Some organized fields of thought and belief show an almost fantastic propensity to
continue to exist even though all relevant evidence for their validity and legitimacy is
overwhelmingly non supportive.   Historians of the ancient world generally believe that a
number of the ancients correctly had some sort of idea that the earth was round.    The several voyages of Christopher Columbus, which first started in 1492, demonstrated that sailing westward for many weeks (i.e., months) did not result in falling off the edge of the earth.   A few years later, Nicholas Copernicus, expounded his theory that the earth revolved around the Sun.  Galileo, following Copernicus' thinking did some teaching that the world was round and that it, as well as the known planets revolved around the sun; however, he recounted his understandings, at least
to the public, when challenged by officials of the Inquisition.  Ferdinand Magellan, in the
early 1500s, clearly demonstrated that if one sailed in the same direction long enough, then
one would eventually arrive back to where one started; that it was possible to sail around
the world!   Map makers, for the past four or more centuries did increasingly depict the earth as a
globe.  The truly final proof that the world was indeed round was from the photographs of
the earth taken from outer space by cosmonauts/astronauts less than half a century ago. 
What more proof is needed to clearly established that the world is basically round (like a
ball) and that it is not merely some kind of flat surface.?

Belief in a Flat Earth

     Despite the proof, indicated in the above paragraph that the world is round, there
continues to exist an organization whose name is the Flat Earth Society (FES).  At first
blush, one would assume that this group’s name is some kind of jest like name to identify
a collection of persons who value the humor of being associated with completely
disproven ideas and the like.  Not so - the FES fully appears to represent a group of
people who truly believe what the name of their organization suggests.  Despite all of the
unquestionable and undisputed proof, that has existed literally for centuries, they continue
to believe, and to try to convince others, that the world is best characterized as being flat.

     If there are any disbelievers in what is stated in the immediately previous paragraph,
they are invited to go to the Web Site of the FES;  it can be found at: 
http://www.flat-earth.org/.  When one enters "flat earth society" into just about any popular
Internet search engine (e.g., such as Google), it imost surprisiing to note the large number of web sites show up.

Possible Explanations for Believing That the Earth is Flat

     With knowing that there are people in this world, as are the members of the FWS,
who expound a belief in something that has been proven over and over
again, for centuries, which is false and untrue, does this perhaps suggest that they are
psychotic (i.e., out of touch with reality).   Perhaps for a few of them, but I doubt that a
psychiatric examination would support that any such diagnosis would be warranted for the
remaining majority.  What then?  A few other possible explanations quickly come to mind. 
Perhaps, they are all liars and are only putting forth an idea that they are fully aware of is
false and is not scientifically supportable?   Again, such an explanation might fit a few of
them, but not the majority as one would then have to ask what would be their motivation
for wanting to publicly lie and to make oneself eligible for reticule.

     Still another possible explanation can be offered.  This one suggests that some type of
personal gain reinforcement is given to those who expound the idea that the world is flat. 
Such reinforcement may be in the form of financial revenue received as a result of
expressing such an unusual viewpoint.  Royalties received from magazines and books on
the subject might cause one to report a personal viewpoint that is consistent with what is
communicated in the publications.  Sales of T-shirts that show some association with the
Society might encourage a few T-shirt designers and sellers.  However, how many people
can be even imagined who might have some financial motivation for wanting to be known
as a believer in the idea that the world is flat?  Financial gain possibilities to be achieved by
being seen as a believer that the world is flat is hard to imagine and envision.

     No, the most likely explanation is that most of these people do truly believe what they
are expounding regarding characteristics of the world’s surface attributes.  Their belief
structure most likely is very similar to how and why people become and continue to
believe in the worlds’ religions.  People, in great numbers and for the length of their
lifetimes, truly believe in the teachings of their religions, all without the support of
scientific or other similar kinds of proof.  If this explanation is accepted, then it is easy to
understand how and why people can believe in systematic teachings that do not stand the
test of any proof, scientific or other.  When the American public is polled, it is my
understanding that better than 80% express a clear belief in a god or creator and further
indicate that they are not agnostics nor atheistic in what they believe.  There exists no
scientific proof of what they claim to believe - none is required.  A belief that the world is
flat, rather than spherical, can be understood to represent a sort of religious belief in the
reality of the world and of much of what is contains and how it operates.  In fact, the
religious officers of the Inquisition, the very ones who threatened Galileo, would have
explained that their belief in a flat world was founded in their religion.

     The explanation that is elaborated on in the above paragraph seems to clearly
correspond to much of what is expressed in the Web Sites that focus on the FES. 
These sites go into great detail that believing that the world is flat has very explicit Biblical
and other similar religious origins for so believing.  One would not be too far off to
consider these members of the FES as somewhat resembling a group of
religious thinkers who are perhaps more familiar to us; such a group are the Christian
‘Creationists’ who believe that the world is only a few thousand years old and that the
Biblical description of creation should be believed in a completely literal fashion.

Belief That the Polygraph Detects Lying and Deception

     Now very drastically we will change our focus to another organizational association of
people, the American Polygraph Association (ApA).  [I chose to use this abbreviation
as the APA abbreviation is reserved for the American Psychological Association,
a very different organization indeed!]   According to information that is found within
the ‘ApA’s Web Site (http://www.polygraph.org), that organizationwas founded
in 1967 and at the present time it claims about 2000 members.  One of the basic eligibility requirements for membership are that  the tentative member possess a bachelors
degree (in anything); also, that he/she has completed a 40-hour length polygraph training
program.  Seemingly, such training is usually completed in a four to six weeks length
course that is taught by any number of ApA approved training schools. 

     The practice of trying to use the polygraph paradigm to attempt to discern lying and
deception had its first primitive start just prior to World War I.  In many of the books
regarding polygraphy, history of the development of the polygraph is generally described
in detail.  However, for a quick ‘over-view’ of polygraphy history, one can quickly find
such in a recent publication by the present author (Stone, 2003), such is entitled as “The
Use of the Polygraph to Detect Lying and Deception:  The Hoax of the Century” and is
published in the Electronic Journal of ‘Forensic Psychonomics.  This particular article can
be found at:  http://www.home.earthlink.net/~lastone2/polygraphing.html.  At this point it is
assumed that the reader of the present article either already possesses an adequate
comprehension of the basic history of polygraph and of subsequent validity research that
has been reported in bona fide behavioral scientific journals and books for the past
half-century (but mostly in the past few decades) or that the reader has just read the article
which can be found using the above listed Internet address.

     It is therefore assumed that the reader of the present article is familiar with the fact that
the validity of using the polygraph to detect lying and deception, especially as employed in
evaluation of applicants for employment or some such occupational assignment, has been
scientifically studied, actually starting in the 1920s (e.g., Larson, 1923).  Most scientific investigations, in sume fashion, have focused upon validity and reliability of the polygraph,
when used to detect lying and deception.  It is believed that most such investigastions, that
have been completed, end up being published either in appropriate refereed journals or
in books.  In the past decade or so, just about all of the past published works, that can be
regarded as having been published in behavioral science journals, as well as in similarly
focused books, since the late 1800s, have been abstracted and do exists in readily available computerized data bases.  If one were to want toconduct a very extensive literature search
on any subject area within the very general and broad area regarded as behavioral sciences,
one can accomplish a very complete and exhaustive search rather easily and quickly.  ‘For example, the concept area associated with  the polygraph technique, and similar purposed other techniques, could be ‘searched’ quite completely.  If a group of appropriate experts were to be tasked with conducting a complete search of the existing published scientific literature pertaining to the polygraph, such would be a rather easy project to complete.

     The most recent major review of all of the scientific literature pertaining to the
polygraph, as used particularly in the security and applicant screening arena, was
completed only a couple of years ago.  The U.S. Congress ordered its sub-organization,
the Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) to review the medical and scientific literature
to determine whether use of the polygraph tests for screening had any worth (i.e., was the
technique valid?).  The OTA contracted with the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) to
carry out this tasking.  When completed the  NAS was to complete a report detailing its
findings and to submit the report to Congress. 

     It should be mentioned at this point, that in the past couple of decades, just about all
the major appropriate medical and scientific organizations have gone on record that they
were aware that a good deal of research had been conducted on the polygraph technique,
used to detect lying and deception, and that just about all of this research found that the
technique generally could be regarded as being invalid.  A number of reviews of the
literature, regarding the polygraph, had been completed and published prior to the one
recently accomplished by the NAS.  Interestingly enough, The U.S. Congress, about 20
years earlier, had ordered a very similar type review of the then existing literature that
pertained to polygraph validity.  At that time the study group (which was mainly composed
of a number of very well-known and -regarded psychologists) found that the polygraph
technique was not scientifically established; they stated in their summary, in a rather conservative fashion, that "polygraph tests to detect deceptiveness have been conducted for many years,
although their validity has not yet been established."

     Their findings have been described by the U.S. Congress, Office of Technology
Assessment (1983) and by Saxe, Dougherty and Cross (1985).  Dr. Saxs was the head of the 
group that was tasked by the OTA to conduct the literature review.   Also, in the past couple of
decades, several excellent books have appeared that also very competently reviewed the
existing scientific literature pertaining to use of the polygraph to detect lying and
deception.  It would seem that the one by Lykken (1980, 1998), which now has gone
through two editions, has been regarded by most as perhaps the best of the many.  Like the
findings expressed by the Congressionally tasked group of psychologists, back in 1983 and
by the NAS in 200 , the evaluations expressed in just about all of these books are very
similar.  One difference in these just mentioned sources is that Lykken has argued that one particular polygraph test, that generally and currently is known as the Guilty Knowledge Test (GKT) does appear to be a valid test, according to scientific standards.  However, what is really
interesting is that it appears that just about all polygraphers, who are mainly concerned with evaluation for security and pre employment purposes, do NOT make any use of the GKT test.  In fact, the GKT seems not to be a technique that is even taught in most of the existing polygraph schools.  As a side note, it might be mentioned that the writer of the present paper has developed a test for the possession of guilty, hidden or special knowledge, that is not based upon any measures of anxiety or emotional physiological changes, as does the polygraph, that has been titled as the SEPO (for serial position) test.  Interestingly, this SEPO test makes use of the GKT type paradigm for stimulus presentation.  Information regarding this SEPO test can be found at:  http://www.home.earthlink.net/~lastone2/sepo.html. 

     At this point, the reader would seem to be quite safe in assuming (i.e., believing) that
the polygraph technique used to detect lying and deception, especially in security and
applicant screening situations, has been consistently shown in real or bona fide scientific investigations to be an invalid test.  At this point, in the present paper, it would seem efficient to simply state that, in an emphatic fashion, up to the time of the NAS review of existing research literature regarding the validity of the polygraph technique, especially when employed for
security and pre employment evaluation purposes, using polygraph obtained information, should not be trusted and relied upon. Actually, Lykken (1998) said this even more stronger as well as more succiently, “it is madness for courts or federal police or security agencies to rely on polygraph results [p. 279].”  It can be easily believed that over half a century of scientific investigation has clearly shown that use of the polygraph to conduct evaluations focused on security and pre employment considerations is not to be considered as a valid methodology.

High Quality Reviews of The Research Literature Regarding Polygraphy

     How then, how do the couple of thousand polygraphers in the USA (most of whom are present  members of the ApA) respond to the fact that the scientific community, time and time again during the past half century, has clearly concluded that practice of polygraphy should be considered as
highly questionable in that there exists no credible empirical evidence for their test’s validity? 
Actually, the ApA itself has answered this question on the Internet (i.e.,http://www.polygraph.org.za/a_p_a__15_10_2002.htm) using only two pages.  About the only major points that the ApA mentioned seemed to be limited to three in number.  The first was that, in the published report, “the National Academy of Sciences did not conduct any new or original laboratory or field research on polygraph testing.  Their effort was confined to a review of theresearch on polygraph testing and in particular to that which pertains to (pre employment)
personnel screening.  In doing so, the ApA suggested that the academy relied on only 57 of the more than 1,000 research studies available.

