XPost: alt.religion.scientology   
   From: spacetraveler2000@hotmail.com   
      
   "Ramona"  wrote in message   
   news:1120743524.012301.157380@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...   
   >   
   >   
   > Spacetraveler wrote:   
   > > "Kevin"  wrote in message   
   > > news:barbaraschwarz-268DCA.07000407072005@news.charter.net...   
   > > > In article <8n7ze.141643$dP1.494693@newsc.telia.net>,   
   > > >  "Spacetraveler"  wrote:   
   > > >   
   > > > > You are missing the point here. It automatically means that   
   psychiatry   
   > > per   
   > > > > this admits being involved with premeditated fraud. As there is not   
   > > > > scientific support for their claim.  It is in fact very odd that you   
   are   
   > > > > unable to perceive this. It's a sign of a fixated mind that focuses   
   > > solely   
   > > > > on that which supports one's own case, and is unable to perceive the   
   > > actual   
   > > > > reality of what is happening.   
   > > > >   
   > > > > Spacetraveler   
   > > >   
   > > > The e-meter is a hoax. No Scientific support for the claim it really   
   > > > does anything ( I know what it does, I do indeed have an electronics   
   > > > degree)   
   > >   
   > > The E-meter is not the issue discussed here!!!!  Deviation tactics   
   noted!!!!   
   > >   
   > > >   
   > > > It's a simple lie detector circuit. And it doesn't work well.   
   >   
   > You are correct and the scientific evidence supports that statement.   
   > >   
   > > Various talkshows in US use it, don't they. They appear to have a very   
   high   
   > > percentage of accuracy, which is stated in these shows.  Man, you talk   
   like   
   > > a chicken without a head...   
   >   
   > Speaking of chickens without heads, reread what you just stated about   
   > yourself.  You have just said that you believe polygraphs must be true   
   > because talk shows state that they have a high percentage of accuracy.   
      
   That's YOUR interpretation, which in fact is an inaccurate interpretation.   
      
   > LOLROFLMAO!!!!! And you are concerned about MY research????!!!  Wow.  I   
   > really need to get my nose out of the books and watch more Jerry   
   > Springer.  Oh little did I know of his scientific background.   
   >   
   > Did you know that polygraph false positives fall along racial lines?   
   > Yes, that's correct.  Blacks seem to produce more false positives than   
   > whites.  Did you also know that there are companies that train people   
   > to pass polygraphs but that loads of free information is easily   
   > available to the layman?  This would suggest that the lie detector is   
   > for crap as a useful tool.   
   >   
   > You probably don't want to do any non-talk show research...focusing on   
   > the real stuff might give you a headache.  Real scientist will use   
   > words like reliability, validity, and scientific theory (dang that   
   > keeps coming up) and those words have specific meanings in science that   
   > are NOT treated the same way as layman definitions.   
      
   You are missing the point here. You choose an interpretation simply lead by   
   your eagerness to find wrong with me.  A real scientist would consider   
   alternate options...  repeatedly you DO NOT consider alternate options...   
      
   Spacetraveler   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)