). Or you could be a gnostic atheist, someone who doesn't believe in a god, and claims there is no god.
@bmwsux4 The uncertainty principle says that it is impossible to know both the position and the momentum of a particle at the same time, for measuring either will affect the other. In order to measure the position of a particle, you need to literally bounce something off of it, whether that be a photon or a gravitational wave or what have you. In so doing, the momentum is altered. It has nothing whatsoever to do with human "observation" in a day-to-day setting.
For us to be able to detect an electron, a photon must first interact with it, and this interaction will change the path of that electron. It is also possible for other, less direct means of measurement to affect the electron. Weither its called "Heisenburg's" or not is what I was trying to get at. Normally you dont lie or whatever; but when the testor asks you questions you may be tempted to lie or your heartbeat may indicate a lie when its the truth.
@bmwsux4 nervousness does not affect a lie detector test, polygraphers are trained to be able to distinguish between a lie and a nervous reaction. They run a series of questions first that will produce little or no feeling, such as is your name john.your body is being measured in 4 different ways: heartrate, galvanic skin responses, breathing at the diaphragm, and breathing at the chest. If you lie, chances are all four of these areas will respond. Nervousness will affect one/2 of these areas.
@bmwsux4 That's not Heisenberg at all. The observer effect is often confused with Heisenberg's uncertainty principle probably because most people have trouble understanding it.
I would have simply written NO number on the piece of paper. Then I would wait to see what number he said I had written. Only if he could detect that I had written no number, would I say the test had any credibility.
That's funny George...or friend of George, since the truth was just right in front of your eyes. So I agree with you. Start listening to the truth. Polygraph works and it works well.
The polygraph works well as a confession getter, sure. But not as a lie detector. In fact it has terrible shortcomings in that department. The fundamental problem with polygraphy is that it is based on the premise that responses in the autonomic nervous system indicate lying, and a lack of those responses indicates truthfulness. This is not true. Any person can tell you that many things can increase ones blood pressure, heart rate and sweating activity.
Saying something repeatedly doesn't make it true. Your rhetoric takes one grain of truth out of an entire bowl of sand and applies it to the whole wrongly. Polygraph is a test, a measureable test. A properly designed and conducted polygraph, CAN and DOES, with much better than chance percentages, indicate when a person is being deceptive TO AN ISSUE. It is NOT about individual questions! Your absolutism that requires a direct question/lie connection for polygraph to be valid is a fallacy.
And the scientific community DOES agree with me on 'deception to an issue', so stop wrongly applying a piece of information to the whole. You have an agenda that is one sided. You refuse to accept polygraph validity. I can accept polygraph imperfections and encourage research to make it better. Your agenda offers nothing but complaining and misdirection. Help solve the problem, rather than just pointing it out. There are flaws/weaknesses in all forensic sciences.
The polygraph has little validity to accept. Validity, in psychometric terms, means that a test is measuring what it is intended to measure. The polygraph fails to meet that criteria, because, as I mentioned before, the polygraph does not measure deception.
Research won't make the polygraph more accurate anymore than adding scoring algorithms and other pseudoscientific junk to phrenology will make it more accurate. The issue is with the premise of the approach.
Retired FBI Supervisory Special Agent Dr. Drew C. Richardson studied polygraphy for the federal government. Speaking to the senate, he said, "[Polygraph screening] is completely without any theoretical foundation and has absolutely no validity... the diagnostic
value of this type of testing is no more than that of astrology or tea-leaf reading. ...(A)nyone can be taught to beat this type of polygraph exam in a few minutes."
There is no evidence that polygraphers can detect countermeasures. Former federal polygrapher Dr. Richardson has challenged his peers to detect countermeasures in an experiment devised by him. No one has taken up the offer. Additionally, once one loses the fear of the "lie detector" the polygraph is pretty much useless. No fear = no fear driven responses.
American Psychological Association - "There is no evidence that any pattern of physiological reactions is unique to deception."
This has been flagged as spam show
In 1997 I stole a few car stereo's ( yes it was dumb ) and when a * friend * told the cops because I wouldn't take him along to steal, I was questioned, I denied it ( obviously ) was then given a polygraph test and passed even though I lied. They said the only thing I was untruthful about was not knowing who did it. I decided to turn it around on the guy who snitched on me and he failed but was innocent. I figure either I am just an awesome liar, he was a poor truth teller or the test is fake
TheCurzondax 1 week ago
But notice what the polygrapher said...I'm "guessing" you wrote 23 but you want me to think it is 26.
If the journalist said, "no, that's incorrect," the polygrapher would have NO WAY to show that the journalist was lying.
If he knew he would have been able to tell him definitively that he wrote 23 but wanted him to think it was 26.
mgm8822 1 month ago
There are two ways to beat a lie detector test, one being MUCH easier than the other:
1. When you answer the questions with a lie, fully believe that lie to be the truth!
2. At the beginning all the way through the test, stub your toe or step on a tack. The detector will read your stress as high throughout, and become inconclusive.
