From Our Forum: What If Justin Smeja Failed The Polygraph Exam?


Here's something to think about for you skeptics. It is said that lie detectors can be fooled and that the 99 percent accuracy level means nothing. Justin Smeja recently beat a Limestone Polygraph instrument, one of the most accurate ones out there, and it's used by the government. Even after Justin's polygraph results showed that he was telling the truth, some are still claiming that lie detectors are flawed and that anyone can fool a polygraph.

Here's the question that was posted on our forum earlier today: What if Justin failed the polygraph exam? Would skeptics accept the polygraph results and say that they knew he was lying all along?

SasquaiNation posted the following statement:

Let me flip this scenario around if I may. What if Justin failed miserably on the polygraph? I wonder how many would still hold their view of polygraph testing and the machine's accuracy. I'm willing to bet that almost nobody would say "but wait, Justin could be telling the truth because these types of tests are known to be unreliable."

Is it the man or the machine that people are having difficulty with? Something to ponder.

Comments

  1. Great post and thank you. So true

    ReplyDelete
  2. If if's and but's were candy and nuts we would all have a merry christmas!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ...it would be christmas 365 days a year!

      Delete
  3. Someone posted an interesting fact regarding the lie detector subject, that BOTH Heronymous and Patterson passed their examinations. Yet, they cant both be telling the truth.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That was what 10 Years ago? Technology has changed much

      Delete
    2. Was't Bob h a drunk if so there's the answer to that one.

      Delete
    3. Not really making an argument either way, just an observation.

      Delete
    4. bob's test was for a tv show, i know they used to fake those all the time for television

      Delete
  4. The skeptics would be patting themselves on the back had he failed and they would be the ones pointing out how the newer polygraphs are so much more accurate.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hey gnrfan, did you notice that the topic of this thread was a question addressed to skeptics? Why not wait for a skeptic to reply then criticize (or not criticize) their response rather then pulling a huge straw man and criticizing what you imagine skeptics might say?

      Delete
    2. I diddn't mean for my comment to sound like I was talking about all skeptics because I wasn't. I was talking about the ones that for no reason at all feel the need to constantly say Bigfoot doesn't exist,just to get a reaction and call annyone that thinks they do retarded.I have no problem with smart skeptics that can make a point without being an asshole about it.

      Delete
    3. Bigfoot doesn't exist. Really, it doesn't exist.

      Delete
    4. Oh yeah, I almost forgot, you're retarded too.

      Delete
  5. I've been skeptical of Smeja's claims from day 1, but the positive polygraph result does lend credence to his story. It's a start at least. Let's see what the DNA shows now.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. See that is how to be a reasonable skeptic.

      Delete
    2. Exactly 8:23. The polygraph is merely one piece placed in a much larger puzzle, but now we're having some fun, huh? Can't wait for the Sykes report!

      Delete
    3. Agreed to all who posted. I wanted to believe him after listening to him, but passing this helps push my stance over to a more positive side. If the DNA from the sample comes back unknown primate or homo "something", then even better.

      Question to Shawn: When the sample was collected, was there enough "eyes on the ground" to make sure something was not planted?

      Delete
    4. It would not matter if it was planted. You cannot fake DNA, so it is what it is. With that much material they can get a full nuDNA and the whole genome. Then we will see what we have in fine detail, though it may take years to look at all the important parts of the DNA, similar to the way they are doing with the human genome. There is a lot of data to sift through, even using a computer. The good news is there will be no doubt of how it compares to all so far sequenced primates.

      Delete
  6. I'm fully confident that he shot 2 of the animals some of us so desperately crave for. I know for a fact the samples are part of Dr. Ketchum's study and that it has been sent to various other labs as well.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You know it "for a fact" and yet Melba claims Smeja's sample is NOT in her study. Which is it?

      Delete
    2. Ketchum never said she didn't have smeja's sample, what the hell are you talking about? she's bragged about it as one of the major samples in her study.

      me, I don't care what Ketchum thinks as I'm excited Smeja, Bart C and another fellow have come forward about having the flesh and boots in two labs and are apparently going to share the whole enchilada. BTW, I think that says more about Smeja then the polygraph and people aren't even noticing that little storyline.

      Delete
  7. First off there are no real skeptics that post here.
    Second the polygraph discussion has virtually been nullified between the pretend skeptics and who they call bleevers.

    Alleged Bigfoot eyewitnesses describing detailed encounters have passed lie detector tests. I don't recall on any forum "bleevers" using that fact as proof or strong evidence that Bigfoot exists (as well they shouldn't), but I have seen pretend skeptics holding up Bob H's lie detector tests as some sort of validation that he was in the P/G suit.

    My point is, if one side can't use it the other can't either. I think they're basically meaningless, especially when debating Bigfoot.


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. When are you going to quit dicking around and just kill yourself already? All one has to do to be skeptical of big foot is to doubt Bigfoot's existence. You have absolutely no argument against skeptic's arguments so you continually try to claim that those who don't agree with you secretly do agree with you and that anyone who doesn't believe in Sasquatch “isn't a real skeptic”. “you really agree with me” is not an argument. You're obviously some sad, fat ass, prick who has nothing better to do then collect workers compensation, gain weight, troll Bigfoot websites, and wait for the inevitable coronary to put you out of your misery.

      Delete
    2. The closet bleever 11:32 doth protest too much.

      Delete
    3. ^^^^
      Take that nonsense back to JREF please.

      Delete
    4. @ 12:09
      I don't think this place was setup for you to look for dates.

      Delete
    5. I would like to point out that a James Randi follower would be highly unlikely to use the word gay in a derogatory sense as James Randi is a fag and his followers are all fags or fag sympathizers.

      Delete
  8. All a lie detecter test at best can do is prove the subject THINKS he is telling the truth, doesn't mean it IS the truth big difference

    However...I didn't believe him at first but after reading a lot on him and watching the videos and such I am starting to think MAYBE he IS telling the truth...I'll wait for some, dam ANY DNA to sway me one way or the other

    ReplyDelete
  9. C'MON GUYZ!! LEAVE JUSTIN ALONE.. HE HAS DONE EVERYTHING ANYONE HAS ASKED OF HIM AND YOU GUYZ STILL GIVE HIM SHIT!! WHAT MORE CAN HE DO TO SATISFY Y'ALL?! THE MAN KILLED TWO SASQUATCHES, GAVE SAMPLES, PASSED TWO LIE DETECTORS..GET ON BOARD AND LETS MOVE ON ALREADY!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Um, dude, you seem to have left your caps lock on.

      Delete
  10. Justin sure makes the whole mountain man outdoors man seem sexy. He is much better looking then a few of his fb pictures make him out to be

    ReplyDelete
  11. Lie detectors are not reliable so it doesnt matter what they say or whether you are a sceptic or a believer they cant be used in isolation to prove things. Physical evidence is required, not rumors about evidence, actual evidence. When there is some i will be a happy and hopeful sceptic

    Virgil_caine

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. REALLY, polygraphs are not reliable huh? Were you homeschooled? They are MOST DEFINITELY RELIABLE!!! Virgil_caine you shouldn't make such comments because they make you sound so ignorant....you have no idea what you are talking about. Do some intelligent research before you speak foolish one!!!

      Delete
  12. The fact that there has been hundreds & hundreds of sightings of a strange bipedal creature is actual evidence.I can't even understand the argument that someone will believe in something when there's actual proof. Who wouldn't. Oh wait a skeptic wouldn't.It's like when hundreds of people witness a murder & they say the alleged killer.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So the fact that there have been hundreds and hundreds of purported sightings of ghosts means that ghosts exist? When are you going to learn that “hundreds &hundreds” of lies do not equal a truth. The number of witnesses does not matter if the witnesses are wrong.

      Delete
    2. @ 11:46

      Are you pretending to be a skeptic ?

      Delete
    3. @ 12:00

      Are you pretending not to retarded?

      Delete
    4. I had a "ghost" ruin a year of my life.So now i'm a liar & all the people that witnessed it are liars. you make me sick. If it makes you feel safer at night to tell yourself that things the people don't understand don't exist then go ahead.I can only hope a worm like you gets choked in the middle of night like i did & you have no one to turn to because everyone thinks you are lying.

      Delete
    5. Ha Ha! You just said that you believe in ghosts thereby proving yourself to be retarded! Why would you do that? Are you secretly some sort of reverse-troll who's trying to make the footers look stupid by pretending to be one of them then saying retarded things?

      Delete
    6. Actually it was the truth.That's why i believe in bigfoot because i've already seen things that smart people like you claim don't exist.

      Delete
    7. Ha Ha! You just said I was smart! You really are are a reverse-troll! That’s fucking awesome dude, and a good strategy. With me attacking them as a skeptic and you bringing them down from the inside we'll demoralize the crap out of them, and then maybe they'll finally give up on this whole “Bigfoot DNA” hoax.

