View Poll Results: How confident are you that Person B lied?

Voters
24. You may not vote on this poll
  • 100% Person B was definitely lying.

    0 0%
  • 95% or more. There's a shred of doubt, but they almost certainly lied.

    2 8.33%
  • 80% they probably lied, but I'd allow it in court.

    1 4.17%
  • 80%, but that's not good enough to serve even as evidence in court.

    4 16.67%
  • It's a 50/50 crap shoot you have no idea.

    17 70.83%
  • I trust person B before I trust person A.

    0 0%
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 38

Thread: Lie Detectors

  1. #11
    Sage
    KevinKohler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    CT
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:54 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    18,761
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Lie Detectors

    Know what works better? 7 up and seagrams 7, aka, 7 and 7s. After about...4-5 of those, the truth starts to come out.
    Quote Originally Posted by calamity View Post
    Reports indicate that everyone knew he was hauling a bunch of guns up there. But, since you brought it up, there's something which should be illegal: guns that breakdown.

  2. #12
    Sage
    oneworld2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    5,827

    Re: Lie Detectors

    Quote Originally Posted by akyron View Post
    I...agree with you...Now I need to go lay down.....ouch.
    That's not what the test indicated
    There never has been a peace process, but rather an annexation process that used the “peace process” as a facade

    There are no victories, in all our histories , without love

  3. #13
    Sage
    Moderate Right's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Kentucky
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:08 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    31,942

    Re: Lie Detectors

    Quote Originally Posted by MrWonka View Post
    I realize that lie detectors are not admissible in court, and they certainly have their faults and criticisms, but most experts do seem to think they are fairly reliable in most cases when the operator is a professional who really knows what they're doing. Certainly, if the only evidence you had against someone that they committed a crime was that they failed a lie detector test when they were asked if they'd committed the crime I would have to say that's not enough to justify a guilty verdict and it shouldn't be allowed in court, but what about a scenario like this...

    Two different people who both witnessed an event are both required to take a polygraph with a certified professional operator. The session can be filmed and recorded in case there are any anomalies that look weird they can be challenged. One person(person A)passes the test. The other person(person B) tells a contradicting story to the first person and fails the test. The person who failed is then allowed to take a second polygraph, on a different day, on a different machine, with a different certified professional operator and once again fails the test. What level of confidence would you have that Person B was lying?
    In that particular case I would guess that the odds are greater than 50/50 but I'm not going to say 80%. There are just far too many variables and that's why they should never be admissible. Take Ms Ford in the recent Kavanaugh case. Her lawyers submitted a polygraph but the polygraph could have been rigged to giver her an advantage. If you start out with wanting a prejudiced outcome and use your own people to give you that prejudiced outcome, then you will get a .................................................. ...... (drumroll please) prejudiced outcome.

    Now if you have a completely unbiased and fair test or tests and they come out one way then I would say that the results would be somewhere between 50/50 and 80/20. But, certain people can and do pass tests that don't give the correct result. Take Ford again, she may have believed that Kavanaugh did what she said he did but there have been two men who came forward and said that they had had consensual sex with Ford in circumstances very similar to what she reported with Kavanaugh. The girl was drunk and she was 15 years old and it was 35 years ago. There are any number of reasons why someone can lie and pass a lie detector test or they may wholeheartedly believe in their own testimony, which might actually be incorrect.

  4. #14
    Tavern Bartender
    Nailed it!
    Middleground's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Canada's Capital
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,774
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Lie Detectors

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    Polygraphs are notoriously unreliable. It's a useful interrogation technique, particularly for the gullible. Otherwise they're worthless.
    Quote Originally Posted by celticwar17 View Post
    Polygraph tests are a interrogation tactic.... nothing else.
    "Justice" Kavenaugh disagrees with you.
    Quote Originally Posted by ThoughtEx. View Post
    Canada, it's way better than America, it's what happens when people don't vote against their own interests to stick it to the minorities and liberals.

  5. #15
    Global Moderator
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    42,752
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Lie Detectors

    Quote Originally Posted by Middleground View Post
    "Justice" Kavenaugh disagrees with you.
    It's Justice Kavanaugh, without the quotes. He IS a Justice of the US Supreme Court whether you like it, accept it, or not.

    And considering his accusers track record so far of recanting and admitting that they lied I wouldn't keep up with supporting the farce that went on by the Dems.

  6. #16
    Tavern Bartender
    Nailed it!
    Middleground's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Canada's Capital
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,774
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Lie Detectors

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    It's Justice Kavanaugh, without the quotes. He IS a Justice of the US Supreme Court whether you like it, accept it, or not.

