I find it funny how we read articles about complex issues, like becoming a confident leader or the 4 qualities of a good father, when we’re still struggling with the rudimentary skills we learned in kindergarten.

On average, you will hear between 10-200 lies per day. While many of them are small and will not likely affect your life, the skill to spot a lie can drastically change your life. It can prevent a negative relationship, keep you out of trouble, or help you heal a broken relationship. And most importantly, catching someone in a lie just might help them stop.

The video below explains the science of how liars act and feel. It provides four interesting tactics for spotting a lie. I have also provided a quick recap below.

Recap: The 4 Communication Signs Of A Liar:

  1. Minimal Self-Reference: Liars write or talk more about others often using the third-person to distance and disassociate themselves from their lie.
  2. Negative Language: Liars tend to be more negative because on a sub-conscious level, they feel guilty about lying.
  3. Simple Explanation: Liars often over simplify because their brains struggle to create a complex lie.
  4. Convoluted Phrasing: And even though liars keep things simple, they seem to use longer and more convoluted sentence structure. Inserting relevant words but in a hard-to-understand way.

Do you have a liar in your life? What techniques or signs help you spot a lie? Let me know in the comments below.

Dale Partridge

Some know me as a serial entrepreneur and Founder of Sevenly and StartupCamp, others know me as the guy who can ride a unicycle and still kickflip on a skateboard. I’m on a mission to inspire people. Will you join me?

93 thoughts on “How To Spot A Liar In 5 Seconds

  1. Wilma Conner says:

    On how to spot a liar, believe the look on their face, not the words in their mouths. The non-verbals shout louder than the phony words. Shifty eyes, strain on the face, tone of voice, obviously fake sincere tone. And quick to argue when you don’t agree with their fantasy.

  2. nunya says:

    These are the same symptoms exhibited by people with PTSD/trauma survivors. SMH, people will think they are liars.

    This is info is more damning than good. :/

  3. Deb says:

    I agree with Nunya, these symptoms do exist in ptsd survivors. As well, many cognitive distortions are present in people with different illnesses. I find this article saddening in a world where there is already so little trust at times. We don’t ever really know what’s going on in another’s mind, but curiosity might be a good tool in many cases to find out. Happy New Years all.

    • Dale Partridge says:

      I’m sure some of them do exist in PTSD survivors, although this article was targeted toward the majority of the population who aren’t dealing with PTSD. You are right that we’ll never fully know what’s going on inside another’s mind, but I believe these are great signs to look for in spotting a lie. From there, it’s your choice to call it or inquire about it, or not. (;

  4. David J H says:

    After working with vulnerable people for years I have become very good at spotting lies. You know what? There is nothing people hate more than a person who can see through their lies. It’s a useful tool for me at work sometimes but as everyone lies all the time I wish I could now just turn it off. Successfully swallowing bullshit is one of the most important social tools you have and the easiest way to do it is to not constantly spot the bullshit. Communication and relationships are complex things and often it’s impossible to see the repercussions of calling someone out on a lie. Many liars are also very charming and have a great deal more friends and power than those who are usually more honest. Next time you righteously call someone out on a lie consider whether it may make you the most lonely righteous person in the room?

    • Dale Partridge says:

      You’re correct on this! Many liars are very charming – they can trick people into liking a persona they’ve created for themselves, sort of an alter-ego to escape what they don’t like about themselves. The charades do end though, and the walls come crashing down. What we need in our culture is vulnerability and connectivity. Those things are guaranteed to make you TRUE friends, and you won’t have to worry about being the only honest and “lonely” person in the room. 🙂

      • David J H says:

        That’s what we need in our culture is it?

        Look everyone lies, in fact it’s often necessary in healthy relationships and cultures. For those pathological liars and individuals that use deception in a destructive malicious way? We will always have them too. Neurological based disorders like psychopathy and personality disorders are littered throughout the population. These empathy impaired people use deception to cut a path through society as a short cut to their urges and goals.

        What we need is awareness and not to be naive, to understand these inherent dangers are out there and probably always will be. Don’t take everything at face value and expect everyone to be as honest and moral as you are.

