Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by rurban 3235 days ago
We have the same issues with polygraph tests as with traditional witch tests:

* swimming test (aka trial by water): throw them chained into water. a witch would stay afloat, an innocent would sink like a stone.

* prayer test: witches cannot speak scriptures aloud, without making mistakes or omissions. but even if you can it was a devil's trick.

* touch test: victims of sorcery would have a special reaction to physical contact with their evildoer

* witch cake: In cases of mysterious illness or possession, witch-hunters would take a sample of the victim’s urine, mix it with rye-meal and ashes and bake it into a cake. This stomach-turning concoction was then fed to a dog—the “familiars,” or animal helpers, of witches, and would spell out the name. It worked with well in Salem, as knowledge of the recipe led to the conviction then.

* witch marks: numb and insensitive to pain. Moles, scars, birthmarks, sores, supernumerary nipples and tattoos could all qualify.

* Pricking and Scratching Tests on these marks.

* Incantations: very similar to a polygraph test

http://www.history.com/news/history-lists/7-bizarre-witch-tr...

They all worked extremely well over hundreds of years.