Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

A thought that's been running through my head.

26 replies to this topic
Assailant
  • Assailant

    Snitch

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 03 Apr 2010

#1

Posted 15 May 2010 - 06:12 PM

Hey people, I've been thinking for a while about lie detectors. You know on these shows like Jeremy Kyle where they have lie detector tests like "Have you ever slept with another woman besides your wife?" - I was thinking ways to bypass a lie detector test. The thought I had is what if you were to ask yourself a question straight after they ask you a question. For instance, if you did cheat on your wife, and you wanted the answer to be no, and that you were telling the truth - you could ask yourself "Are you a female?" [If you were a male, and vice versa]. This way you could kinda 'go-over' the question you were asked, due to you asking yourself a question that you are genuinely telling the truth to.

I dunno, it probably wouldn't work. Who knows.. What do you guys think?

Xboxless
  • Xboxless

    Gangsta

  • Andolini Mafia Family
  • Joined: 10 Oct 2007
  • United-States

#2

Posted 15 May 2010 - 06:15 PM

That would take an extreme amount of self-deception.......which is probably hard....

I know I have heard one way where you squeeze your butthole, apparently that messes with it....like the blood pressure or something.

Ad Rem
  • Ad Rem

    Trick

  • The Precinct
  • Joined: 08 Nov 2009

#3

Posted 15 May 2010 - 06:17 PM Edited by Ad Rem, 15 May 2010 - 06:22 PM.

Apparently you can throw it off by clenching your anus.

Edit: Yeah, that thing above. So basically, it merely measures your body's reactions to the questions, which is an inaccurate way of detecting a lie as you may be getting nervous even if you aren't lying, or alternatively not have any reaction and easily lie your way through the test. I hear they did an experiment on some convicted, self-confessed murderer, he passed with flying colors. Yes, I saw that one Penn & Teller episode.

Assailant
  • Assailant

    Snitch

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 03 Apr 2010

#4

Posted 15 May 2010 - 06:19 PM

I've never heard of that, but I could see how it would work, as vile as it may be.

Maybe someone like Derren Brown could ask himself another question after he got asked.

DJSmurf2009
  • DJSmurf2009

    V Hunter

  • Members
  • Joined: 27 Jan 2009

#5

Posted 15 May 2010 - 06:23 PM

Probably wouldnt work as its more to do with the sub-conscience.. Even if you asked yourself a question that would throw the lie detector your way straight after they ask the Question, Thier question would still be in your sub-conscience and would show through your nerves, eye movements and heart-rate i suppose...

Mark
  • Mark

  • Feroci
  • Joined: 15 Aug 2002
  • United-Kingdom

#6

Posted 15 May 2010 - 06:24 PM

Supposedly another way is to do something that's taxing on your brain and slightly stressful, like trying to do arithmetic in your head as fast as you possibly can. It supposedly makes the machine think you're lying to everything, including the truthful parts used for calibration.

860
  • 860

    🇯🇲🇯🇲🇯🇲

  • The Yardies
  • Joined: 21 Dec 2008
  • Jamaica
  • April Fools Winner 2015

#7

Posted 15 May 2010 - 06:37 PM

Well you could answer the opposite of what you'd want to and make yourself feel nervous, thus making your truth seem like a lie.

Grae
  • Grae

  • Members
  • Joined: 10 Nov 2007
  • None

#8

Posted 15 May 2010 - 09:42 PM Edited by Supreme., 16 May 2010 - 08:33 AM.

Think I'd have a bit of an advantage, as I've a somewhat 'detached' personality. It's no bother at all to put truly serious problems entirely out of my mind and remain perfectly relaxed in a neutral/good mood.

Maybe I'd make a decent serial killer? ph34r.gif

CryptReaperDorian
  • CryptReaperDorian

    Boss

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Aug 2007

#9

Posted 15 May 2010 - 09:51 PM

According to Beavis & Butthead, holding your breath can throw off a lie detector.