      Delete
    8. I don't even know what a troll or a reverse troll is.Make sure to confirm with your mommy that ghosts don't exist as she tucks you in.

      Delete
    9. Coming to “Bigfoot Evidence” and saying that you don't know what a troll is is like going to a Britney Spears concert and saying that you don't know what a stank hoe is. You're just lying through your teeth.

      Delete
    10. Above comments: same anon, different personalities.

      Delete
    11. Nope. two different people. one telling the truth & one ignorant skeptic.

      Delete
    12. I find it amuses that just because the technology has yet to be invented to accurately Identify Beings of spirt "Ghosts" that one assumes they are not real.
      “hundreds &hundreds” of lies :
      Yes when we have actual cases that are unexplained. So you as the Jerk Skeptic explain the cases that NO one can give a logical explanation for.
      We know so little about the "afterlife" and our own planet and our own "mind" that to just go well they aren't real is just silly in my opinion.
      Like the one person said It helps you sleep at night then fine but don't bash others who have had experiences that prove to them of other natural and paranormal life.

      Delete
    13. Yeah, you just keep talking CmcMillan. You're totally not making yourself look like a raging flat earthier and religious nut at all.

      Delete
  13. Right heres the deal. I don't care how many fancy pseudoscience polygraphs smeja takes he is lying, it doesn't matter what the results come back like.

    No bigfoots were shot because bigfoot does not exist.

    How do I know? Logic and reason.

    See you in another 50 years when the DNA paper is still coming soon.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Justin passed his polymagraph test and that shows he's telling the truth. You're just a jealous hater, I hate mean people like you.

      Delete
    2. Skeptic...why the hell do you come here? If you know bigfoots do not exist, this site shouldn't even be a concern of yours.

      Delete
    3. I like to enlighten those who were not as fortunate to be blessed with a brain like mine

      Delete
    4. Different poster here..... You know, some of us just find the subject interesting. I don't feel any need to declare any position, I am neutral on Bigfoot. The truth is I just can't draw any conclusions.

      Delete
    5. @ 5:16

      There's no pulling rank in Bigfooting you dumbass. You're just another simpleton discussing your favorite and most likely cryptid pretending to be a skeptic because you think it makes you look like less of an asshole. I'll guarantee you're a longtimer too.

      Delete
  14. It's absolutely wonderful that he passed his test, even though it proves nothing. How about instead of proving a guy's not lying about his Bigfoot encounter, you prove Bigfoot exists? It's a win-win for all that believe in the big hairy galoot. One body, dead or alive, that's all we need. Why do I feel that I am asking for too much?

    ReplyDelete
  15. To address the original theme of this post personally polygraph testing is a variable tool and one that I am not prepared to accept on balance, physical evidence is the only thing that would allow me to believe this event happened and that evidence has to be unequivocally linked to the alleged shooting.

    And that is the problem how would we know that any sample submitted for DNA testing came from a specific event other then someones say so.
    This would be the problem for those advocating prosecution of Smeja in a court of law unless that court accepted the Polygraph test that is.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Lest we forget what George Costanza once taught us:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vn_PSJsl0LQ

    ReplyDelete
  17. Believe half of what you see...none of what you hear.

    ReplyDelete
  18. one of the questions was...'Is this entire 'Sierra Kills' story a hoax?' Answer - 'No'. Uh...what? Frankly, he could have driven to the location on the date in question and then made up the rest of the story...his answer would have been truthful. I looked over all the test questions and it does seem that many were formulated to give Smeja a favorable response. There are so many theories on how to pass these tests, so I have little faith in the results. Any electronic device and application can be manipulated.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You are a clueless nut ball lon

      Delete
    2. Your penis can be manipulated too Lon Strickler, does that mean you don't get your rock's off when you manipulate your's?

      Delete
  19. Regardless of it being true or false,some of you need to look up logical fallacies. You fail at argumentation automatically by using them. They disqualify you as a participant. Not calling anyone out specifically , but I know who some of the worst offenders are. If you want to make valid arguments they have to follow LOGIC. This is one of the biggest flaws in how many approach their assertions. If you want people to take you serious, take an entry level community college writing course and you can learn all about them. It's really not that complicated.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Samurai Chatter: Have you used it in the field?

BREAKING: Finding Bigfoot Production Company Seeks Filming Permit In Virginia

Bigfoot injured by a forest fire was taken away and hidden by the authorities, not even Robert Lindsay can top this story