        It’s not a jungle out there, it’s worse than that. The apex predator left the jungle and it’s us. We are smart, deceptive, charming, ruthless and deadly and we are everywhere.

        • Yagadan says:

          I’m usually very scared of such things as lies. However, the zenith of all lies is inherently the goal of anything else, urges that people need, as you’ve mentioned. You’re both right. Awareness of lies will bring acceptance of others. Eventually, you’ll make the association between them and “you”, as in any important apparatus in your personal life and everyone will be vulnerable to anyone else. Yet, it’ll be psychologically nigh impossible to deceive further. If this does occur, then it’ll be considered a picky personality trait.

          Also, without going into political philosophy and further, ethics, I’ll say this: The conflict of humanity will bring everything into perception. Conflict begats awareness and that, further conflict. Schopenhauer would have a field day with this. Separation is the problem. We only dislike things because of its opposition. Our “awareness” only materializes problems. We must, ideally, all become weak and stupid and utterly incapable of recognizing opposition. Our desires are universal and separation will further begat problems. This is why separation is bad. We need things, okay? We recognize things of propagating the self. Food, water, connection all enforce this self-concept, going back to survival. We want what is life enforcing because of this:

          Obligation of an infinite regression is an important factor here. The universe works on the same principles and perhaps causes ours. Going with the natural selection concept given by Darwin, applied to need here, of course desire. Here, it is seen that the universe is governed the same, Now, the universe created humans, by any method that it is cared to be believed. We obviously act the same, or work on the same ideals as the universe. Therefore clear obligation of why is passed to the universe. The universe’s creation, of itself, is not relevant here to the fact that we are of the universe. Simple facts aside, the universe’s reason for creating us is the why, or at least a resolution to the why, as we see our ideals coming from the universe, it obviously has the problems at large, and the most natural route is fixing itself to understanding and it shows the will to continue. It regresses itself to a state of imperfection from its inherent absoluteness to manifest consciousness to resolve itself. It, as we do, invertly manifests itself to solve problems, putting them aside from ourselves to continue, which is a legitimate reason why the universe allows uneasiness and variance in awareness, due to understanding. The understanding is not a puzzling one that is to be fixed, as might be obviously inferred, but that of completing itself and confirming the outside path by manifesting inherent ideals, which are its processes to this absolute completeness. To satisfy Kant’s metaphysics on this, one must recognize the universe’s means as ends in themselves, but to no significant avail as they are one and the same. This might also fix all problems with the Euthyphro Dilemma without denouncing it as a false dilemma.The first step to fixing it is asking if God created the universe or vice versa, which puts the dilemma in a more discernible state. If the universe created God, then evidently, God says things are good because they are good, and if God created the universe, then that means things are good because God says so. Yet, if God is one and the same with the universe and his own development(which is infinitely perpetuating, so any tiredness or reduction is possible in any form), then things are good because, on one horn, they are one of the same with God’s processes and since we are one and the same with the universe and by infinite regression, we are that God, and what we’re doing is in less than instant to infinity(as, of course, finiteness and infinity cannot coexist, but then they can as their nonexistence can bring themselves upon), and our perception is equal to our desire, which manifests as time, which is an absolute property, and part of the aforementioned development, and on the second horn, things are good, because, as said, God is us, and we say thing are good because we need them to be, our need is then our development and inverted self-manifestation again, voiding everything else. Now, to the universe’s coming about, it’d, as again said before, the nonexistence of something would bring itself about, as anything before, before just used for perception’s sake, would be void or formless, or at least radically different from ours, or a continued regression. The nonexistence of our universe, as needed, can only amount to one thing. Our ideals. We are as we are because of how we came about and that was most suitable, so almost exactly as natural selection’s source is, genetic mutations, occurring and being at an infinitesimal state.Our universe develop from a “nether” universe, and that of another, being radically different in proportions, and again, inverted self-manifestation brought it about for the sake of itself. The ultimate source of everything was an incumbent force, coming of itself, as the alternative wouldn’t exist. So, the nothing exists(exists used as not existing, really) as well, and the something(us) exists out of itself, being an illusion, free perception(which is confused with will and Will, and will of itself), and commonly existing in of itself what is needed. Existence wouldn’t be able to be unless it was, so it had to be of that. It may not be real, in a sense incongruent and not of our understanding, but it is the truth of ourselves, as a barbaric, backwards Lucifer Experiment, it does not exist and is here all the same. (IMPORTANT) Here only being used as a point of reference, so makes sense in the context of before. The virtue of all of this is development, regression, of course, and going to past ideals for understanding, associations and being. Instead of associations and manifestations, this can possibly be seen as regression(to ideals) and being(forced to exist of itself, being here, but not existing, of clarification) Direct laziness is the agonizing, manipulative, unforeseen, because it is, precognition, and being force of the universe and is the universe, and not the universe, being of and not, and that of itself as a creator, imbibed with itself, doing it.

