Amit Katwala

Yeah, that's right. Yeah. So and actually, the technology hasn't changed since, you know, the 1920s, really. So in the initial one, yeah, you'd have four different lines on the chart. And then it's the kind of combination of those lines that will appear on the chart, you know, ink on paper or nowadays it's on a computer screen.

Exactly. The machine is supposed to work on the premise that liars will be nervous, but people are nervous for all sorts of reasons, right? There's no way of telling whether someone is sweaty because they're lying or sweaty because they're nervous about being wrongly accused of lying.

Exactly. The machine is supposed to work on the premise that liars will be nervous, but people are nervous for all sorts of reasons, right? There's no way of telling whether someone is sweaty because they're lying or sweaty because they're nervous about being wrongly accused of lying.

Exactly. The machine is supposed to work on the premise that liars will be nervous, but people are nervous for all sorts of reasons, right? There's no way of telling whether someone is sweaty because they're lying or sweaty because they're nervous about being wrongly accused of lying.

Or maybe they're lying, yeah. But you just can't tell. And that's the big problem with the polygraph. Even if 90% of people would show a particular result on the polygraph, that doesn't mean it's true for everyone. And that's the big problem. There's no single telltale sign of lying that works for everyone all of the time. Researchers in the field say there's no Pinocchio's nose.

Or maybe they're lying, yeah. But you just can't tell. And that's the big problem with the polygraph. Even if 90% of people would show a particular result on the polygraph, that doesn't mean it's true for everyone. And that's the big problem. There's no single telltale sign of lying that works for everyone all of the time. Researchers in the field say there's no Pinocchio's nose.

Or maybe they're lying, yeah. But you just can't tell. And that's the big problem with the polygraph. Even if 90% of people would show a particular result on the polygraph, that doesn't mean it's true for everyone. And that's the big problem. There's no single telltale sign of lying that works for everyone all of the time. Researchers in the field say there's no Pinocchio's nose.

You know, there's nothing that is going to give you the right answer with enough certainty, enough times to be valid to use in a courtroom setting, for instance.

You know, there's nothing that is going to give you the right answer with enough certainty, enough times to be valid to use in a courtroom setting, for instance.

You know, there's nothing that is going to give you the right answer with enough certainty, enough times to be valid to use in a courtroom setting, for instance.

So it's actually been barred from the courtroom for a really, really long time. So Larson invented the machine in 1921. And there was a famous case called the Fry case, which was set a precedent that the polygraph couldn't be used in the courtroom. And that was actually in, I think, 1923. So it really wasn't long afterwards.

So it's actually been barred from the courtroom for a really, really long time. So Larson invented the machine in 1921. And there was a famous case called the Fry case, which was set a precedent that the polygraph couldn't be used in the courtroom. And that was actually in, I think, 1923. So it really wasn't long afterwards.

So it's actually been barred from the courtroom for a really, really long time. So Larson invented the machine in 1921. And there was a famous case called the Fry case, which was set a precedent that the polygraph couldn't be used in the courtroom. And that was actually in, I think, 1923. So it really wasn't long afterwards.

But even the people that invented the polygraph kind of had their misgivings about it quite early on. and thought that it shouldn't have been used as widely as it was being used even back then. So John Larson, who invented it, was really excited about it for the first couple of years. But then he saw how his scientific caution kind of got blown away by hype and press coverage.

But even the people that invented the polygraph kind of had their misgivings about it quite early on. and thought that it shouldn't have been used as widely as it was being used even back then. So John Larson, who invented it, was really excited about it for the first couple of years. But then he saw how his scientific caution kind of got blown away by hype and press coverage.

But even the people that invented the polygraph kind of had their misgivings about it quite early on. and thought that it shouldn't have been used as widely as it was being used even back then. So John Larson, who invented it, was really excited about it for the first couple of years. But then he saw how his scientific caution kind of got blown away by hype and press coverage.

And then by the end of his life, he hated the machine. He thought it was like a Frankenstein's monster that he'd unleashed on the world. So I would say that within 10 years, there were serious doubts about the efficacy of the polygraph. But by then, the hype and the you know, the drama around it sort of overtook it all and it really snowballed.

And then by the end of his life, he hated the machine. He thought it was like a Frankenstein's monster that he'd unleashed on the world. So I would say that within 10 years, there were serious doubts about the efficacy of the polygraph. But by then, the hype and the you know, the drama around it sort of overtook it all and it really snowballed.

And then by the end of his life, he hated the machine. He thought it was like a Frankenstein's monster that he'd unleashed on the world. So I would say that within 10 years, there were serious doubts about the efficacy of the polygraph. But by then, the hype and the you know, the drama around it sort of overtook it all and it really snowballed.

It's very, very subjective. So, yes, you can give two different examiners the same chart to examine and they could come up with completely different answers as to whether the person was lying.