Polygraph is junk science.
I absolutely agree that polygraphs are garbage anyway. I probably should have put that in my original post. THAT would be a good line of attack.
Nonetheless, we need to stop latching on to this “two question” line.
All polygraph is, is a tool for interrogation.
It’s a psychological blackjack the operator uses to intimidate & manipulate his subject. Many polygraphers actually believe they’re are doing lie detection. (It helps if the subject believes it too.) Polygraphers are not detecting lies, to do so would require the actual reading of minds. Fun SciFi for movies & TV but not science!
The intelligence community uses it for employment in both counterintelligence and full-scope (read: life style) polygraphs. It also uses it for credibility assessments of HUMINT and counterintelligence sources.
There are two keys: the polygrapher and the moral constitution of the one being polygraphed. It can be defeated and manipulated. I've had many. Some good, some exceptionally poor.
But it isn't junk science. It's an imperfect science that has remarkable results if done correctly. Its imperfection is why it cannot be used in courts.
I’ve heard that a more reliable method of detecting lying is analyzing a subject’s voice. It would be cool to have one of those investigators evaluate Dr. Fraud’s testimony and weigh in on it.
Of course, whatever drug she was on could impact those results, too.