    What the ApA suggested, in the immediately prior sentences, is entirely true.  However,
the NAS was specifically tasked by the U.S. Congress to conduct a review (and to not do
any new laboratory or field research) of existing already documented research hat was
focused upon use of the polygraph in security and pre employment personnel screening. 
There probably does exist “more than 1,000” already conducted and documented research
investigations that pertain, in a very general fashion, to the polygraph technique. 
However, only a fraction of these 1,000 studies are at all relevant to the focused tasking
that was given to the NAS, namely to review those studies that pertained to use of the
polygraph when used in security and pre employment settings.

    The second point raised by the ApA, in its Internet response, was that “the NAS report
does not adequately recognize the many successes of polygraph in both the criminal
specific arena and in National Security . . .”  No one can doubt that interrogations that
also include involvement and presence of polygraph machines can sometimes lead to
confessions of past wrong doing behavior made by the individual being questioned.  Police
interrogation or questioning, without any polygraph involvement, many times also can be
shown to produce many successes in both the criminal specific arena and perhaps also in
National Security investigations.  Making use of the thumb screw or any other such similar
purpose device and even more confession success could be easily expected to occur. 
When naive people, who are being questioned, are deceptively told that they are being evaluated by a lie detector device that is just about 100% accurate in detecting lying and deception, it is
not at all surprising that this deceptive ruse has some effect in an of itself - of course, it
increases the probability of getting a confession.  The author of the present paper has
elsewhere documented that he has, in conversations with at least 10 polygraphers, got them to agree that they believe that they could, many times, obtain self incriminating statements even
with their polygraph machines turned off.  Such would suggest that these polygraphers (all of whom were, or had been, employed by the U.S. Government as polygraphers) were rather aware
that what they were doing was conducting interrogations and that the main value of their
using a polygraph machine was that it helped ‘motivate’ the involved subject individuals
to provide self incriminating information.  With this said, it is possible that these polygraphers even held some not overly compelling ideas  that their use of the polygraph did actually help them discern lying and deception.  The present author particularly recalls a conversation with one very
experienced polygrapher in which the polygrapher made the comment that he believed he
could be successful in obtaining confessions even if he showed a machine that might be
mistaken as a polygraph, such as an EEG, EKG or even some electronic auto engine
testing  machine.  It is not easy to get polygraphers to say such things as most appear to be extremely defensive, when so questioned.  This should not be too surprising as after all most people are quite defensive regarding the validity and worth of their own occupations/professions. 
As a result most areresistant to any realization that what they do is based upon false and doubtful foundations. 

    The third point stated in the ApA’s Internet response to the report issued by the NAS
panel, that studied the literature on polygraphing, was that the panel was unable to suggest
any techniques, alternate to the polygraph, that did “outperform” or “show promise of
supplanting the polygraph in the near term.”   According to the understanding of the
writer of this paper, the U.S. Congress did not explicitly task the to-be-created NAS panel
to suggest a technique or techniques that might used in place of the polygraph in security
and pre employment screening matters.

     What then can be concluded from a reading and study of the ApA’s written response to
the NAS report on the validity of the polygraph method when employed in security and
employee screening usage?  It appears that the polygraph proponent people did, and what they have been doing for a number of years, almost totally ignore the overwhelming and ever-increasing scientific findings and ‘proofs’ that their prior made claims, that the polygraph technique is highlyvalid when used to uncover lying and deception, are clearly unfounded.