          Back to the point, yes lies are good for our connections, with the opposition. For what’s good,(is) the self, and capabilities to enforce such(which is consciousness/awareness’s development’s reason for manifestation) , as it enforces a universality. Like Kant’s universalized maxims, this is good for the universe as it is the self. By natural selection, it is the only universe that could have arose and developed beings who questioned such things.
          Adieu!

          • David J H says:

            Would you like to break that all down into English for everyone please? Seriously man the goal is to be understood and not to (appear) to be an intellectual.

          • Yagadan says:

            It’s very simple. It’s just long because I’m used to somewhat long-winded philosophy. To summarize this all, I’m agreeing with you. We should be aware of the world and others. However, I’m trying to be optimistic about it by saying that this is to create a happier world in which everyone can live. Also, you would have insulted almost any other(who could understand that you weren’t be insulting and make appear’s connotation be synonymous with that of “seem”) with the last bit of your comment.

          • Yagadan says:

            I’m sorry if I seemed pretentious. Yet, may I ask you point out my errors, mainly? I really want to understand what is wrong. Please. If my ignorance is going to detriment me, I want to learn, and yes, I know what the Dunning-Kruger effect is. I might even recognize if I’m just a subject of the Lake Wobegon effect as well if you please let me defend myself. Thank you.

          • David J H says:

            I’m not your tutor and you don’t defend ignorance you educate it. It did not worry me that I didn’t understand a word you wrote, it concerns me that you didn’t and yet you kept writing. Leave the big words, name dropping and begats behind for a bit and actually take a look at the world around you for a moment. That is the last you’re getting from me whether you agree with my assessment or not.

          • Janice says:

            Yagadan, Don’t mind David J H, He really is just threatened because he had no clue what you were talking about. I was able to figure out your meaning with a little time and patience (and some intelligence). Unfortunately, your post is hard to follow for a few reasons. I’m going to assume you were genuine in asking for input on how your post could be made better. If I’m wrong, and I offend you, I apologize. Here are my observations: 1) It’s very long – try to condense your thoughts into a few main points 2) You use terms and phrases that are specialized to your area of philosophical understanding but not commonly familiar to the general reader – if you simplify terms you will get your ideas across more clearly. 3) You use long, run-on sentences with very confusing punctuation. When you combine this with the unfamiliar terms and metaphysical way of talking, it gets doubly confusing. This one is really important! If you use simpler, more concise sentences, your meaning will be easier to understand. Hope this helps, and don’t stress the David J H’s too much. They want to come onto these sites and be the “expert of the conversation” and feel threatened by anyone who sounds smarter than them. When they feel threatened, they attack.

          • Yagadan says:

            Oh, I was genuine about noticing any errors. You have to stretch language when you’re trying to explain a concept or idea that you’re trying to put in place. However, I was just referencing an old writing from about 7 years back and I have learned to write concisely since then. I just didn’t want to poke any holes by rewriting it and possibly negate a core idea.
            Also, I like poking fun at people, and David J H seemed fun. Of course there are mistakes, I’m waiting for him to realize. After such a comment from him, he was dying for a troll.
            Albeit, I’m rather curious about what you gleaned from what I wrote. Do you have any experience in metaethics?(P.S. Internet trolling is sometimes the best way to conduct a social experiment.)

