Forensics Myths Debunked - The Truth Behind Real CSI Evidence
popularmechanics.com
popularmechanics.com
The results of polygraph testing aren't even admissible in many courts, and the National Academy of Sciences found that they're unreliable, unscientific, and biased.
Despite all this, so many people think they're still a bullet proof method of lie detection. I have heard of a many people who have had false positives on polygraph tests, and have had their life ruined because of it.
If you got a false positive you'd be a nervous ninny, and a false negative would mean that you're at least somewhat competent. For them, it's a win/win.
But I find it funny that, to help support its argument that forensic methods lack sizeable scientific support, it uses 2 wrong-conviction examples and an experiment with only 6 fingerprint examiners.
That's the difference between the media and science, I suppose. And it is a difference that needs to be clearer in the courtroom.
It should be noted that a lot of medical practices - as opposed to biological discoveries - rest on no more real science than this...