Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

Lie detector confirms Roswell testimonies


  • Please log in to reply
103 replies to this topic

#31    Viper2

Viper2

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 156 posts
  • Joined:22 Mar 2010
  • Gender:Male

Posted 19 December 2011 - 11:07 AM

View Postpsyche101, on 19 December 2011 - 03:23 AM, said:

So how many people who say this was not an alien craft was this tech used on, and what are those results?

Or did we avoid that to ruin the surprise?

Bragalia is well known for clutching at Roswell straws. This is feelgood news, not news news.

This is not "news news" to you because you simply don't want to believe The Roswell Incident was ETs no matter what.  Even if 100 people at the scene of The Roswell Incident passed lie detector tests saying it was ETs, people like you would still be arguing against it.

This story is a big deal, and once again gives more credibility to the Roswell ET story.  Chances are more likely that Roswell was visitors rather than not.  Whether those visitors were ETs or time travelers is another question.

Edited by Viper2, 19 December 2011 - 11:07 AM.


#32    quillius

quillius

    52.0839 N, 1.4328 E

  • Member
  • 5,591 posts
  • Joined:04 Aug 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:LONDON

  • A man should look for what is, and not for what he thinks should be.
    Albert Einstein

Posted 19 December 2011 - 11:51 AM

View Postbison, on 17 December 2011 - 06:07 PM, said:

Since it is the words themselves that are analyzed, and these would remain the same if the test were repeated, I doubt repeated testing would increase the accuracy. If they could analyze the accounts of other witnesses giving similar details, and these were also found to be true, it would reduce the level of doubt.  A minimum figure of 86% accuracy means a 14% chance of an incorrect 'true' verdict. I'm not a statistician, but two similar accounts, both found true, would presumably mean .14 x .14 doubt, or .0196, say ~ 2%, or 98 percent certainty.  Using the same logic, three similar accounts would yield 99.8% certainty.

Hey bison, yes I was heading towarsd corroborating accounts so as to be able to use the multiplier as you have shown to increase the accuracy.

As for repeated test on same individual, well I still think iot would be interesting if they are basing it solely on words used. Dependant on the length of test then I am sure there would be significant differences in words used...so if they still point ot the same conclusion I would say this is increasing the accuracy.

:tu:


#33    Hazzard

Hazzard

    Stellar Black Hole

  • Member
  • 11,762 posts
  • Joined:25 Aug 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Inside Voyager 1.

  • Being skeptical of the paranormal is a good thing.

Posted 19 December 2011 - 10:03 PM

View PostViper2, on 19 December 2011 - 11:07 AM, said:

This is not "news news" to you because you simply don't want to believe The Roswell Incident was ETs no matter what.  Even if 100 people at the scene of The Roswell Incident passed lie detector tests saying it was ETs, people like you would still be arguing against it.

This story is a big deal, and once again gives more credibility to the Roswell ET story.  Chances are more likely that Roswell was visitors rather than not.  Whether those visitors were ETs or time travelers is another question.


Couldnt they have come from another dimension aswell,... or is that a little too "outside the box" for you?

I still await the compelling Exhibit A.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. -Edmund Burke

#34    psyche101

psyche101

    The Customer.

  • Member
  • 38,345 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 19 December 2011 - 10:12 PM

View PostViper2, on 19 December 2011 - 11:07 AM, said:

This is not "news news" to you because you simply don't want to believe The Roswell Incident was ETs no matter what.  Even if 100 people at the scene of The Roswell Incident passed lie detector tests saying it was ETs, people like you would still be arguing against it.

This story is a big deal, and once again gives more credibility to the Roswell ET story.  Chances are more likely that Roswell was visitors rather than not.  Whether those visitors were ETs or time travelers is another question.


No it is not "news news" why would it be? Someone touts some new software, and because they said "It helps Roswell" all the alienz fanatics have jumped all over it. What has it proven exactly? Why is it a big deal, and what does it tell us? That some people believe that others believe. Big whoop.

Get a grip Viper. At least having something of value to fight for. This is less than helpful with regards to a solution. You tell me, how many actual witnesses are still alive today, and what was that result hrrmmm? If you bother to look it up I think you might be in for something of a surprise.