          • Janice says:

            Ah! So I’m part of your social experiment am I? Well, that’s OK 🙂 When I posted I was mostly irritated at David J H for acting arrogant and as if he “knew all”. Not sure what that says about me 😉 No, I don’t have any experience with metaethics. When I say I was able to figure out your meaning with a little patience (and intelligence), I mean that I was able to wade through a new subject for me with terms and ideas that are foreign and arrive at a basic idea of your meaning. I’m a few months away from my Master’s degree in counseling so I’m used to working my way through advanced writing. A good dictionary helps! I’m not sure I can put your meaning in just a few words, but I’ll try. What I gleaned (I like that way of looking at it rather than claiming that I completely understand something I’m sure takes much more thought and time than this forum allows) from your post is that we tend to resist things/people that are different or “other” than us, and this concept of “otherness” arises from our awareness (in the sense of being aware of ourselves as a separate person/entity/consciousness). The problem with this is that we are inherently “wired” for connection. Your discussion on how the universe came to be (creation by a being such as God, or self-creation for the purpose of existing) was the least clear to me, but I think your point is that no matter how the universe came to be, it exists and we exist, and we and the universe are one. Yet it seems that we retain a separateness too. It also seems that you’re making the point that reality or existence is more a matter of perception than absolute, corporeal existence. I could have that all wrong though! 🙂 Your bottom line seems to be that we exist to be connected with others and lying can foster connection just as it can cause division. The division comes when the lie emphasizes our “otherness” rather than our oneness. I think I’d better stop typing now, or I’ll stop making any sense at all! I have to say your field of metaethics is a little mind-boggling, and feels VERY circular to me. Maybe it’s supposed to? As for messing with our friend David J H with a little trolling – you are the most sophisticated troll I’ve ever encountered on these forums! Blessings to you!

          • David J H says:

            Also as I can see from your further replies to him you both disappeared up each others metaphorical backsides. Wow.

          • David J H says:

            I’m threatened because I wasn’t naive enough to take the time and effort to try and untangled that monstrous web he created? I never made claim to know anything and unlike Yagadan I didn’t pretentiously quote philosophy. I am not an “expert” but I won’t be victim to the avalanche of indecipherable nonsense that people like Yagadan throw at you. Who’s really claiming to be the experts here Janice after one presents the avalanche and the other pretends to understand it? Hmmmm? When I get clear and concise comments written in decipherable language I will always happily answer them. Seriously Janice, Yagadan the victim here? Come off it!

          • georgem says:

            I am making a comment in a random place just to say that you are the one of not many who actually now something in this topic 🙂 I have learnt a bit of body language and I cannot stop “doing this” subconsciously to other people 🙂 I have learnt a lot from a tv show “Lie to me” and inspired with it looked for some resources. Key worlds BASE LINE, though you cannot really tell whether someone is lying unless you know his/hers base line 🙂 But body language tell a hell of a story. Regards Mate!

          • David J H says:

            You make numerous errors, you use needless flowery language and yes it’s too long. It would leave anyone wondering if you have any sort of grasp of what you are trying to say at all? Not going to reply to you again because as with many as ignorant as you, you can’t actually see it yourself. The

            Dunning–Kruger effect is at play here I feel. Look it up.

        • Randall Webber says:

          David-I wasn’t aware that ASPD and other personality disorders had a neurological basis. Could you give us some literature citations so I can learn more about this?

          • David J H says:

            I said psychopathy was neurologically based. I do not agree with this sort of reclassification to ASPD. I honestly don’t see it as the same thing. Personality disorders may have numerous currently unknowable causes but yes I wouldn’t be surprised at a neurological base in many cases.

          • David J H says:

            Okay. I don’t believe anything. I have a current understanding based on evidence. I’m not a preacher so I’m not asking for belief. If you want to believe in something go to church with the rest of the deluded.

            Personally this feels like that start of a trolling session and if I see more evidence of it I’ll just flag you.

          • David J H says:

            I had written another reply to you feeling like you might be about to troll me. After reading your profile I realise I would have been mistaken. You are in fact a quite delusional conspiracy theorist. So I apologise but I won’t be addressing this or any other comment from you as I feel it will enable your mental health issues. Be well.