Tchuck
  • Tchuck

    Grey Gaming

  • Feroci
  • Joined: 20 Dec 2002
  • Japan

#10

Posted 15 May 2010 - 10:24 PM

Always remember one of George Costanza's pearl of wisdom:
"It's not a lie if you believe in it."

Shylock
  • Shylock

    Gedachtnisse sind genau das.

  • The Precinct
  • Joined: 13 Aug 2007

#11

Posted 16 May 2010 - 03:09 AM

Thumb tack in your shoe. When they ask you the baseline questions, such as your name, age etc etc. you press down on the thumb tack. The pain raises your neurological senses and heart rate/blood pressure. Then when they ask you the question you need to lie about, don't press on the tack.

Some of the more advanced polygraphs detect pupil dilation, temperature and brain activity, so as they get more scientific they become harder to beat.

ghost of delete key
  • ghost of delete key

    chrome vanadium

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 27 Dec 2003
  • United-States

#12

Posted 16 May 2010 - 03:30 AM

Polygraph tests are incredibly easy to cheat if you know how. The basic idea is to skew the response to the control questions so that the rest is essentially meaningless.

That's one of the reasons why as a general rule they're not admissible as evidence.

Slynke
  • Slynke

    "Forum Cool Guy"

  • $outh $ide Hoodz
  • Joined: 09 Mar 2002
  • Mars

#13

Posted 16 May 2010 - 03:41 AM

For the control questions, elevate your heart rate so your range is wide. Then just relax yourself for the rest of the questions, especially when lying.

Polygraphs are EXTREMELY easy to fool, which is why results are never submitted in a court case.

*EDIT*
Hahahaha, you posted almost identically to me! tounge.gif

ghost of delete key
  • ghost of delete key

    chrome vanadium

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 27 Dec 2003
  • United-States

#14

Posted 16 May 2010 - 03:46 AM

Either you took 11 minutes to write that, or you didn't read the whole thread.

Either way, tounge2.gif

Slynke
  • Slynke

    "Forum Cool Guy"

  • $outh $ide Hoodz
  • Joined: 09 Mar 2002
  • Mars

#15

Posted 16 May 2010 - 08:18 AM

I smokes alot of weed biggrin.gif

jules_winnfield
  • jules_winnfield

    Player Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 Sep 2005

#16

Posted 16 May 2010 - 09:50 AM

Lie detectors are complete BULLsh*t anyway.

SagaciousKJB
  • SagaciousKJB

    Captain tl;dr

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 21 Jun 2003
  • None
  • Ban Roulette Winner 2016

#17

Posted 16 May 2010 - 02:03 PM

QUOTE (ghost of delete key @ May 15 2010, 20:30)
Polygraph tests are incredibly easy to cheat if you know how. The basic idea is to skew the response to the control questions so that the rest is essentially meaningless.

That's one of the reasons why as a general rule they're not admissible as evidence.

I bet it still takes practice to beat someone that has been doing it for a long time.

Though, you know the basic set of questions in the beginning they tell you to "lie" for and the ones to "tell the truth" for. Well, I've always heard that if when you lie, you clench your anus, or flex your abdominal muscles, or just do something big, the reading will be much higher than just a simple lie, and when you lie further on in the polygraph test it does not show as high of peaks. Of course, the butthole clenching theory comes back into play because if the lie still makes it spike it'd be a little suspicious, but I guess the idea is if you can then keep your butthole clenched the entire time they won't notice.

Well, the problem is that I think clenching your asshole for a long interrogation is probably going to be kind of noticeable to a trained professional.

So, I've always had the idea, why not a thumb tack in your shoe?

Every time they make you lie for the benchmark, slap your toe down on the tack fairly hard. Hard enough to wear it smarts for the whole interview. Then when they're not seeing these huge spikes like they saw when you were basically stabbing yourself, the lies also won't look suspicious at all compared to the background noise the pain in your toe is causing.

I doubt that anyone would be able to pick out something as natural as pain, and I don't think it would be suspicious, because they could easily just say, "I was a little nervous when we started" or something to play it off.