Edited by psyche101, 19 December 2011 - 10:14 PM.

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. - Sir Isaac Newton Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit. - Ed Stewart Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Dr Who

#35    psyche101

psyche101

    The Customer.

  • Member
  • 38,345 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 19 December 2011 - 10:40 PM

View PostSynergy, on 19 December 2011 - 06:31 AM, said:

According to Carey and Schmitt, there are over 600 witnesses that have come forward now. Most of them, however, are not first hand. Testimony will never prove anything, especially when it's less than first hand, but there is no chance at all that it was Mogul. I covered why in detail a few years back here: http://www.unexplain...1

Most of them? What first hand witness is still alive today?
With all due respect, you have cut and pasted 4, maybe 5 websites main body and regurgitated that here. I do not feel that you ousted project Mogul at all, I feel that all you did was spread the popularised preference over MOGUL around. I can go into it all again if you wish to (in that thread as it would be OT here), but all of these points have been covered in the Best Evidence thread(s) and in my opinion, well refuted. You also did the same thing Sky did, and copied and pasted Rudiak's derision of Moore, whom he outright calls a liar, so I hope you do not do a hypocritical thing like Sky did and then call him an honest witness to be trusted with his white sands sighting. He is one or the other, liar or saint? Although that is just the tip of the iceberg as to why all that information makes less sense than what you feel you have refuted. I do not mean any offense, but I have also studied the subject in depth, and find these to be no more than popular excuses as to why people simply refuse to accept a mundane explanation, however, I do say Kudos to you for mentioning the cause as being "whatever the military might have kept under wraps" and I certainly can appreciate the open mind there. I have been convinced that MOGUL is not the answer, and neither is an alien solution, the Lost Shaman Intelligence Operations hypothesis I think fills more round holes with round pegs than any other. The Twining memo pretty much spells this out.
The majority of ill informed public have not been bamboozled with MOGUL only, they have also been bamboozled with wide eyed camp fire tales and chinese whispers of flying saucers and martians, and I feel there is absolutely no doubt that the latter is by far the majority. Misinformation is misinformation, no matter if the sound of it is "cool" or not. But MOGUL, when one reads and understand it properly, is a good candidate. It just is not as good as the LSRIOH. (Lost Shaman Roswell Intelligence Operations Hypothesis)

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. - Sir Isaac Newton Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit. - Ed Stewart Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Dr Who

#36    Synergy

Synergy

    Paranormal Investigator

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 836 posts
  • Joined:04 Feb 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Philadelphia, PA

  • "The quality of a person's life is in direct proportion to their commitment to excellence regardless of their chosen field of endeavor."

Posted 20 December 2011 - 02:56 AM

View Postpsyche101, on 19 December 2011 - 10:40 PM, said:

Most of them? What first hand witness is still alive today?
With all due respect, you have cut and pasted 4, maybe 5 websites main body and regurgitated that here. I do not feel that you ousted project Mogul at all, I feel that all you did was spread the popularised preference over MOGUL around. I can go into it all again if you wish to (in that thread as it would be OT here), but all of these points have been covered in the Best Evidence thread(s) and in my opinion, well refuted. You also did the same thing Sky did, and copied and pasted Rudiak's derision of Moore, whom he outright calls a liar, so I hope you do not do a hypocritical thing like Sky did and then call him an honest witness to be trusted with his white sands sighting. He is one or the other, liar or saint? Although that is just the tip of the iceberg as to why all that information makes less sense than what you feel you have refuted. I do not mean any offense, but I have also studied the subject in depth, and find these to be no more than popular excuses as to why people simply refuse to accept a mundane explanation, however, I do say Kudos to you for mentioning the cause as being "whatever the military might have kept under wraps" and I certainly can appreciate the open mind there. I have been convinced that MOGUL is not the answer, and neither is an alien solution, the Lost Shaman Intelligence Operations hypothesis I think fills more round holes with round pegs than any other. The Twining memo pretty much spells this out.
The majority of ill informed public have not been bamboozled with MOGUL only, they have also been bamboozled with wide eyed camp fire tales and chinese whispers of flying saucers and martians, and I feel there is absolutely no doubt that the latter is by far the majority. Misinformation is misinformation, no matter if the sound of it is "cool" or not. But MOGUL, when one reads and understand it properly, is a good candidate. It just is not as good as the LSRIOH. (Lost Shaman Roswell Intelligence Operations Hypothesis)

For the record, I actually took a ton of time to write the majority of that huge thread myself. The Galganski analysis was copy and pasted, as are quotes obviously.