          • David J H says:

            Cool I missed a joke. I’ll get over that a lot sooner than you’ll get over your delusional mental illness. Seek help.

          • Realist says:

            Are you seriously attempting to make a medical diagnosis based on internet comments? You need to get your ego under control buddy. Better luck next time.

          • David J H says:

            If I I’m wrong I’m cool with it but if I’m right then my sympathies are with you. Go on don’t trust what I say, ask a psychologist about your need to believe in conspiracies?

          • Realist says:

            Unlike you, i dont have a need to believe in anything, whereas you clearly have a number of mental health issues as evidenced by all the issues you’ve attempted to project onto me in your previous posts. Next time don’t try to psychoanalyse a trained psychologist and you’ll avoid making such a fool of yourself.

            I look forward to your condescending insults and further projections of your insecurities.

          • David J H says:

            I have seen your profile and anyone else that sees it is not going to believe you’re a professional anything. You follow conspiracy theories of all kinds and haven’t given any explination for this strange behaviour. My feeling is this is because like most conspiracy nuts you don’t think it’s at all strange. Seriously “a trained psychologist”? You are frigging hilarious! Go away numbnut.

          • Realist says:

            So predictable. So many assumptions. You really do embarrass yourself sir. I would direct you to a little website called “wikileaks” to help you understand the difference between a conspiracy theorist and an educated researcher but your ego and your cognitive dissonance are obviously overpowering your limited intelligence, so there wouldn’t be much point.

            When you grow up enough to stop talking down to people you don’t know, you might be a qualified to have a logical discussion…

          • David J H says:

            Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha, you didn’t? You actually called yourself “an educated researcher”? And you want people to believe you’re a psychologist? You even said “you do embarrass yourself sir”? Listen to yourself, you sound like a 13yr old. Seriously I am not going to entertain this nonsense any longer. Look this is the internet so it’s not surprising but you are emotionally and intellectually and adolescent. In fact looking at the subjects and websites that you indulge in if you’re not 14 or 15yrs old you are the one who should be deeply embarrassed. Ha ha ha ha ha. Go research more mysterious ancient Egyptian mysteries (perhaps its was aliens?) ha ha ha ha ha.

          • Realist says:

            Let’s just take a second to remember how this all started with a one line, three word joke, that went over your head.

            Your ego is out of control, which is why you felt so embarrassed about not getting the joke, you felt the need to cyber-stalk a stranger online, and you are trying to talk down to me?

            Get help

          • David J H says:

            I admitted I missed the joke “Cool I missed a joke. I’ll get over that a lot sooner than you’ll get over your delusional mental illness. Seek help.”

            Which taking into account it was one line without context is completely understandable. However there is no defense for the fodder you indulge in and moreover the credence you seem to give it based on the comments you leave on these subjects. You’re clearly unable to recognise nonsense. So don’t talk to me. I neither entertain drunks or the deluded. Logic is wasted on both.

            So that’s it is it? My ego about missing a joke I admitted? Look. Come see. Psychologist of the year here. Line up for your assessments. You’re in good hands. ha ha ha ha ha ha

      • Janice says:

        Yes! You are right on with your comment about the need for more vulnerability and connectivity in our culture. Well, any culture anywhere that involves humans I think. Have you heard or read Brene Brown’s work? Great stuff, and right up the vulnerability/connectivity alley! Check it out if you haven’t already. I know she’s done a few TED talks in addition to her books.

  5. b_cald says:

    When someone is telling the truth, they will talk with their hands like someone would do in a normal conversation. When someone is lying however, their hands with either be in their pockets or almost completely still. Like Wilma Conner previously posted, look at their face. A good liar can fake their tone of voice and overcome the hands fairly easily. But where Wilma is wrong, you can’t really tell that someone is lying by saying their eyes are “shifty”. That could just be because they saw something weird or are thinking of something else. but you do need to pay attention to the eyes. When someone lies, their eyes will look up to the left. Most of the time, the person talking won’t even realize it happened which is what makes it such a hard thing to over come when lying. One more thing, the person lying will often repeat the lie either in the exact same way it was originally said, or they will change the wording slightly. This is because the person subconsciously needs to be certain that you heard the lie and repeating it makes the person feel more secure about their lies.