Possible Explanations for Believing That Polygraphy is Valid

     Why would the ApA polygraphers do this?  Let us raise the same possibleexplanations that were suggested in the early paragraphs, of the present paper, when discussing why the members of the FWS and the IFWS might believe as they apparently do.  Any suggestion that the polygraphers might be crazy or out of touch with reality cannot really even be tentatively entertained.  [However, the writer’s personal experience with being polygraphed by the several U.S. intelligence agency polygraphers who polygraphed him during his pre employment evaluation and during later employment, did suggest that one of the polygraphers may have been delusional.] The employment arenas in which most polygraphers are employed simply would not (or most certainly should not) allow anyone with floridly psychotic ideas or delusions to occupationally/professionally operate.  The fact is, it would seem, that those organizations that employ polygraphers believe, at least to some degree, that the polygrapher technique is valid or at best, useful.

     Another explanation is that polygraphers, in general, do fully recognize that their
occupation/profession is basically a hoax in that use of the polygraph to detect lying and
deception is simply not a valid technique.  It can be perhaps surmised that this explanation
fits a few polygraphers, but most likely, only a few.  If this explanation was true for the
majority of polygrapher persons (past and present, whose employment is polygraphy), the myth or hoax upon which polygraphing is based would be much more well known and understood; so
much so that the ApA most likely would not presently exist. 

      The personal gain explanation as to why persons, such as polygraphers, might
continue to want to practice their polygraphing occupation/profession seems to perhaps be
the best one when one wants to understand why polygraphers (at least those represented by
the ApA) seemingly choose to ignore that science repeatedly declares their occupation/profession to be without adequate and sufficient scientific basis.  Why do they not accept what science, over and over and for many years running, has discovered and concluded about the validity of what they seemingly do?  When one starts taking a look at the polygraphing
occupation/profession as a business, it appears to be a huge one that involves many
thousands of people, a number of training schools (some of the larger ones are within the Federal
Government), a large number of equipment manufacturers, as well as most of the U.S.
Federal agencies, bureaus, and the like.  State, county and city police organizations also
are in the ‘corner’ of the polygraphers.  If the USA were to suddenly and completely fully
accept the findings of science that come from study of the polygraph technique to detect
lying and deception and to cease all polygraphing activities, a very major economic
upheaval would take place.  Such an upheaval in our economy, now or at just about any time, 
would be looked upon, by our Country's political and business leaders, a something to clearly
want to avoid.

     One other explanation can be offered as to why the ApA and its members (also
included are the polygraphers who are not members of the ApA) continue to support the
theoretical bases underlying any kind of belief that the polygraph technique represents a
valid test for detecting lying and deception.  This one would simply assume that the
polygraphers’ belief in the validity of the polygraph technique is heavily based upon some
religious type supportive acceptance.  Somehow this suggested explanation simply seems
to not at all fit the situation as the polygraph is not known to have any supportive
references in the Old or New Testaments, the Koran, the Torah or any other known
religious texts.  The writer of this paper however was told, by a U.S. Air Force officer,
who had had a tour of duty in the Philippines, that under the disposed dictator, Ferdinand
Marcos, the then Philippines government employed only very attractive young women
who were truly virgins to be trained and used as polygraphers.  In some way, these very
special young women were believed to only be able to properly carry out their work if
they continued to maintain their virgin status; they were regarded in some way similar to
‘vestal virgins.’  This latter very limited example is about the only example that I can think of to offer as something that might go along with the idea that belief in the validity of polygraphing
may have some religious overtones.

Some Polygraphers Agree That Polygraphy is Not Valid

     It should be stated here that there exists a sometimes very vocal group who have been
polygraphers in the past, or who have worked closely with polygraphers, who eventually
recognized the false premises underlying what they had been doing in their polygraphy
activities.  Many, at this point, seem to be not at all reluctant to inform others (sometimes
with great threatening consequences to themselves and to their then previous careers).  A
very good example of someone in this now ‘knowledgeable’ group is Dr. Drew
Richardson, who was one of the FBI’s leading science experts.  In 1997, while testifying
before the U.S. Senate, regarding the practice of polygraph screening, he stated that it was
“completely without any theoretical foundation and has absolutely no validity.”  In
September of 1999, Supervisory Special Agent Dr. Drew Richardson wrote a lengthy
memo to Donald Kerr, the then FBI Assistant Director for the Laboratory Division, in
which he expressed his scientific opinion that continued use of the polygraph for screening
does victimize individuals and jeopardizes national security.  For a goodly period of time
the FBI entirely withheld Richardson’s memo, in a legal case against the Bureau, and only
recently released, due to a Freedom of Information a (FOIA) request having been made, a
heavily redacted version of the memo.  A copy of the redacted incomplete version of the
memo can be found at the following Internet address: 
http://www.antipolygraph.org/hearings/senate-judiciary-1997/richardson-13-09-99.shtml.

     Needless to say, if one wants to “dig a little’ one can rather easily find ex-polygraphers, or
former U.S. security or intelligence agency employees who have had close working
relationships with governmental polygraphers, who explain their understandings that polygraph usage by the Government, especially with personnel screening, is an invalid practice and that
continued use of it actually increases the danger to national security.  When earnings, that
have been connected to the practice of polygraphy cease, many times the prior apparent
allegiance to the justification for and the successes of polygraphy also seem to disappear.

What Appears to Be the Best Explanation

     Well, what do the presentations and discussions, that have been offered in the several
previous paragraphs, as possible explanations as to why polygraphers continue to apparently believe in their polygraph methods, even though science and common sense have long ago rejected the methodology as being without any supportive scientific proof or justification,
leave us with?  It would appear that the best explanation that suggests that polygraphers
seem to simply ignore or refuse to accept the very strong scientific proof that their discipline is only a pseudo science and not one that can show any meaningful supportability is the one that
involves financial and economic motivations.  It can be argued that they cannot ‘buy’ the
idea that their polygraph methodology is not valid as there are very strong economic and
financial reasons that force them to want to continue to support polygraphing as a discipline and profession.  Unfortunately, this continued practice results in several different victimized groups.  Those who are falsely declared to be deceptive may face greatly increased chances for criminal
conviction.  Another victimized group are those who falsely are rejected for employment and/or
security clearances, because of polygraphers' mistaken evaluative decisions.  However, the 
biggest victim is most likely the national security of our Country, which unfortunately has
developed a totally unjustified dependency upon a procedure that has been proven, over and
over, to be an invalid testing technique.

     As noted earlier, it can be estimated that there are thousands and thousands of people
who make their living as polygraphers, those who build, sell and service polygraph
equipment, those who teach polygraphy as well as all those police type persons who
realize that use of the polygraph to ‘pressure’ suspects and others to confess seems to
work rather well.  In addition to this, we have a culture and society that has been taught to
believe that the polygrapher does validly detect lying and deception.  The entertainment
media (books, radio, TV, movies) all seem to have a tendency to present polygraph usage
as one that works quite well to detect lying and deception.  Unfortunately, the general
public has not yet been adequately and sufficiently exposed to the truth (i.e., the very large
body of scientific evidence) regarding use of the polygraph.  Even more unfortunately,
many in the ‘general public’ also include a fair percentage of lawyers, politicians,
employers, and others whose decision making sometimes involves the use of polygraphy
in our society. 

The FES and the ApA

    All of the presentations and discussions that have been stated, in this paper so far, can be
brought to one final matter of concern.  The writer of this paper finds it quite easy to
understand and accept why those who adhere to the idea that the world is flat (such as
those members of the FES) do so in spite of all of the easily available evidence,
that has been offered for centuries, that the earth is not so shaped.  To believe as they do
because of bona fide and genuine religious beliefs is for most people a most acceptable
basis for holding beliefs that most times cannot be scientifically supported or proven. 

     It is also easy to understand why the polygraphers continue to refuse to accept the
over-whelming evidence that the polygraph (used to detect lying and deception) is not
scientifically supportable.  However, it is difficult to accept their ignoring of evidence
that causes them to reject the scientific results that clearly supports a contention that
polygraphy, as they have been employing it, is nothing more than a pseudo science.  It has
to be believed that the past and present leaders in the ApA, who can be expected to
possess intellects probably a bit superior, or at least equal, to the average, run-of-the-mill
member, whose major work activity is the administration of polygraphy, did long ago recognize
that they had to truly ignore  what was coming from application of the bona fide scientific
method to the study of polygraphy.  However, the polygraph profession leaders continuance in their never changing denial that just about the entire body of empirically conducted research 
regarding polygraphy is something that can be almost totally denied suggests dishonesty and deviousness on their part.

     If the continued existance of the polygraphing ‘profession, in the past couple of decades is
basically founded on selfish financial reward reinforcement, so much so that the myth of polygraph
validity is perpetuated, then such is immoral and hence should be challenged.  Those who
occupy leadership positions in the ApA, or are in the manufacturing and sales ends of
polygraphy and its equipment, and continue to want to ignore the very consistently found  research findings, based upon the scientific method that has shown, at least for the past several decades, that the practice of polygraphy, to detect lying and deception, is unjustified as it represents an invalid pseudo science.

Remedies for The Existing  Situation

    What needs to be done is to better educate the general public regarding the existing
polygraph research results and their implications.  The writer of this present paper  has
seldom ever encountered an article in a popular magazine, or in a newspaper story, or
more importantly as the subject of a TV program.  Unfortunately, I have read a goodly number
of pro-polygraph newspaper and magazine articles, as well as watched TV programs that
presented polygraphing in a most positive light, in that they falsely suggested a well founded
scientific basis for the practice.  In fact, a number of years ago there was a TV program
that was on for at least a year in which people were polygraphed;  Attorney F. Lee Bailey
served as the host on this program and very convincingly argued, over and over, for the
validity of the polygraphing methodology.  The average person almmost never comes into any type of contact with behavioral or forensic science journals or with books such as written by Lykken; his/her only usual source of any new knowledge comes from the TV and sometimes
from newspapers (typically only those such as U.S. Today, National Inquirer, Globe and the
like).  This is very different from the public’s level of knowledge regarding the shape of
the earth.  In everyday life, the amount of information coming from schooling, from the
public media (of all types) and, for many persons, the personal experience of travel
involving inter-continental and across the oceans trekking is overwhelming to reinforce the
common understanding that the world is round.

Discussion and Conclusions

     This brings us back to the original discussion, in the early paragraphs of this paper,
regarding the fact that there are still people who so emphatically believe that the world is
flat that they have even created societies to loudly proclaim to the world about their
beliefs.  The title of this paper raises a question as to whether there is any common ground
for the FES and the ApA with respect to both groups strongly supporting  belief structures
that in fact have been empirically disproved for multiple decades.  Both sets of organized
groups are very similar in that they profess belief in organized thought that are at best
described as being nothing more than pseudo sciences.  Although many persons may
disagree with the idea that the world is flat, the membership of the FES cannot (and should
not) be criticized unduly as their reason for sobelieving is due to their strong [mainly] Christian religious thinking.  Religious belief is based upon foundations that that are sometimes quite resistant to scientific thinking and proof.

      The FES is very different from the ApA in that the former is composed of individuals
who think as they do because of  having a good deal of religious thought and belief in common.  These people base their belief that the world is flat due to an unquestioning acceptance and
belief in the religious books in which they believed were created either directly by their god
or, at least, on his direction.  As such, the ideas and messages in these holy writings were such
not to be challenged, most certainly not by mortal men.