Moore's trajectory is mathematically in error. There's no question about that. The official log states flight #4 wasn't launched. All we have is Moore's word (so much for unsubstantiated testimony being insignificant?) that it happened vs. the massive amount of witnesses that contest the Mogul material and further contradicted by official records of when/if launches took place.

You wanna talk about foggy memories... Moore supposedly specifically remembered (DECADES later) flight #4 being launched AGAINST official records out of the 100+ Mogul flights?? We have records of where most of them landed, too. Historical tracking data lends little credibility to the Mogul theory. Flight 38 is the only one to come close to the debris field (20-40 miles), and that wasn't even the impact site, it was simply the last recorded location.

He may have made an honest mistake in thinking 100/12.1 = 350. Who are we to say? Thomas and Printy have admitted themselves the mathematical errors in Moore's trajectory. Regardless, his (invalid) trajectory was still 17 miles off, which is vastly underestimated considering Brazel was on horseback while tending to the ranch.

The tough material found does not resemble Mogul material, which was by all accounts (including the popular Irving Newton) built of very flimsy, fragile foil, which Newton said you would have to be careful not to tear. The balsa wood struts being flame retardant and cut resistant is a testable statement. Why ignore this opportunity? Marcel described some large pieces of metallic debris several feet long which he described as "thin as foil in a pack of cigarettes" that he was specifically able to bang a sledgehammer off of without making a dent. This does not mean the material was indestructible, only that it exhibited extraordinary properties.

No radiosonde, string or rubber was reported until the second publication the following day with the Brazel interview for which 6 separate witnesses reported him being escorted by the military to provide his new story (Witness to Roswell by Carey and Schmitt). Brazel found this material very frequently, and yet insisted this wasn't what he found. Either he hadn't found this stuff before (thus, he lied), and this is what the Roswell debris really consisted of; or, he HAD found this stuff before, and the Roswell debris was not consistent with his description in that article.

Marcel and Cavitt took two cars and filled both with debris? Of a Mogul balloon? Another testable hypothesis, given that we know what kind of cars they took. They didn't mind the stench of the deteriorating neoprene? Didn't even notice enough to mention it? The flight to Wright-Patterson was supposedly cancelled, and yet official documents suggest otherwise. Why would they waste their time and fuel for what was positively identified as a weather balloon? Why didn't RAAF take the NOTAMS into consideration? The RAAF also launched on average about two of such balloons per day in connection with the bases frequent test drops of unarmed atomic bombs, yet they were not equipped to identify the debris? There are too many things that don't add up with the Mogul theory.

Edited by Synergy, 20 December 2011 - 03:26 AM.

"Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity."
--Martin Luther King, Jr.

"In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual."
--Galileo Galilei

"You must be the change you wish to see in the world."
--Mahatma Gandhi

#37    psyche101

psyche101

    The Customer.

  • Member
  • 38,345 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 20 December 2011 - 03:43 AM

View PostSynergy, on 20 December 2011 - 02:56 AM, said:

For the record, I actually took a ton of time to write the majority of that huge thread myself. The Galganski analysis was copy and pasted, as are quotes obviously.

Sorry, no offense was intended, but if that is indeed the case, you seem to have a photographic memory, as the exact same things is found on several websites. A great deal of what you have posted is available at Dave Rudiak's website.
I have no faith in the Galganski claim. If a MOGUL train could not make that field, just how the heck did something the size of a Volkswagen Beetle do it?

View PostSynergy, on 20 December 2011 - 02:56 AM, said:

Moore's trajectory is mathematically in error. There's no question about that. The official log states flight #4 wasn't launched. All we have is Moore's word (so much for unsubstantiated testimony being insignificant?) that it happened vs. the massive amount of witnesses that contest the Mogul material and further contradicted by official records of when/if launches took place.