    • David J H says:

      You are talking utter bollocks. 🙂
      There is no specific type of body language or lack of it to look for in deception. Many pathological liars won’t even show many micro-expressions or other emotional leakage. Everything must be studied and seen in context and even then the best deception experts can be fooled. If anyone ever claims they have a set of rules to spot liars then they are lying or mistaken. Most people fabricating a story will leave clues but it’s different for each person.
      But thanks for the laugh. 😛

      • Alexandria says:

        This is the daily POSITIVE. Why not let people comment as they wish? I do agree with different people having different responses. I feel quite comfortable looking up and to the left and I am certainly not lying. Someone I know smiles when they lie, even if they are feeling guilty. I’m sure there are certain consistencies, however…

        • David J H says:

          Alexandria never should someone talk as if they are in some way expert or knowledgeable if they are not. Many come on the internet and read something like this and believe it to be true. There is a science of deception emerging and genuine experts exist. People like b_cald make mockery of this and those seriously studying it. I am half way through a degree in Forensic Psychology myself and seeing people online talk as if they have some command and understanding of the subject that they clearly do not, drives me to distraction. The whole comment was framed as if everything said were facts and not just some very vague impressions and ideas. If anyone would really like to know about the psychology of deception they can study it too. So I do not apologise for drawing a line underneath it in exactly the way that I did. I was deliberately provocative so my comment would be noticed.

          Very glad you noticed it.

          • Grant Sheppard says:

            I suggest you go back to study or ask for a refund! Deception does have micro-expressions in body language. Not everybody is able to spot it!

          • David J H says:

            Glad you watched Lie To Me. But I’m afraid micro-expressions have not yet found there way to become a consistent way of revealing deception. For a start they are largely found only if you have good video evidence. Even then they will only form a part of the picture and not be revealing in each subject. However I am sure Tim Roth is happy you enjoyed the show. lol

          • David J H says:

            Also “Many pathological liars won’t even show many micro-expressions” means there are micro-expressions but few. Some comprehension skills wouldn’t go amiss Grant. Keep watching the prime time fictional television shows. 🙂

          • Grant Sheppard says:

            Haha, enjoyed you’re comment. I watched Dr Paul Ekman instead, you calling him a liar too?

          • David J H says:

            Need I repeat that your comment was in error because you failed to understand my comment? Jokes aside you made a fool of yourself by scolding me for something I did not write. So again. Comprehension skills. Get some. The name dropping skills don’t make up for your lack of them one little bit brainiac. lol

          • Grant Sheppard says:

            How is my comment error? Stop being such a wise ass. Just because you have a degree or studying for it doesn’t mean you know everything. Comprehension skills! You are the one who failed to comment on a comment.
            Its people like you who make this world a worse place. But whatever you’ll probably feel my comment is in error anyway. So ill safe my comments for somebody who doesn’t take things personally. Have a good life!

          • David J H says:

            “Deception does have micro-expressions in body language” this is what you said, implying that I said they did not. In fact I said “Many pathological liars won’t even show many micro-expressions” this does not negate their presence, it merely points out one limitation to using them. So I never claimed to actually “know” anything. I presented something I have a current understanding of and you completely misinterpreted it because of a lack of comprehension. I am aware of the field as I am also aware that it’s use is not yet widespread. So pull your bloody head in.

          • David J H says:

            I didn’t hear you denying your error? Therefore the entire reason for your comments attacking me were based on a false pretence. So we know what you are so full of don’t we?

          • Grant Sheppard says:

            I don’t have to but i did. You only read what you want to read. But that’s okay.
            You behave like you’re the only one who understands this topic. You don’t know me yet you pretend that you do.

          • David J H says:

            No I behave like you straw manned me and you did. I behave like facts are important and they are. I presented to you your exact words each time, you could not do the same for me. Why? Because your attack was unwarranted and you can’t present evidence you don’t have. I made no claim about you or what you said without directly quoting you. You make many claims about who I am and what you believe my motivations are but these claims are the empty cries of a beaten man. Go crawl back into the hole you crawled out of Grant. You are deeply pathetic.

