usmbguest5318
Gold Member
- Thread starter
- #21
Off Topic:
To be honest, it's my understanding that no organization other than ASTM International is the one that promulgates, among other things, broadly accepted standards pertaining to nature, extent and limitations of forensic handwriting analysis. Reading their standards, one finds this:
in refutation of remarks made by people who are as expert on the matter as one can be.
Look, I didn't mean to come back to this now and haven't the time, but before signing off I'll just say that the three people you cite from the article are no where near what I would consider "as expert on the matter as one can be!" How did you determine that? Because THEY make the claim so? Look, I actually just a bit ago for the first time read the entire original article and when I have the chance, I will pick it apart for all the lies, distortions, nonsense and contradictions it contains. But not tonight.
I asked you the question I did about your credentials as a handwriting analyst. If you tell me that you are, for example, a certified forensic document examiner.....
You're doing it again, you are confusing graphology with legitimate forensic science. But yes, I am board certified and meet all SWGDOC requirements. By the way, the ABFDE does NOT set the standard for what a Certified Examiner is, that is only THEIR standard to be a member of THEIR organization. As an aside, another organization called SAFE Home - SAFE Forensics has trademarked the term you quote so technically, ABFDE is in trademark violation.
inasmuch as you't not attested to being a handwriting expert, I give no credence to your handwriting analysis pronouncements in refutation of those made by experts in that discipline.
THANKS! You just made my life much easier! Despite the fact that I AM a handwriting expert, one of the most rigorous and careful in the world, published in the field, have said as much, have passed hundreds of proficiency tests and could tear apart and was prepared to dissect the News.com.au article as the sham it is piece by piece top to bottom in a way that any reader could follow and see for themselves the many inconsistencies and errors, maintain that handwriting analysis can be VERY accurate when done scientifically, just that what these three women put out on the public arena is NOT scientific nor accurate (read: garbage), and in fact, wrote up a small analysis of my own on Donald Trump's signature RIGHT HERE on USMB some months ago (you should have read it), and have already invested at least as much detail on the man as I would normally get paid $160 for just for the elucidation of this thread so that readers would have a chance to get some real insight into Trump for a change away from all the horsecrap normally thrown about here and not the politically and personally-biased garbage put forth in that article, and for that effort have not even so much as gotten a "thanks" for my contribution, but mostly just insults, all the while dancing a tightrope in not violating my privacy and personal life on this forum by giving away any personally identifiable information and especially, not compromising or harming my professional credibility as a private examiner with all of this "graphology" nonsense, you've just talked me out of wasting any further time on the matter which probably no one would read anyway, just as few people have shown interest in this thread as they showed little/no interest in my original comments months back (vicious unsupported propaganda is so much more enjoyable to read than facts, aren't they) because, when push comes to shove, you, like all too many people on this board, while you TALK a good game apparently haven't the perceptiveness to know when someone speaks with an intuitive ring of truth, and since only a fool would put their name, address, website, professional affiliations and such out in public on a social forum such as this full of weirdos and idiots just to certify that they do indeed have DIRECT authority as a source of info on a given matter, you have shown again why NO ONE QUOTES THEMSELVES HERE as having firsthand knowledge and expertise in any topic, lest they merely get disbelieved and ridiculed, so the USMB shall as always carry forward on endless tedious topics of flailing, wild propaganda with hyperlinks to Breitbart, Fox and New York Times as the indispensable citing "authorities." After all, they are world renown publications with degrees in journalism! They MUST be telling the truth!
By the way, the ABFDE does NOT set the standard for what a Certified Examiner is, that is only THEIR standard to be a member of THEIR organization. As an aside, another organization called SAFE Home - SAFE Forensics has trademarked the term you quote so technically, ABFDE is in trademark violation.
To be honest, it's my understanding that no organization other than ASTM International is the one that promulgates, among other things, broadly accepted standards pertaining to nature, extent and limitations of forensic handwriting analysis. Reading their standards, one finds this:
- Standard Guide for Scope of Work of Forensic Document Examiners. (See also: Handwriting Examination: Meeting the Challenges of Science and the Law)
Reading that document, I see the scope of what forensic handwriting analysts do and can opine upon is as follows:
The forensic document examiner makes scientific examinations, comparisons, and analyses of documents in order to:
In that scope I see nothing having to do with forensically using handwriting as a basis for inferring any sort of personality/psychological traits a writer may or may not have. Perhaps there is a different standards document that allows auguring for a writer having "this or that" personality trait due to his/her handwriting having some discrete or assemblage of characteristics. If so, by all means, insofar as you are "one of the most rigorous and careful [handwriting analysts] in the world [and are] published in the field," provide a link to it, or upload it. I'd be happy to read it.
The forensic document examiner makes scientific examinations, comparisons, and analyses of documents in order to:
- establish genuineness or non-genuineness, or to expose forgery, or to reveal alterations, additions, or deletions,
- identify or eliminate persons as the source of handwriting,
- identify or eliminate the source of typewriting or other impression, marks, or relative evidence, and
- write reports or give testimony, when needed, to aid the users of the examiner’s services in understanding the examiner’s findings.