We do know that a service flight was launched, that has subsequently been dubbed as flight #4. That is a nomenclature issue which serves no other purpose than to confuse the situation. Why could a small cluster of 5 balloons not have made it to the Foster Ranch?

View PostSynergy, on 20 December 2011 - 02:56 AM, said:

You wanna talk about foggy memories... Moore supposedly specifically remembered (DECADES later) flight #4 being launched AGAINST official records out of the 100+ Mogul flights?? We have records of where most of them landed, too. Historical tracking data lends little credibility to the Mogul theory. Flight 38 is the only one to come close to the debris field (20-40 miles), and that wasn't even the impact site, it was simply the last recorded location.

He may have made an honest mistake in thinking 100/12.1 = 350. Who are we to say? Thomas and Printy have admitted themselves the mathematical errors in Moore's trajectory. Regardless, his (invalid) trajectory was still 17 miles off, which is vastly underestimated considering Brazel was on horseback while tending to the ranch.

I do not deny his trajectory is in error, but I agree he may have had a "fuzzy recollection" The logs clearly state that a service flight was launched, which is not a 28 balloon train. Service flights consisted of 3 or 5 balloons, and one could conceivably make it to the Foster Ranch. There is no definite either way, but there is nothing to refute the notion either.

If you had not noticed, my objection to claiming Moore is a liar means that I refuse to accept that he is a saint when it comes to his later white sands sighting. That is outright hypocritical.

Now what proof do you have of the debris field? There are a ridiculous amount of conflicting accounts, not a one corroborated. I would hope you are placing faith in something more than a story here. And the field is of no consequence to the final outcome.

View PostSynergy, on 20 December 2011 - 02:56 AM, said:

The tough material found does not resembled Mogul material, which was by all accounts (including the popular Irving Newton) built of very flimsy, fragile foil, which Newton said you would have to be careful not to tear. The balsa wood struts being flame retardant and cut resistant is a testable statement. Why ignore this opportunity? Marcel described some large pieces of metallic debris several feet long which he described as "thin as foil in a pack of cigarettes" that he was specifically able to bang a sledgehammer off of without making a dent. This does not mean the material was indestructible, only that it exhibited extraordinary properties.

What tough material? The stuff on the tales that has never been produced? You know that Mrs Brazel was so impressed with the stuff that she swept the "junk" from her porch. It is rumored that some of it may still lie under a concrete slab at the back of the house poured soon after the event.

Now lets consider the tough material on odds. You are basing the truthfulness of those claims on the descriptions, so surealy a little logic wouldnlt go astray?

Lets just say for kicks that this really did happen. Some little grey fellow hopped into a spaceship not big enough to cross space, and made it here, and then, this amazing technology fails, he crashes, then this material with exotic properties that we cannot dent bursts into millions of pieces upon impact with dirt.
Amazingly this little bloke from some far flung corner of the Universe just happened to make this little spaceship out of materials that look exactly like, but with different properties, Balsa Wood, Tinfoil, and paper.
And this little bloke manages to crash that spaceship in the corner of the Universe where the natives just happen to be experimenting with balloons made out of balsa wood, tinfoil and paper. And not just on the planet, but on that very tiny piece of planet where this experiment is going on.

Would you like to take a guess on the odds of that happening?

I think an Independence day scenario would have higher odds.

View PostSynergy, on 20 December 2011 - 02:56 AM, said:

No radiosonde, string or rubber was reported until the second publication the following day with the Brazel interview for which 6 separate witnesses reported him being escorted by the military to provide his new story (Witness to Roswell by Carey and Schmitt). Brazel found this material very frequently, and yet insisted this wasn't what he found. Either he hadn't found this stuff before (thus, he lied), and this is what the Roswell debris really consisted of; or, he HAD found this stuff before, and the Roswell debris was not consistent with his description in that article.

Until the second publication. Really, that is reason to be suspicious? Come on now.