     In contrast, when looking at the membership of the ApA, it can be easily argued that they believe as they seemingly do because of holding strong financial motivations that hold their belief structure and loyalty to an idea together.  In other words, financial remumeration is the glue that
holds their 'loyalty' to perpetuate a  hoax that is founded on lies and the ignoring of scientific truth.  Such a motivational picture not only can be applied to the membership of the ApA, but seemingly  also to the entire polygraph industry that goes far beyond the polygrapher group itself.  Loyalty to the idea that the polygraph represents a highly valid lie detection methodology, based on what appears mainly to be personal financial motivations, seem not to be so easily excused as representing a moral and honorable justification for believing as they apparently  do.  If one believes in a lie, that can quite easily harm others as well as their own Country, simply for financial justifications - this is an immoral situation to say the least.  To proclaim to the world that the polygraph, as a lie detector, is valid and if it is not (and this has been proven over and over again by empirical scientific research r), then the likelihood that the polygraph when used, and its results believed and accepted, is indeed a very dangerous methodology to impose upon its victims.  To continue to proclaim the validity of such a practice, when in fact just about all of the empirical evidence (which is truly weighty and impressive) regarding its lack of validity, is something that morally should be fought and defeated.

     This kind of financially based motivation is behind any number of fakes, hoaxes, 'cons,'
and frauds that bedevil and do great hard to innocent victims.  Much (but certainly not all) of the present vitamin, herbal, and nutritional supplement industry communicates promises of cures and effective treatment for many medical problems and aliments without any sufficient scientific justification to support their promises.  In the past several years, many stock brokers encouraged their trusting clients to buy stocks that the brokers themselves clearly knew were extremely poor investments.  It is the writer's belief, which is shared by a surprising number of highly experienced and 'seasoned' psychologists, that many of the psychologist vendors of the practice of psychological counseling, psychotherapy, and other similar mental therapy offerings, are knowingly over-selling their product well beyond its bona fide worth.  Other such similar examples can be very easily identified and seem very similar to the hoax that the group, who financially befit from the practice of polygraphy, which has been touted as being lie detection, have perpetuated upon the public these past several decades. .

    The conclusions that can be stated at this point is that perhaps a number of the members of the FES would seem to be a righteous and moral group in their belief of something that is clearly
false and incorrect.  However, the membership of the ApA (and seemingly also including just
about all those who earn their incomes from the polygraph industry) do seem to be clearly
immoral and dishonorable in their continuing to put forth the idea that the polygraph represents a valid lie detector methodology.  What seems to make it even worse for the ApA group is the fact that many within the polygraphing occupation have seemed to have developed the true fact that the polygraph machine is only ‘window dressing’ for the pressured interrogations that they impose upon others.  Many polygraphers, in the past, have gone ‘to the other side’ and loudly profess
that the polygraph technique, as a lie detector, in reality is a fake.  The telling of lies in order to hopefully encourage others to confess is not something that can be regarded, as it is by the ApA crowd, as a pursuit to be embraced and applauded.  To declare that what the ApA supports is unethical seems to be a justified conclusion.

     For anyone who has read this paper and who finds themselves wanting to know more about
the lack of validity of polygraph testing, especially as practiced by the Government in personnel screening matters, the author strongly recommends taking a look at the following World Wide Web address:  http://www.antipolygraph.org.
 
 

Larson, J. A. (1923).  The cardio-pneumo-psychogram in deception. Journal of
   Experimental Psychology, 6, 420-454.

Lykken, D. T. (1980). A tremor in the blood:  Uses and abuses of the lie detector.
   New York:  McGraw-Hill.

Lykken, D. T. (1998). A tremor in the blood:  Lies and abuses of the lie detector.
   New York: Persekus Publishing.

Saxe, L., Dougherty, D., & Cross. T. (1985).  The validity of polygraph testing: 
   Scientific analysis and public controversy. American Psychologist, 40, 355-366.

Stone, L. A. (2003).  The use of the polygraph to detect lying and deception:  The hoax
   of the century. Electronic Journal of Forensic Psychonomics, 3,  Can be found at
   http://www.home.earthlink.net/~lastone2/polygraphing.html.

U. S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment (1983, November). Scientific
   validity of polygraph testing:  A research review and evaluation.  (OTA-A-TM-
   H-15), Washington, DC: Author.