Brain Fingerprinting: Identifying Incorrect Thinking

From: J. R. Molloy (
Date: Tue Oct 02 2001 - 11:13:55 MDT

Identifying terrorists before they strike
Steve Kirsch,
ABSTRACT: Brain fingerprinting,
a technique proven infallible in FBI tests and US Navy tests and accepted as
evidence in US courts, can be applied to a new problem: the problem of
accurately identifying trained terrorists before they strike. Had it been in
place on September 11, it would have prevented all of the attackers from
boarding the planes. It is the only technology for preventing other terrorist
attacks before they are carried out. For example, it is the only system that
will allow us to accurately identify all members of al Qaeda so we can keep
them off our planes today and prevent them from entering our country.
Brain Wave Science
Human Brain Research Laboratory, Inc.
Dr. Lawrence A. Farwell has invented, developed, proven, and patented the
technique of Farwell Brain Fingerprinting, a new computer-based technology to
identify the perpetrator of a crime accurately and scientifically by measuring
brain-wave responses to crime-relevant words or pictures presented on a
computer screen. Farwell Brain Fingerprinting has proven 100% accurate in over
100 tests, including tests on FBI agents and tests for a US intelligence
agency and for the US Navy. Dr. Farwell recently presented Brain
Fingerprinting in court in defence of a man falsely convicted of murder.
Brain Fingerprinting has been featured on CBS 60 Minutes, CBS Evening News,
ABC World News, CNN Headline News, and the Discovery Channel, in U.S. News and
World Report, the New York Times, and in print and electronic media throughout
the world.

The "computerized security screen" described in this paper and the calculation
of test results are all done totally under computer control; testing requires
no human intervention and no human interpretation. In the case of the FBI
tests, 100% of the determinations were correct. There were no false positives,
no false negatives, and no indeterminates. Eight years later there is still no
other technology or manual screening that comes close to these results. Brain
fingerprinting has been used to exonerate and well as to convict and it has
succeeded in difficult cases where all other methods have failed.

In this document, we describe how, by combining brain fingerprinting
technology with iris identification, we can construct a system that combines
high security with convenience. It is a system that cannot be fooled, can
probe more areas than a typical manual screen, and is dramatically more
convenient and more accurate than manual security questioning. The system
described here is much more than just a high-tech, more effective version of
the security questions that they ask on El Al flights. In addition, it also
provides instant positive authentication at very low cost virtually anywhere
in the country. So you get the benefits of an in-depth security screen
everywhere in the country without cost or inconvenience.

In our system, you are given a 10 minute computerized security screen only
once every few years (and when necessary if a new threat is identified), to
determine your "security risk profile." This can be done on the day of travel
or anytime in advance, at your convenience. Once your data (your iris data,
name, and brain fingerprint security screen test results) are entered into a
federal databank, it is inexpensive and quick (under 1 second) to authenticate
you at airports, sports arenas, public buildings, etc. In fact, only an
Internet connection (which could be wireless) is required for authentication.
Where iris scans are cost prohibitive, an ID card used in conjunction with a
biometric sensor (such as fingerprints, hand geometry, etc) can be used to
achieve nearly equivalent speed, convenience, accuracy, and confidence.
Depending on your risk profile and the current entry policy of the place you
want to enter, you may or may not be allowed access.

The system does not violate anyone's civil liberties. Unlike a human screener,
it cannot discriminate on the basis of race, creed, color, sex, religion, etc.
It is not a psychological profile. The computer cannot determine how you feel
about anything. It is best equated to an automated version of the Yes/No
security screening questions we have today. Essentially, it is nothing more
than a sequence of "Have you seen this item before?" questions. You may review
the questions in advance and you may choose to halt the test at any time. Your
answers cannot be used to incriminate you. The association of iris data and
your name is strictly optional and at your discretion. You may choose to be
tested totally anonymously without having to produce any ID whatsoever. So
this is actually more protective of people's privacy than many of the existing
security screens that people accept today.

In order to account for possible negative public perception caused by a lack
of understanding of how the system works, the system should be phased in over
at least a year, and a manual screening option should be available during this
public phase-in acceptance period. Since all the terrorists in the 9/11 attack
arrived from outside the country, we could first require its use on all people
seeking entrance into the US from outside the country (regardless of whether
they are US citizens or not). The President and members of Congress should
also be screened before it is required of the general public. However, for
maximum effectiveness, the system should be adopted at all airports world-wide
so that we can restrict the movement of terrorists without restricting the
movement of the public at large.

Other benefits accrue from this system as well. Iris scanners are already
installed and in use today at select airports and sports arenas. By requiring
their use at these places, the FBI can not only keep terrorists from entering,
but can capture a suspect for arrest or questioning. An iris scanner can tell
the operator to have security hold a suspect that the FBI has tagged in the
iris database. Alternatively, the FBI can just use this information to track
the movements of suspects without arousing suspicion. All of this is
impossible to do today. A national iris databank can also be used for many
positive things such as uniting parents with children.

It is critical that the US government provide the funds to commercialize the
use of brain fingerprinting to identify terrorists, because it is the most
cost effective way to combat terrorism in the US. However, without leadership
from the FAA to require the use of this system at US airports, this technology
will not be commercially developed on its own for this particular use.

Unlike most other approaches, the approach described here provides a potent
weapon on the war against terrorism while actually increasing customer
convenience and enhancing security against a wide range of attacks making it
at least 1,000 times more difficult for a terrorist to escape detection . At
worst it adds only 1 second per authenticated entry and typically only 10
minutes for a re-screening once every few years.

All the underlying technology necessary to implement the system described in
this document exists today; it just needs to be packaged for this new
application and installed in airports. In less than 90 days from receipt of a
request from the FAA, FBI, or Department of Transportation, we can prove the
concept is effective at identifying terrorists with over 90% certainty for
$100K (99.9% confidence is possible but will take more than 90 days). We can
construct a prototype "airport scenario" (construction of security screening
booths, creation of all security checkpoint types, and creation of software
needed to run a large airport) for less than $50M in less than 24 months. All
the technology is off-the-shelf and it's just a packaging, programming, and
system integration problem. By capitalizing on new technologies, a system
using the approach described here could be put in place at all airports in the
US in less than 4 years at a total one-time capital equipment cost of under
$1B, the majority of which can be funded by private industry (the federal
government would set the standards and certify the manufacturers and
periodically test and certify the machines themselves).

Once the system is in place, the cost to install additional authentication
security checkpoints can be as low as $300 per station. Since the system does
not require labor beyond the personnel who are already manning security
checkpoints, check-in desks and boarding gates, and because Internet
connectivity is so inexpensive ($1K per month for a high traffic airport), the
system described here does not appreciably increase annual operating costs to
run an airport.

This system isn't perfect. It might allow 1 terrorist in 100 through. Is there
any other system that can determine an exact count of the number of terrorists
on a plane? Brain fingerprinting may sound silly. But consider the
alternative. Our next attack could be far worse. How many more people will
lose their lives before we take action? A million?

Is there a better alternative for protecting innocent lives?

--- --- --- --- ---

Useless hypotheses, etc.:
 consciousness, phlogiston, philosophy, vitalism, mind, free will, qualia,
analog computing, cultural relativism, GAC, Cyc, Eliza, cryonics, individual
uniqueness, ego, human values, scientific relinquishment

We move into a better future in proportion as science displaces superstition.

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat May 11 2002 - 17:44:11 MDT