Re: Justin passes Lie Detector test, positive data continues to come in.

SasquaiNation Tue Aug 14, 2012 9:23 pm

I quickly found one account but no reference to back it. I'll have another look and add to this comment if I find more.

Gimlin Refuses Polygraph

from Cryptozoology.com

Kel Tue Aug 14, 2012 11:06 pm

SasquaiNation wrote:I quickly found one account but no reference to back it. I'll have another look and add to this comment if I find more.

Gimlin Refuses Polygraph

from Cryptozoology.com

Oh yeah! Thanks SN! If you're willing to do the digging, I'm very interested to know more background to that claim. That was an interesting read in those comments. We've always known Gimlin was a proven liar, but now he sits high upon the Throne of Bigfoot ~ infallible as the Pope. Personally, I don't expect he'll ever change his story, nor do I expect a final confession letter to be read after his death.

**GT3Paul** Wed Aug 15, 2012 1:57 am

Burden you bring up some fascinating questions. I have to say my man, you are earning some respect from me. You are sitting back and processing questions and using reason. Good Job.

I have got some more to add to this whole thing. I havent seen anything quite like this, obviously many of us havent. But from what I have read this happens more often than we think (IF they exist). Apparently hunters pick off one of these guys every 2-3 years. Then when they get to what they have shot, they see that the prey was a BigFoot and it damn near looks human. The hunter pannicks and ponders the idea of getting charged with murder and either hides the body or runs off without ever telling any one.
It seems in Modern times (since 1950) the murder thing really plays into the hunters mind. AND if you read or just look at the forensic artist renderings in David Paulides Books by Henry Pratt, these things look TERRIBLY Human. I mead a dead ringer for a very large Native American. Not the apish brute you see in other places including Patty.
And to make YOU think some more read the books (hoopa Project) and (Tribal Bigfoot) these guys dont look like Patty. Time in again and again they look like Long haired bearded men with hairless faces. Every incident all independent of each other, have independent sessions with Mr Pratt and over and over he draws the same facial features, except for a few that have Patty like appearances

Nosey Wed Aug 15, 2012 3:45 am

And this is empirical evidence how? Travis Walton passed a polygraph "proving" he spent several days on a UFO.
Justin is no more credible than any other charlatan. It's all about the money, attention and who knows what motivation.

Woodwose Wed Aug 15, 2012 4:19 am

SasquaiNation wrote:I'm wondering why Bob Gimlin would refuse to take a polygraph test if his his claims are as true as he says.

Possibly for the same reason that I would refuse one if I were accused if a crime I knew I didn't commit - the scientific consensus (even today) is that polygraphy is unreliable, prone to false positives and it's accuracy is thought to be little better than chance.

I'm only guessing of course Very Happy

As far as Smeja is concerned I don't think we can call the case on the test results alone, but it is an interesting turn of events.......an entertaining bit of filler whilst we wait for the DNA results or any other hard evidence rumoured to exist.

SasquaiNation Wed Aug 15, 2012 6:28 pm

You could be right Woodwose, and like you said, it's one more interesting piece to the puzzle. 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.
Just to be clear Woodwose, this has nothing to do with your above comment, it's something I'm curious about.

CMcMillan Wed Aug 15, 2012 7:18 pm

SasquaiNation wrote: You could be right Woodwose, and like you said, it's one more interesting piece to the puzzle. 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.
Just to be clear Woodwose, this has nothing to do with your above comment, it's something I'm curious about.

I believe if it came back he was lying, the skeptics who have been saying you can't trust a polygraph test, would all be saying to us SEE he is lying it is a HOAX.
We know that polographs can be fooled when someone truely believes what they are saying to be true, and they have convinced themselves over time that it is truth.

This test was just an added piece to the puzzle, nothing more nothing less.

I have a feeling that they have the actual body or parts of the body of either the creature.
I can not wait for more information to come out foor big foot or against.
either way this is and has been a good story.

Woodwose Wed Aug 15, 2012 7:19 pm

Yes SasquaiNation, I agree, it would be interesting to see what happens in that kind of situation. Anyone who is genuinely sceptical about polygraphy shouldn't change their position (I would have considered Smeja's result meaningless if he had failed), but I imagine that there are some people who selectively reference the unreliability of polygraph tests as a form of confirmation bias.

I also think that the idea of the polygraph has a lot of influence over how it's perceived and how people perform when tested. For instance, I suspect that many people will be compelled to tell the truth - or appear truthful- because they think it's 99% accurate. That isn't the same as being a successful device for detecting dishonesty, it just adds weight to the notion that polygraph tests are little more than a psychological parlour trick.