Anyway...

Polygraphs just measure skin responses, blood pressure, hearth and breathing rhythm and all that fancy jazz. The idea isn't really that there's a specific bodily reaction for everyone that the machine detects as lying, they always have to rely on pretty subjective "benchmarking" that isn't much more sophisticated that playing poker.

However, law enforcement still uses them as a tool to go after suspects, even if the evidence isn't acceptable in court, because it just so happens that catching someone's bluff is a useful skill that poker employs, and a polygraph is just basically a machine that kind of gives you a magnifying glass to observe way more about their "tells" than one could do with their eye.


Or can they?

I bet that poker players would be pretty apt at fooling polygraph tests. I wonder if any studies have been done...

3niX
  • 3niX

    Lazy idiot

  • Members
  • Joined: 28 Aug 2005

#18

Posted 16 May 2010 - 02:28 PM

Well...

Usually theres a skilled operator using the detector so any anomaly will not go unnoticed and asked about. Remember, these guys are mostly professionals who have done it so long that they can smell bullsh*t a mile away. They only rely on the readings as far as asking questions goes. Theyll decide by themselves whether you are lying or not.


The gameshows based on these tests are nonsense anyway... most of the time theyll just take translate the readings without any consideration to how the person actually behaves.

@Sag

I doubt most poker players would win the test. Sure, they can act numb at times but their main skill is in reading other people.

makeshyft
  • makeshyft

    Cyclop have 9 years

  • The Precinct
  • Joined: 14 Dec 2002
  • None

#19

Posted 16 May 2010 - 03:01 PM

All this stuff about thumb-tacks and clenching your asshole is a surefire way to prove that you're scared sh*tless about taking the test. The fluctuations and spikes caused by these methods are going to f*ck with your baseline, sure, but in a way which will show the examiner that you're up to something.

It will give you an anomalous reading that is not consistent with normal physiological responses, and you'll simply have to do the baseline questions over.

kevin2006rhs
  • kevin2006rhs

    host of delete key

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 30 Sep 2004

#20

Posted 16 May 2010 - 03:15 PM

QUOTE (makeshyft @ May 16 2010, 11:01)
It will give you an anomalous reading that is not consistent with normal physiological responses, and you'll simply have to do the baseline questions over.

If you can jimmy the baseline questions you f*ck up the control. If you focus on just f*cking up the easy gimme questions the rest of the questions, no matter how truthful you answer them, will mean sh*t. Its easier to botch the easy question than try and dance around the hard ones.

Its like a state trooper's radar gun. If it isn't calibrated correctly, its no use to him. People could be doing 90 and it shows 50, or visa versa.

Shylock
  • Shylock

    Gedachtnisse sind genau das.

  • The Precinct
  • Joined: 13 Aug 2007

#21

Posted 16 May 2010 - 04:10 PM

QUOTE (SagaciousKJB @ May 16 2010, 15:03)
QUOTE (ghost of delete key @ May 15 2010, 20:30)
Polygraph tests are incredibly easy to cheat if you know how. The basic idea is to skew the response to the control questions so that the rest is essentially meaningless.

That's one of the reasons why as a general rule they're not admissible as evidence.

I bet it still takes practice to beat someone that has been doing it for a long time.

Though, you know the basic set of questions in the beginning they tell you to "lie" for and the ones to "tell the truth" for. Well, I've always heard that if when you lie, you clench your anus, or flex your abdominal muscles, or just do something big, the reading will be much higher than just a simple lie, and when you lie further on in the polygraph test it does not show as high of peaks. Of course, the butthole clenching theory comes back into play because if the lie still makes it spike it'd be a little suspicious, but I guess the idea is if you can then keep your butthole clenched the entire time they won't notice.

Well, the problem is that I think clenching your asshole for a long interrogation is probably going to be kind of noticeable to a trained professional.

So, I've always had the idea, why not a thumb tack in your shoe?