    And considering his accusers track record so far of recanting and admitting that they lied I wouldn't keep up with supporting the farce that went on by the Dems.
    None of that negates Dr Ford's account. And "Justice" Kavenaugh is a strong proponent of lie detectors. Did you know that?
    Quote Originally Posted by ThoughtEx. View Post
    Canada, it's way better than America, it's what happens when people don't vote against their own interests to stick it to the minorities and liberals.

  7. #17
    Sage
    chuckiechan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Location
    California Caliphate
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:43 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,236

    Re: Lie Detectors

    Quote Originally Posted by MrWonka View Post
    I realize that lie detectors are not admissible in court, and they certainly have their faults and criticisms, but most experts do seem to think they are fairly reliable in most cases when the operator is a professional who really knows what they're doing. Certainly, if the only evidence you had against someone that they committed a crime was that they failed a lie detector test when they were asked if they'd committed the crime I would have to say that's not enough to justify a guilty verdict and it shouldn't be allowed in court, but what about a scenario like this...

    Two different people who both witnessed an event are both required to take a polygraph with a certified professional operator. The session can be filmed and recorded in case there are any anomalies that look weird they can be challenged. One person(person A)passes the test. The other person(person B) tells a contradicting story to the first person and fails the test. The person who failed is then allowed to take a second polygraph, on a different day, on a different machine, with a different certified professional operator and once again fails the test. What level of confidence would you have that Person B was lying?
    Lye detectors dont detect lies, they detect physiological changes. People who stutter for example give completely unreliable results, as do most who have learned English as a second language.

    I can see them as useful to butress claims of innocence, but not giilt.
    As charges are filed, people are going to start "Singing in DC... and Crying on DP"... LOL
    A.G. Barr: I have an obligation to make sure that government power is not abused.
    Racism is not being able to read racist rap lyrics out loud because you are white.

  8. #18
    Sage
    Xelor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Location
    Washington, D.C.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:55 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,462

    Re: Lie Detectors

    Quote Originally Posted by MrWonka View Post
    I realize that lie detectors are not admissible in court, and they certainly have their faults and criticisms, but most experts do seem to think they are fairly reliable in most cases when the operator is a professional who really knows what they're doing. Certainly, if the only evidence you had against someone that they committed a crime was that they failed a lie detector test when they were asked if they'd committed the crime I would have to say that's not enough to justify a guilty verdict and it shouldn't be allowed in court, but what about a scenario like this...

    Two different people who both witnessed an event are both required to take a polygraph with a certified professional operator. The session can be filmed and recorded in case there are any anomalies that look weird they can be challenged. One person(person A)passes the test. The other person(person B) tells a contradicting story to the first person and fails the test. The person who failed is then allowed to take a second polygraph, on a different day, on a different machine, with a different certified professional operator and once again fails the test. What level of confidence would you have that Person B was lying?
    Red:
    More than 50%, but absent knowing the questions asked and the circumstance(s) about which B was asked, I can't hazard how much more.
    Those who jettison the epistemological standards of science are no longer in a position to use their intellectual product to make any claims about what is true of the world or to dispute the others’ claims about what is true. - Tooby & Cosmides
    The lion does not turn around when a small dog barks. -- African Proverb

  9. #19
    Sage

    Skeptic Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    16,542

    Re: Lie Detectors

    Quote Originally Posted by Crosscheck View Post
    Can you imagine if they were truly reliable.

    Would totally change our judicial system. No more hung juries. Most likely a sharp increase in confessions.


    Heck, they could even bring a lie detector to a political debate. Get out the popcorn.
    I read a sci-fi book in the late 90s with that exact premise. A 100% accurate truth machine was invented and eventually was miniaturized and mass produced so people wore them like watches and their watch would tell them if they were being lied to. It changed the entire culture. It was called “Truth Machine” by James Halperin. After 20 years I don’t remember much more about it but I do remember enjoying it.
    <-- That is a winky face. If I use it in a post then that means I was more interested in being silly, sarcastic or hyperbolic than being accurate, factual or sincere at that particular moment.

  10. #20
    Global Moderator
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    42,752
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Lie Detectors

    Quote Originally Posted by Middleground View Post
    None of that negates Dr Ford's account. And "Justice" Kavenaugh is a strong proponent of lie detectors. Did you know that?
    Nothing corroborates Dr. Fords account. Tell me, when are we ever going to see her polygraph results? You know, the ones that she has refused to give over...assuming she actually took one.

    And considering Kavanaugh's background how much would you want to bet that he's taken such tests before?

    And yes, I know his opinion on them. In fact, he said nothing that I didn't say. They're a valuable tool for investigations, but unreliable to use in a court of law.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •