You might laugh, but we get this question a lot, or something similar, such as: How can I prove I’ve spoken to my grandfather? Or Did I see the ghost that haunts my old barn?
Claims of alien encounters, ghosts, or even communication with the dead continue to captivate the public imagination. From mysterious lights in the sky to detailed abduction stories, to sightings and even conversations, people who report these kinds of contact are often met with intense curiosity—and skepticism. In an effort to determine the truth, some have turned to lie detection technologies like polygraph tests or more modern tools such as ocular motor deception technology and brain scans.
Interestingly, you can take a lie detector test to determine whether you are lying about what you think happened. But this is not proof that what you think is what actually happened.
Let’s unpack why lie detection tech is a poor fit for probing para normal encounter claims.
1. Lie Detectors Don’t Actually Detect Lies
The term “lie detector” is misleading. Lie detection technologies don’t directly detect deception. Instead, they measure responses. In the case of polygraph these are physiological responses like heart rate, blood pressure, breathing patterns, and skin conductivity. For Ocular Motor Deception tech, these are pupil dilation, blink rate, eye movement and other variables. The idea is that when someone lies, they experience a response, which causes noticeable changes in these bodily signals.
But responses can be triggered by a number of factors. Someone telling the truth could “fail” the test, while someone lying but calm and rehearsed could “pass.” Even though next generation technologies that use AI are now over 85% accurate, they are not perfect.
2. Subjective Experiences Are Hard to Measure
Even if a person truly believes they saw aliens, it doesn’t mean it happened in objective reality. Human memory is malleable and can be influenced by dreams, trauma, or false memories. So, if someone undergoes a polygraph or another kind of lie detection test, it might simply reflect that they believe their story—not that the event literally happened.
In other words, lie detection can’t distinguish between a person lying and a person who sincerely believes in an experience that might not be real. That’s a huge limitation when trying to validate something as out-there as extraterrestrial or paranormal contact.
3. Scientific Proof Requires More Than Belief
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. To prove someone saw an alien, you’d need physical, testable, and repeatable evidence—something like alien biological material, verified spacecraft, or video footage confirmed by multiple credible sources. Belief alone, even if verified by a polygraph, doesn’t meet the threshold for scientific proof.
Lie detection technologies simply don’t bridge that gap. They’re tools for assessing emotional or physiological reactions, not instruments for confirming paranormal truths.
4. Modern Lie Detection Tools Still Struggle
Technologies like fMRI scans and eye-tracking software are often touted as more advanced lie detection tools. While we believe in the promise of these systems as they become more reliable, they are still based on the assumption that lies and truth show up differently in the brain or body. But emotions, beliefs, and neurological variation can make the data hard to interpret. Ultimately we believe that computers do this better than humans do, but there is room for improvement.
In the end, with respect to paranormal experiences, lie detection technologies might provide a window into how someone feels about their story, but they fall far short of proving whether or not an alien encounter actually happened. The search for truth in the realm of the unexplained still demands rigorous evidence—not just technology that measures bodily reactions to questions.