The lie detector test is a glorified heart monitor/etc. All it does is measure changes based on your answers. It doesn't even hold up in court as evidence.
vjm3 1 month ago
When Aldrich Ames was asked how he beat the lie detector twice in the CIA as a soviet mole, he told them his soviet contacts gave him simple advice: Get a good nights sleep, arrive early, be confident and friendly with the examiner and try to stay calm. The truth is that the polygraph is a lie, it's a psychological tool that interrogators used to intimidate you into giving a confession. You're at a huge psychological disadvantage when you think they can read your mind.
misterbarbister 5 months ago
Google "Quadri-Track ZCT"
WTCnucleardemolition 1 year ago
I have beaten a poligraph 3 times. I was put on probation for a crime in which i wont say what it was and was subject to a poligraph every 6 months. i wasnt supposed to drink, or be out past 9 pm but i did all the things i wasnt supposed to do. and then i lied about them and at the end of my probation term i was releases with a more than satisfactory completion!
Laborer192004 1 year ago 8
@Laborer1 hey lessen you fuk dont bulshit ppl i have been through test 2 time fuking couldnt do noth the test is fuking perfect. fuking hate shit like u who never took it and bs everyone like a ass who got to know. u know. u know. u know shit
mjowkar 5 months ago
@Laborer192004 but what did you do to pass?
iTzBRYANT113 2 months ago
@Laborer192004 how'd you pass it?
ptthebest25 1 month ago
.
Polygraphs are so ridiculous..... Imagine, they ask you "Does this look familiar?" and show you a picture of a murder scene with a dead body that's been stabbed...
How many times haven't we seen that in movies!?!? And when you watch a movie your heart rate and pulse goes up... duuhh...
Or they ask you if you shot a person... Umm, hello; FPS games anyone??
Those memories -- movies and games -- are imprinted in the subconscious.
.
SlLENTHlLL 1 year ago
this bullshit. i had a polyram test and I pass it. i just got horney n thought racist thoughts when it cames to questions for some reason i was able to distract the answer.
NoXAdmiral 1 year ago
you gotta piss off the instructor, make the instructor really mad like; answer each question with a question, ask the instructor questions that the instructor ask's you, OR when you go in to take your test get no sleep at all the night before that way and pop a sleeping pill before the test that way, youll be to tired to be nervous , thats right youll be to tired to be nervous.
bigpoppa800 2 years ago
lol on ur comment on lie dectetor
NoXAdmiral 1 year ago
@bigpoppa800: I wonder if every answer you give is a lie how they would tell the difference? I guess that is why they have you answer a certian way to the first few questions. A bit off topic but I heard somewhere that if you but a cucumber up your anus [dont laugh], you will think about the pain and not the test and you will pass.
bmwsux4 1 year ago
interesting but I believe that they can be wrong often.... If not the court system would be a lot less complex
thesnowman777 2 years ago
Its 100% about the Heisenberg theory, in that the fact that you observe something you change its outcome.
For example; if you are performing your job task at peak efficiency you will have NO problem. However if you have the POS bossman that looks over your shoulder you are more likely to screw-up cause of the nervousness factors.
So YES; polygraphs are BS!
bmwsux4 2 years ago 18
That is a very accurate answer bud, do you think I can pass the Polygraph test?
XeresKyle 2 years ago
I do not know if you can pass it xereskyle; but if you ask the pope if GOD exists and he say YES, and then an athesist the say NO; then who is telling the truth?
Its all about what you truly believe to be the truth and the persons involved, and how the person giving the test can modify the post test questions to say you were a liar.
bmwsux4 2 years ago 4
Comment removed
tiko1531 1 year ago
@tiko1531: Then that would be agnostic in that 'there is not enough evidence' or 'i'm not entirely convinced'. Athesim is the rejection of the existance of any type of God, Diety, Ghost, Entity, or otherwise. I have met true atheists and right off the back they said NO.
bmwsux4 1 year ago
@bmwsux4 Agnosticism and atheism aren't mutually exclusive. Agnosticism and gnosticism go to what you know, while theism and atheism would go to what you believe. You could be an agnostic atheist, someone who doesn't claim to know whether there's a god, but doesn't believe (What I am). Or you could be a gnostic atheist, someone who doesn't believe in a god, and claims there is no god.
tiko1531 1 year ago
@bmwsux4 best comment EVER
hotboy1990 1 year ago
or you could just be nervous because it is your first time being acused
pup101 2 years ago
@bmwsux4 That's not at all what Heisenburg's Uncertainty Principle is about. You don't know what you're talking about.