Yes, his new story seems to have earned him a pretty penny for towing the line, he opened up a storage warehouse business not long after, which seems even more suspicious when the press were offering up a $3K reward for flying discs at the time. From what I can tell, he tried to fraud for the money, and ended up winning. As this was a MOGUL service flight he could quite honestly say it looked nothing like the trains he had found before.

View PostSynergy, on 20 December 2011 - 02:56 AM, said:

Marcel and Cavitt took two cars and filled both with debris? Of a Mogul balloon? Another testable hypothesis, given that we know what kind of cars they took. They didn't mind the stench of the deteriorating neoprene? Didn't even notice enough to mention it? The flight to Wright-Patterson was supposedly cancelled, and yet official documents suggest otherwise. Why would they waste their time and fuel for what was positively identified as a weather balloon? Why didn't RAAF take the NOTAMS into consideration? The RAAF also launched on average about two of such balloons per day in connection with the bases frequent test drops of unarmed atomic bombs, yet they were not equipped to identify the debris? There are too many things that don't add up with the Mogul theory.

Yes, it seems more likely that it was as Crarey wrote, a service flight. And why would they mind the stench? What are they going to do abut it? Because they did not have a whine about it is suspicious? I think not.
Why would they waste their time? Well, I woud say this is where the LSRIOH steps in. Note these men, and then note who belonged to intelligence. The Twinning memo wraps things up nicely there, suggesting that the military create a diversion so that they may investigate the phenomena unhindered.

If you wish to tackle this more in depth, it might be prudent to relocate to the other thread?

Edited by psyche101, 20 December 2011 - 03:48 AM.

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. - Sir Isaac Newton Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit. - Ed Stewart Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Dr Who

#38    DONTEATUS

DONTEATUS

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 19,031 posts
  • Joined:15 Feb 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Planet TEXAS

Posted 20 December 2011 - 04:36 AM

still waiting for the Lie detector to go Beep ! or at least the Blinking of a red nose ! Or sumptin ! :wacko:

This is a Work in Progress!

#39    Earl.Of.Trumps

Earl.Of.Trumps

    BigFoot Whisperer

  • Member
  • 3,653 posts
  • Joined:20 Dec 2011
  • Location:Planet Elsewhere

  • One of the beginnings of human emancipation is knowing when authority needs to be corrected | Hitchens, adapted

Posted 20 December 2011 - 07:02 PM

Maybe they should give a lie detector test to the FBI


http://vault.fbi.gov...art 1 of 1/view

Guy Hottel was 2nd in command of the FBI when the Roswell incident happened. Hottel was dispatched
to Roswell to confer with Air Force brass and this is his brief of said discussions.

Hottel was informed that there were three flying saucers that crashed that day.
There were three three-foot tall dead aliens in each saucer (9 total).

I know, I know, just because the FBI says it it does not make it true but that at least contradicts
current government stance on what exactly crashed at Roswell.

The information in that memo was posted at The Vault as a result of freedom of information act requests.

Edited by Earl.Of.Trumps, 20 December 2011 - 07:03 PM.

There are no such things as Lenticular clouds, only UFO's in disguise


"I'm not trying to say your wrong, I'm just saying I disagree with you" ~ Jeremy ~


#40    Hazzard

Hazzard

    Stellar Black Hole

  • Member
  • 11,762 posts
  • Joined:25 Aug 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Inside Voyager 1.

  • Being skeptical of the paranormal is a good thing.

Posted 20 December 2011 - 07:14 PM

View PostEarl.Of.Trumps, on 20 December 2011 - 07:02 PM, said:

Maybe they should give a lie detector test to the FBI


http://vault.fbi.gov...art 1 of 1/view

Guy Hottel was 2nd in command of the FBI when the Roswell incident happened. Hottel was dispatched
to Roswell to confer with Air Force brass and this is his brief of said discussions.

Hottel was informed that there were three flying saucers that crashed that day.
There were three three-foot tall dead aliens in each saucer (9 total).

I know, I know, just because the FBI says it it does not make it true but that at least contradicts
current government stance on what exactly crashed at Roswell.



Roswell is full of conflicting information. Not even the Roswell hardcore fanatics can agree on what happened.


No,... When it comes to the quest for evidence of ET visitation Roswell is a dead end.