          • Grant Sheppard says:

            I suggest you go back into reading you’re own comments. Burning everyone down who disagrees with you is not the way to prove you’re point, a point you don’t have anyway! You straw manned so many others in this discussion but you don’t see that because you can only hear yourself. You’re wrong but cant handle that, how is that for pathetic.

          • David J H says:

            Tell you what why don’t you let them defend themselves if they have issue with my comments directed at them? You made one specific comment directed at me and your premise was wholly false because of your lack of comprehension and I have soundly dealt with that. Since then your attacks have been non-specific and vague but as you lack comprehension skills this is perhaps the best you can do.

            I suggest you learn how to read before referring to my comments again. It’s clear why you direct me to read my own comments, it’s because you have proved you can’t.

            When I do reply to someone who I believe is mistaken I gladly welcome their defence (I have also read and understood their comment first). You however I am done with because you refuse to provide evidence and refuse to accept evidence that is presented to you.I mean how can I trust you understand the rest of my comments anyway if the only one you have specified so far you didn’t even read correctly? If I was them you are the very last person I would want defending me.

            I’ll tell you how a point really fails to be proven? When due to a complete misinterpretation you didn’t have a point anyway.

            Grant if it wasn’t clear I am saying LEARN TO READ, there’s a good lad. lol

    • Kris says:

      Yea I always look to the left when I’m thinking about an answer to a question. I’m not lying, just thinking and verbalizing. These witch hunt tactics are psychotic.

  6. Therese says:

    I think that you have a lot of personal problems you need to deal with rather than generalizing and using your personal experience right now (ex: daughter, husband cheating) Sweet heart I’ve been through it. You don’t need to live through your blogging. It won’t go away… People lie and always will. Little big. Get over it. This was in the middle of my positive page and I read this BS? Really ? Thanks. You are a negative influence sending negative vibes around the world which is worse than being a liar! Write somthing more cheery next time downer! Good luck with you 15 pregnant daughter or husband sleeping with the “hot” nicer body receptionist at work. Leave him.

  7. married2conpulsiveliar says:

    I have a trick I use when I think maybe things don’t sound just right, or they are being a little to vague,, I make a crazy accusation to them,, ie; so did u have fun flirting with the cashier? so you skipped school today? so how many sluts did you drool over this time, you look guilty what don’t you want me to know? at that point I am watching closely for any small facial movements, or ears turning red or not looking me in the eye, or quick shallow breathes or the big give away, answering my question with another question or best yet, repeating my question back to me. there are lots of little hints to pick up on as a person answers questions they are asked that I have learned the hard painful way to spot. I feel as if most of the time I am the head scientist running a life long research project, with me as the only test dummy.

  8. Steven Miller says:

    Like all things in the world, there exists no “silver bullet to lie detection.”

    Dr. Paul Ekman has created FACS (Facial Action Coding System) in addition to many theories and models regarding how to spot lies. Has Paul Ekman created the perfect, fool proof way to detect liars? No.

    Yet, in many areas his work and research is highly praised. His track record and contribution to society is outstanding. If a man has conducted workshops for the CIA, FBI, Homeland security, and other governmental agencies who constantly work to prevent terrorist attacks, apprehend psychopaths, and stop other individuals who wish to bring harm to society, he obviously has some credible evidence to back up his models and theories.

    The study of linguistics is an interesting approach to lie detection, and does have its merits. There is data to back up four points argued in the video, but whether or not that data is statistically significant enough to be employed on a large scale is yet to be determined. Furthermore, it is easier to control your words than to control your body language. Yet, when coupled with non-verbal communication, the pair create a very powerful way to spot the majority of lies.

    In another book, the definite guide to body language, the authors argue that one can spot lie detection by observing one’s non-verbal expressions. Then, through combining individual non-verbal expressions together into what they call “body language clusters” one can have a very good insight into what the person is really saying.

    In addition, Vanessa Van Edwards, a people scientist, has spent her life researching non-verbal communication, and points to a couple actions that the MAJORITY (not everyone, but the majority) of people do when they are lying.