0jdh 1 year ago
@0jdh: Prove it.
bmwsux4 1 year ago
@bmwsux4 The uncertainty principle says that it is impossible to know both the position and the momentum of a particle at the same time, for measuring either will affect the other. In order to measure the position of a particle, you need to literally bounce something off of it, whether that be a photon or a gravitational wave or what have you. In so doing, the momentum is altered. It has nothing whatsoever to do with human "observation" in a day-to-day setting.
0jdh 1 year ago
@0jdh: just like I and wiki says;
For us to be able to detect an electron, a photon must first interact with it, and this interaction will change the path of that electron. It is also possible for other, less direct means of measurement to affect the electron. Weither its called "Heisenburg's" or not is what I was trying to get at. Normally you dont lie or whatever; but when the testor asks you questions you may be tempted to lie or your heartbeat may indicate a lie when its the truth.
bmwsux4 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@bmwsux4 nervousness does not affect a lie detector test, polygraphers are trained to be able to distinguish between a lie and a nervous reaction. They run a series of questions first that will produce little or no feeling, such as is your name john.your body is being measured in 4 different ways: heartrate, galvanic skin responses, breathing at the diaphragm, and breathing at the chest. If you lie, chances are all four of these areas will respond. Nervousness will affect one/2 of these areas.
Sho69607 1 year ago
@bmwsux4 That's not Heisenberg at all. The observer effect is often confused with Heisenberg's uncertainty principle probably because most people have trouble understanding it.
marudoethiopia 6 months ago
Comment removed
WeedFlow420 3 months ago
take a couple of sleeping pills
rinkerall 2 years ago
yeah just tighten your asshole and then relax it
thepapper 2 years ago
Two good questions on a lie detector:
1. "Can you beat a Lie Detector?"
2. "Have you just attempted to beat this Lie Detector?"
ingej32 2 years ago
I would have simply written NO number on the piece of paper. Then I would wait to see what number he said I had written. Only if he could detect that I had written no number, would I say the test had any credibility.
nezpercenathan 2 years ago
Comment removed
rhillirhilli 2 years ago
That's funny George...or friend of George, since the truth was just right in front of your eyes. So I agree with you. Start listening to the truth. Polygraph works and it works well.
rhillirhilli 2 years ago
The polygraph works well as a confession getter, sure. But not as a lie detector. In fact it has terrible shortcomings in that department. The fundamental problem with polygraphy is that it is based on the premise that responses in the autonomic nervous system indicate lying, and a lack of those responses indicates truthfulness. This is not true. Any person can tell you that many things can increase ones blood pressure, heart rate and sweating activity.
youfailedx 2 years ago
One can show ANS responses while being entirely truthful, and one can have a complete lack of these responses while lying his/her ass off.
Also, once one stops fearing the polygraph, the polygraphs utility disappears. It cannot read responses that don't exist.
You may think the polygraph is accurate as a lie detector. Unfortunately, the scientific community disagrees with you.
youfailedx 2 years ago
Saying something repeatedly doesn't make it true. Your rhetoric takes one grain of truth out of an entire bowl of sand and applies it to the whole wrongly. Polygraph is a test, a measureable test. A properly designed and conducted polygraph, CAN and DOES, with much better than chance percentages, indicate when a person is being deceptive TO AN ISSUE. It is NOT about individual questions! Your absolutism that requires a direct question/lie connection for polygraph to be valid is a fallacy.
rhillirhilli 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
And the scientific community DOES agree with me on 'deception to an issue', so stop wrongly applying a piece of information to the whole. You have an agenda that is one sided. You refuse to accept polygraph validity. I can accept polygraph imperfections and encourage research to make it better. Your agenda offers nothing but complaining and misdirection. Help solve the problem, rather than just pointing it out. There are flaws/weaknesses in all forensic sciences.
rhillirhilli 2 years ago
The polygraph has little validity to accept. Validity, in psychometric terms, means that a test is measuring what it is intended to measure. The polygraph fails to meet that criteria, because, as I mentioned before, the polygraph does not measure deception.
Research won't make the polygraph more accurate anymore than adding scoring algorithms and other pseudoscientific junk to phrenology will make it more accurate. The issue is with the premise of the approach.
youfailedx 2 years ago
Retired FBI Supervisory Special Agent Dr. Drew C. Richardson studied polygraphy for the federal government. Speaking to the senate, he said, "[Polygraph screening] is completely without any theoretical foundation and has absolutely no validity... the diagnostic
value of this type of testing is no more than that of astrology or tea-leaf reading. ...(A)nyone can be taught to beat this type of polygraph exam in a few minutes."
It's time we start listening to the truth.
youfailedx 3 years ago
There is no evidence that polygraphers can detect countermeasures. Former federal polygrapher Dr. Richardson has challenged his peers to detect countermeasures in an experiment devised by him. No one has taken up the offer. Additionally, once one loses the fear of the "lie detector" the polygraph is pretty much useless. No fear = no fear driven responses.
American Psychological Association - "There is no evidence that any pattern of physiological reactions is unique to deception."
youfailedx 3 years ago