Do lie detectors really work?.........................................................?

Question

If I was asked "where do you live?" and I ask myself a question such as where would you rather be? and I answer my own question - "makuda matada!"; would I registar a lie?.

If I stood in my own heart and answered the question "where do you live" I would only produce heart if I didn't comit a sin such as lying.

Does this prove the law of God is greater than the law of man?.

Answer 1

"Does this prove the law of God is greater than the law of man?"

Gary Gilmore, executed for murder in 1977 took a lie detector test to prove his innocence but the findings were not permissible in court. He aced the test, despite being guilty as hell. Asked later how he beat the polygraph, he said "Easy. I lied." All it means to beat a polygraph is you're a liar. A habitual and practised liar without conscience for being so.

I have no doubt a great many clergy, religios and bible bashers could beat a lie detector test. "Easy."

Answer 2

I have no idea what you are saying there, but I'll do the best I can...

Lie detectors work by detecting small, nearly unobservable changes in human physiology that occur when someone tells a porky. Your breathing rate will increase slightly, your pulse quickens, you begin to sweat and you start to think from a different area of your brain (the creative bit).

Now, some people are able to beat the lie detector by training themselves to be perfectly calm during questioning. How exactly they do it, I have no idea. You also find that some psycho and sociopaths will have varied results on lie detectors because of their warped sense of truth and reality. I don't think that this means any law is greater than the law of man, just that some people are clever (or crazy) enough to beat a simple test.

Answer 3

I've heard that lie detectors can give a general idea about whether someone is telling the truth or not but the results are not always reliable which, I guess, is why British police don't use them.

Have a look at http://www.truthtest.net/

Answer 4

A lie detector machine, or polygraph, works by measuring the heart rate of the person who's connected to it. When a person lies their heart rate generally changes. However the machine can be fooled by a person who knows how to control their reactions when they lie.

Answer 5

It's true that it's difficult to tell when someone is lying if they don't know themselves whether they are lying or not. I imagine a lie detector doesn't work very well on some crazy schizo who believes his own delusions.

Answer 6

Your question makes no sense at all, sorry.

Lie detectors, physical, real world ones, measure heart rate and galvanic skin response (which measures the flow of electricity through your body).......so they're pretty accurate if you use them on someone who doesn't know how to get around one.

As for your lie detector.........I have no clue

Answer 7

a polygraph works by measuring several variables in the subject. heart rate, respiratory rate, skin conductivity. so if you are unfamiliar with it than yes, it can be rather effective. however it is beatable and sometime(although rare) just flat our fallible. several agencies and armed forces have been training their people to beat them for years. they are also inadmissible in a court of law.

Answer 8

yes

A polygraph (informally referred to as a "lie detector") is a device which measures and records several physiological variables such as blood pressure, heart rate, respiration and skin conductivity while a series of questions are being asked, in an attempt to detect lies. The above measurements are posited to be indicators of anxiety that accompanies the telling of lies. Thus, measured anxiety is equated with telling untruths. However, if the subject exhibits anxiety for other reasons, a measured response can result in unreliable conclusions.

A polygraph test is also known as a psychophysiological detection of deception (PDD) examination. The original polygraph was invented by John A. Larson.


typical polygraph starts with a pre-test interview designed to establish a connection (or find a scientific control) between the tester and the testee and to gain some preliminary information which will later be used for "Control Questions " or C (see below). Then the tester will explain the polygraph, emphasizing that it can detect lies and that it is important to answer truthfully. Then a "stim test" is often conducted: the testee is asked to deliberately lie and then the tester reports that he was able to detect this lie. Then the actual test starts. Some of the questions asked are "Irrelevant " or IR ("Are you 35 years old?"), others are "probable-lie" Control Questions that most people will lie about ("Have you ever stolen money?") and the remainder are the "Relevant Questions " or R the polygrapher is really interested in. The different types of questions alternate. The test is passed if the physiological responses during the probable-lie control questions are larger than those during the relevant questions. If this is not the case, the tester attempts to elicit admissions during a post-test interview ("Your situation will only get worse if we don't clear this up"). These admissions are the main goal of the test.

While some people believe that polygraph tests are reliable, there is little scientific evidence to buttress this claim. For example, while some claim the test to be accurate in 70% - 90% of the cases, critics charge that rather than a "test", the method amounts to an inherently unstandardizable interrogation technique whose accuracy cannot be established. Critics also argue that even given high estimates of the polygraph's accuracy a significant number of subjects (e.g. 10% given a 90% accuracy) will appear to be lying, and would unfairly suffer the consequences of "failing" the polygraph. It is interesting to note that, so far, no scientific study has been published that offers convincing evidence of the validity of the polygraph test. Polygraph tests have also been criticized for failing to trap known spies such as Aldrich Ames, who passed three polygraph tests while spying for the Russian government.

Several countermeasures designed to pass polygraph tests have been described, the most important of which is never to make any damaging admissions. Additionally, several techniques can be used to increase the physiological response during control questions. In an interview, Ames was asked how he passed the polygraph test. His response was that when told he was to be polygraphed he asked his Soviet handlers what to do, and was quite surprised that their advice was simply to relax when being asked questions, which he did.

The polygraph machine was tested for the first time on February 2, 1935 when Leonard Keeler conducted the experiment in Portage, Wisconsin. They were often used by employers in an attempt to screen out dishonest job applicants, but this practice was outlawed for most private employers in the US in 1988. Some US Federal Government agencies, most notably, the CIA, still apply routine lie detector tests to screen all employees despite the extreme damage that the CIA's reliance on the polygraph in the Ames case did to national security.

[edit]
Admissibility of polygraphs in Court
While lie detector tests are commonly used in police investigations in the US, no defendant or witness can be forced to undergo the test. In United States v. Scheffer (1998) [1], the US Supreme Court left it up to individual jurisdictions whether polygraph results could be admitted as evidence in court cases.

In most European jurisdictions, polygraphs are not considered reliable evidence and are not generally used by police forces. However, in any lawsuit, an involved party can order a psychologist to write an opinion based on polygraph results to substantiate the credibility of its claims. The party must bear the expense themselves, and the court weighs the opinion like any other opinion the party has ordered. Courts themselves do not order nor pay for polygraph tests. An example of this practice would be a rape trial in which the defendant tries to fortify his testimony by submitting himself to a polygraph session.

In Canada, the use of a polygraph is sometimes employed in screening employees for government organizations. However, in the 1987 decision of R. v. Béland, the Supreme Court of Canada rejected the use of polygraph results as evidence in court.

[edit]
Use with sexual offenders
According to antipolygraph.org, a web site skeptical about the polygraph, the polygraph was used at a state facility attached to the Joliet Correctional Center to help decide whether to free offenders [2].

[edit]
History
Similar techniques were used in the ancient times. For instance, in West Africa persons suspected of a crime were made to pass a bird's egg to one another. If a person broke the egg, then he or she was considered guilty. In Ancient China, during a prosecutor's speech the suspect held a handful of rice in his or her mouth. Since salivation was believed to cease at times of emotional anxiety, the person was considered guilty if by the end of that speech the rice remained dry.

Answer 9

lie detectors dont work like that.
they ask you a series of questions, you answer yes or no. then they start the test and ask you the questions again and monitor your pulse, heartbeat, respiration et al.

Answer 10

uh no, they test your nerves, heartbeat, ect. Only a few people can beat a lie detector test knowingly.