    There will always be outliers. There will always be exceptions to the rules. But as scientists and economists, we don’t care about the outliers. We just care about what works the majority of the time for the majority of the people. And by combining the research put forth from various different people on the topic of lie detection, we do have systems and methods that can help people spot lies.

  9. Terry Scott says:

    I have been a government specialist in this field for quite some time. Unfortunately, even with research, bad info can come up. Trainers like Paul Eckman or Chase Hughes have developed increasingly more accurate systems for lie detection. While a single stressful gesture may raise an eyebrow, one would need much more to make any remotey accurate assessment of truth or deception.

  10. Chris says:

    Most of that is the exact opposite. Most liars don’t think ahaid most of the time. You way over thought this And think that a lot of liars are smart enough. Mostly just look for inconsistency and watch their body language. I love the idea though And find some of it true.

    • Dale Partridge says:

      Haha! I think there’s a lot more to lying than you realize.. there’s a lot of psychology behind it. 🙂 Even if someone telling a lie isn’t thinking about it in the forefront of their mind, their subconscious is a whole other story.

  11. Susu says:

    I am shy and tend to talk that way, especially if I’m under pressure. What can I do? My husband thinks I’m lying when I’m not, and telling the truth will I’m lying. This has turned out to be very costly at times.

  12. eLLe says:

    The pathological liar that I was involved with was really good at lying! The thing he was not so good at was every so often he would come out and say something that was self incriminating and not even realize he said it. The problem was, it generally happened during a positive moment and I was left a little perplexed…thinking…did he just say that? Another thing that you can count on: if someone is a cheater — they will cheat. If someone is a liar — they will lie. No amount of love will change that. The only people that can change it is them, but that would take alot of work and don’t kid yourself that you are going to be the one to inspire them to do it. RUN. RUN FAST. Take heart that no matter who they are with and what it looks like on the surface, they’re running the same game.
    Another sign… notice how his friends and family receive you. If you feel like they aren’t taking the relationship seriously, well, there is a reason for that. The reason is that they are aware that your partner is a liar / player.

    I was the first person my ex bf asked to move in with him and this was HUGE step for him. All he did was move his cheating and lying to a less visible place — ultimately it came out. Even knowing how toxic he is, the rejection hurts and I’m left to deal with that.

  13. Confuse says:

    Well I’m not married just in a relationship. J been dealing with this person for about year and a half and sinces that year and half all he did is lie nothing he can say make and truth until he felt like there’s nothing else to say he thinks by lies makes him a better person but it’s tearing us apart but he don’t see that. When I ask him about it he looks directly though me or act like he don’t hear me not only this hurts my feels but he makes me feel like I’m not worthy the truth. I wish I could find the strength to say fuck you I don’t need this but I’m scared of losing him and for what.

  14. Kate says:

    So how do you stop loving a liar? Seems so hard to do….and makes me sad that I know deep down that no amount of time, forgiveness or love will change who they are at the core. Just so sad.

  15. Kristen Jones Freeman says:

    I have ? My wife has had to lie her all of her live bc she grew up in a judgmental family who made her feel like she could never tell them of the mistakes she made with out being looked at like she going to hell so she lied and never told anyone but we been married 3 years now and it took me a little to see it but when I finily did I know push for it and that did help but hear now after trying and seeing her how she acting and reading things I have tried to make her feel like I would never judge her and it doesn’t matter that she lied then but that she tells me shows the love she has for me I have let her know if can be honest with me and really honest my love for hear will always be there and it will I know some of its going to hurt but I have gitting ready over the years for anything what I am asking is I am I doing the right will this work if she loves me and I make her feel like there nothing she say to loose me will she tell me everything will she want to ? If u could help me out that would be great I just want to know that it’s not pointless I guess

  16. Kris says:

    We’re all liars. We do it without even knowing it sometimes. Sometimes we do it for good reason. Anyone who says otherwise is just lying to themselves.

    • Kathleen Kaye says:

      Having a nonverbal learning disability I can assure you for me personally I have never lied due to the fact it’s sometimes difficult to pick up on and I find all types of lies messed up.

Comments are closed.