Every time they make you lie for the benchmark, slap your toe down on the tack fairly hard. Hard enough to wear it smarts for the whole interview. Then when they're not seeing these huge spikes like they saw when you were basically stabbing yourself, the lies also won't look suspicious at all compared to the background noise the pain in your toe is causing.

I doubt that anyone would be able to pick out something as natural as pain, and I don't think it would be suspicious, because they could easily just say, "I was a little nervous when we started" or something to play it off.


Anyway...

Polygraphs just measure skin responses, blood pressure, hearth and breathing rhythm and all that fancy jazz. The idea isn't really that there's a specific bodily reaction for everyone that the machine detects as lying, they always have to rely on pretty subjective "benchmarking" that isn't much more sophisticated that playing poker.

However, law enforcement still uses them as a tool to go after suspects, even if the evidence isn't acceptable in court, because it just so happens that catching someone's bluff is a useful skill that poker employs, and a polygraph is just basically a machine that kind of gives you a magnifying glass to observe way more about their "tells" than one could do with their eye.


Or can they?

I bet that poker players would be pretty apt at fooling polygraph tests. I wonder if any studies have been done...

Is there an echo in this topic? catspider.gif

nerner
  • nerner

    OG

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 05 Jul 2008

#22

Posted 16 May 2010 - 04:26 PM

I always thought if you went through your questions so much that you knew off by heart what you wanted to say and were a good enough actor to be able to keep calm while answering the questions, polygraph tests were easily passed.

SagaciousKJB
  • SagaciousKJB

    Captain tl;dr

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 21 Jun 2003
  • None
  • Ban Roulette Winner 2016

#23

Posted 17 May 2010 - 02:55 AM

QUOTE (Shylock @ May 16 2010, 09:10)
QUOTE (SagaciousKJB @ May 16 2010, 15:03)
QUOTE (ghost of delete key @ May 15 2010, 20:30)
Polygraph tests are incredibly easy to cheat if you know how. The basic idea is to skew the response to the control questions so that the rest is essentially meaningless.

That's one of the reasons why as a general rule they're not admissible as evidence.

I bet it still takes practice to beat someone that has been doing it for a long time.

Though, you know the basic set of questions in the beginning they tell you to "lie" for and the ones to "tell the truth" for. Well, I've always heard that if when you lie, you clench your anus, or flex your abdominal muscles, or just do something big, the reading will be much higher than just a simple lie, and when you lie further on in the polygraph test it does not show as high of peaks. Of course, the butthole clenching theory comes back into play because if the lie still makes it spike it'd be a little suspicious, but I guess the idea is if you can then keep your butthole clenched the entire time they won't notice.

Well, the problem is that I think clenching your asshole for a long interrogation is probably going to be kind of noticeable to a trained professional.

So, I've always had the idea, why not a thumb tack in your shoe?

Every time they make you lie for the benchmark, slap your toe down on the tack fairly hard. Hard enough to wear it smarts for the whole interview. Then when they're not seeing these huge spikes like they saw when you were basically stabbing yourself, the lies also won't look suspicious at all compared to the background noise the pain in your toe is causing.

I doubt that anyone would be able to pick out something as natural as pain, and I don't think it would be suspicious, because they could easily just say, "I was a little nervous when we started" or something to play it off.


Anyway...

Polygraphs just measure skin responses, blood pressure, hearth and breathing rhythm and all that fancy jazz. The idea isn't really that there's a specific bodily reaction for everyone that the machine detects as lying, they always have to rely on pretty subjective "benchmarking" that isn't much more sophisticated that playing poker.

However, law enforcement still uses them as a tool to go after suspects, even if the evidence isn't acceptable in court, because it just so happens that catching someone's bluff is a useful skill that poker employs, and a polygraph is just basically a machine that kind of gives you a magnifying glass to observe way more about their "tells" than one could do with their eye.


Or can they?

I bet that poker players would be pretty apt at fooling polygraph tests. I wonder if any studies have been done...

