that's part of it. Also its not difficult to fool a polygraph - simple relaxation training is often enough. Then there are the polygraph examiners. I think in a lot of cases, the training is very minimal, with the certification, where it exists, is only nominal - more like paying a fee than anything else. Over all the results are so subjective that they simply cannot be trusted as far as I'm concerned.
On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 5:48 PM, Sisk, Kris <[email protected]> wrote: > > I've not looked into the subject deeply but I've always been under the > impression that the inaccuracy in polygraphs was because they have a > tendancy to say you're lying when you're actually being truthful. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Larry C. Lyons [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Friday, August 20, 2010 4:38 PM > To: cf-community > Subject: Re: Harry Reiiiiiiiiiiid - It's Hard Out Here for a Politician > > > Which one? > > That said, anyone who thinks that a polygraph is any serious indicator > of truth needs to get an education. > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology-Michael-Dinowitz/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:325686 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