I still await the compelling Exhibit A.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. -Edmund Burke

#41    regeneratia

regeneratia

    Alien Abducter

  • Banned
  • 4,810 posts
  • Joined:20 Jun 2010
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:All my posts are my own views, my own perceptions. Will not be finding links for why I think the way I do.

  • It is time to put the big guns down now, Little Boys!

Posted 20 December 2011 - 07:35 PM

Lie detectors can be faulty. I do not counter this article deliberately, for I sit on the fence regarding Roswell. However, lie detectors are not proof of anything, due to their subjective nature.

Truth is such a rare quality, a stranger so seldom met in this civilization of fraud, that it is never received freely, but must fight its way into the world
Professor Hilton Hotema
(quote from THE BIBLE FRAUD)

Robert Heinlein: SECRECY IS THE HALLMARK OF TYRANNY!

#42    Leonardo

Leonardo

    Awake

  • Member
  • 18,410 posts
  • Joined:20 Oct 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK

  • Hell is a guilty conscience

Posted 20 December 2011 - 08:37 PM

View PostLilly, on 18 December 2011 - 05:51 PM, said:

The bottom line is, and I think someone already pointed this out, lie detectors can only pick up on what a person believes is truthful.

Not necessarily, Lilly. A carefully prepared statement of untruths would be able to pass such a test.

For example, Maj. Marcel may have been providing 'disinformation' at the behest of his superiors. Well-worded, or practised, it would pass a test of linguistics.

I am not suggesting that was the case, I am highlighting that there are flaws in an approach which relies heavily on one indicator of uncertainty.

In the book of life, the answers aren't in the back. - Charlie Brown

"It is a profound and necessary truth that the deep things in science are not found because they are useful; they are found because it was possible to find them."  - J. Robert Oppenheimer; Scientific Director; The Manhattan Project

"talking bull**** is not a victimless crime" - Marina Hyde, author.

#43    Synergy

Synergy

    Paranormal Investigator

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 836 posts
  • Joined:04 Feb 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Philadelphia, PA

  • "The quality of a person's life is in direct proportion to their commitment to excellence regardless of their chosen field of endeavor."

Posted 20 December 2011 - 11:30 PM

View Postpsyche101, on 20 December 2011 - 03:43 AM, said:

If you wish to tackle this more in depth, it might be prudent to relocate to the other thread?

Very well. I responded to your previous post there.

"Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity."
--Martin Luther King, Jr.

"In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual."
--Galileo Galilei

"You must be the change you wish to see in the world."
--Mahatma Gandhi

#44    psyche101

psyche101

    The Customer.

  • Member
  • 38,345 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 21 December 2011 - 07:25 AM

View PostSynergy, on 20 December 2011 - 11:30 PM, said:

Very well. I responded to your previous post there.


Thank you, I think we avoided a wrist slap nicely there ;)

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. - Sir Isaac Newton Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit. - Ed Stewart Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Dr Who

#45    scowl

scowl

    Government Agent

  • Closed
  • 4,111 posts
  • Joined:17 Nov 2010
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 22 December 2011 - 06:34 PM

View Postregeneratia, on 20 December 2011 - 07:35 PM, said:

Lie detectors can be faulty. I do not counter this article deliberately, for I sit on the fence regarding Roswell. However, lie detectors are not proof of anything, due to their subjective nature.
Their results have to be interpreted by a person. There are no absolute standards for that person to differentiate a false statement from a truthful statement. It's always up to the person interpreting the results to decide. Needless to say, that method has many flaws. In fact it is perfectly legal to hire a person to give you a lie detector test and declare every statement you made was truthful.

There are several methods of fooling lie detectors. William Poundstone describes them in his book "Big Secrets".

Lie detectors have been shown to be increasingly less accurate for events in the distant past. They rely on an emotional response to a recollection of an event. As the person's memory of the event becomes dimmer and foggier, they cause less of a measurable physical reaction when recalled. In fact one of the techniques to prepare to fool a lie detector is to repeatedly recall an event until it no longer causes a reaction.

Lie detectors are designed to detect lies. They're among the least reliable methods to find truth.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users