Is there an echo in this topic? catspider.gif

Yes, a weird echo that elaborates on ideas in greater depth.

Lol Nah, seriously, I missed you mentioning it.


Also, do you know who came up with that idea? I thought I did, but if you know about it, must have seen it in a movie or something.


kevin and makeshyft,

You're both somewhat right.

See, I think the whole idea behind the thumbtack deal is that the anomalous readings will simply make it seem like you're nervous. Who wouldn't be nervous while taking a polygraph, but the question is whether or not the examiner can tell the difference between someone who is nervous and someone who is in pain.

So, if a polygraph examiner is smart enough to know the difference between someone in pain, someone clenching their asshole and someone who is nervous, I'm not so sure that any kind of measures are going to help too much. People talk about serial killers that passed it with flying colors, but I think that's probably a subconscious reasoning on their behalf... I mean, I doubt someone heinous enough to kill dozens of people is going to have the same responses to lying as sane people like us would have.


However since the whole thing is still so subjective, they shouldn't be admissible--and it's a good thing they're not.

makeshyft
  • makeshyft

    Cyclop have 9 years

  • The Precinct
  • Joined: 14 Dec 2002
  • None

#24

Posted 17 May 2010 - 02:56 AM

QUOTE (kevin2006rhs @ May 17 2010, 01:15)
QUOTE (makeshyft @ May 16 2010, 11:01)
It will give you an anomalous reading that is not consistent with normal physiological responses, and you'll simply have to do the baseline questions over.

If you can jimmy the baseline questions you f*ck up the control. If you focus on just f*cking up the easy gimme questions the rest of the questions, no matter how truthful you answer them, will mean sh*t. Its easier to botch the easy question than try and dance around the hard ones.

Its like a state trooper's radar gun. If it isn't calibrated correctly, its no use to him. People could be doing 90 and it shows 50, or visa versa.

The point I was trying to make is that humans will generally give the similar readings when setting a baseline. If you're jamming your toe down on a thumb-tack, the readings are going to be spiking all over the place, and the examiner will know you're up to something.

It's not about f*cking up the control. The examiner won't accept that as a control, because he/she will know that you have tried to f*ck with it. You'll just be searched and forced to answer baseline questions again.

sofa_king
  • sofa_king

    C20-H25-N3-O

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 08 Nov 2004

#25

Posted 17 May 2010 - 03:20 AM

Ahh, polygraphs, the alchemy of interrogation methods. Pretty much the only use for them was they
occasionally added some credibility to peoples lies. East to beat, but it takes a highly trained individual to catch
you cheating, not necessarily a tactical advantage for those administrating.

They were working on a cat-scan type of machine that monitored brain waves but even that was found
easy to manipulate. Face it, lie detectors do not exist.

Slynke
  • Slynke

    "Forum Cool Guy"

  • $outh $ide Hoodz
  • Joined: 09 Mar 2002
  • Mars

#26

Posted 17 May 2010 - 03:30 AM



I guess Part 3 got removed, find it yourself

Polygraphs are BULLSH*T! Now stfu sly.gif

TheBruceter
  • TheBruceter

    Li'l G Loc

  • Members
  • Joined: 22 Nov 2004

#27

Posted 18 May 2010 - 10:40 AM

QUOTE (Tchuck @ May 15 2010, 22:24)
Always remember one of George Costanza's pearl of wisdom:
"It's not a lie if you believe in it."

I think this would work. If you convince yourself that much you didn't do it, and not think of it on the day, you could possibly pass.

I know someone that forgets that he's lying.. lol Still bullsh*ts and is calm as anything, even although he told me the truth.. (doubt he'd pass the test though)

Its all about your nerves. Be calm and answer lies positivly and i doubt it will show. I have wondered the same thing when i watch that pishy show.

I hate JK. He can be all on one persons side but see as soon as it comes out they smoke dope, he's the bad and evil one thats cause this or that to happen. He was an alky and can't possibly turn things round like that >_<




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users