BurdenOfProof Wed Aug 15, 2012 8:41 pm

The thing about this whole story and that everyone seems to just brush aside is the piece of flesh recovered. Its just a random bit of meat found in the woods, how could it ever be proven to be linked to Justin's supposed shootings? Believers seem to have no issues with this but for me something just doesn't sit right with it.

CMcMillan Wed Aug 15, 2012 8:45 pm

Burden,
Thats because you think that it was JUST found laying around...
We don't know anything much about the WHOLE story as of yet. Justin talks like their is more to it so does Driver but its not being discussed as of yet.

Got Yeti Yet? Wed Aug 15, 2012 8:52 pm

SasquaiNation wrote:Bob Gimlin refused a polygraph? I've never heard this before. Do you have a source for this information?
I'm wondering why Bob Gimlin would refuse to take a polygraph test if his his claims are as true as he says.

It's well known within the squatching community that BobG refuses a polygraph and hard/real questions.

If Dahmer was a bad example, let's discuss BobH's two poygraphs.

I'd rather not, as they are inadmissable, but he passed two of them. Very Happy

CMcMillan Wed Aug 15, 2012 9:09 pm

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-07-10/sports/sns-mct-what-do-you-see-1967-patterson-gimlin-film-20120710_1_bob-gimlin-patterson-gimlin-film-zapruder-film/2

Lie detectors: Roger Patterson passed the test: Prior to publishing an April 1968 article about the Patterson-Gimlin film, National Wildlife Magazine's editors -- not wanting to run a story about a film that might prove later to be bogus -- requested that Patterson submit to a lie detector test. He agreed, and the test was done "by a reputable and retired New York City polygraph expert," according to George Harrison, who became the magazine's managing editor in 1972. Patterson passed the test, and the magazine ran the story.

Heironimus' results are equally problematic; McCormick died in 2009 and Heironimus' attorney, Barry Woodard, did not respond to requests from another local polygraph expert for a peer review of the test results. The 'Lie Detector' show's credibility also took a hit when host Ed Gelb was accused of exaggerating his own academic credentials and the show was victimized by a guest who made up a story, aced Gelb's polygraph and then bragged about it in a magazine.

CMcMillan Wed Aug 15, 2012 9:53 pm

(MoB, p.153)

Greg Long could clearly see that Bob was lying about having no involvement in the filming of Bigfoot: America's Abominable Snowman. December 5th, 1998, Greg Long first calls and records his conversation with Bob...

Greg Long: "I don't know why your name is associated with it (the film)"

Bob Heironimus: "Well, like I say, you know, I'm not gonna, I'm not gonna, you know, tell everything I know about the film deal until, you know, I talk to the right people."

(MoB, p. 150)

This is after in the same conversation that he told Long to talk to his old friend Gimlin if he wanted to know more. This is when they were still friends and BH was trying to protect BG, who by BH's story gave him a small amount of money because he felt bad when they both worked for Noel Pepsi.

Then, on December 19th, 1998, Greg and Pat Long drive to Yakima to visit Bob Heironimus unannounced...

GL: "I'm here in person to see if I can do a follow-up interview with you regarding the suit issue."

BH: "Well, I told you about everything I think I know about it."

GL: "You know a lot more about it because your answers over the phone were basically waffling. You said, 'Well, I do know something, and I don't know something.' You said it twice. You allowed me to record the interview. I'm trying to get to the truth, trying to get the facts."

BH: "I'll just talk to my attorney, and we'll go from there."

CMcMillan Thu Aug 16, 2012 8:02 am

I like this Blog Post
http://www.bigfootlunchclub.com/2012/08/bigfoot-killer-passes-lie-detector-test.html

RO SAHEBIWhat was your role?
My job is to tell Justin's story. It's the most fascinating story I've ever heard. No matter how this ends, or how much of it you believe, the story is incredible. In the Bigfoot world, people want content, and there's not enough good new content out there. I'm just trying to fill in a little bit of that huge hole.

What do these results mean for Bigfoot research in general?
The results are important to those who understand the whole situation. To most, the polygraph by itself, is not much. Now if the DNA study come up with something and you listen to the drivers story, then add credible players like Bart Cutino, James Bobo Faye, and Derek Randles to the situation... you start get something. Sure none of it is definitive, but at the very least, you have to stop and take a look.

What do these results mean to you personally?
The results were the icing on the cake. I had started to spend a lot of time talking to the players involved and it slowly changed my view on the situation. Before the polygraph test took place, I had already told Justin that I believed him. The problem, it is a hard story to defend. So this just gives me a little bit more ammo to fight with.

Sponsored content