Pros and Cons of Brain Fingerprinting

One of the inventors of brain fingerprinting, Dr. Lawrence A. Farwell, touted the new technology’s benefits, saying the criticism that it’s Orwellian—as in George Orwell’s book 1984—-is unfounded.

“Use of the term Orwellian is misplaced since Orwell described a society in which innocent people were constantly in fear of an extremely controlling government that did not value the truth,” Farwell said.

Hey wait a minute!



That’s exactly the way our government is right now.

He described it to a tee.

In brain fingerprinting, a subject (or victim) is hooked up to a newly developed “electroencephalographic” machine, a headband equipped with sensors, which can read brain waves and impulses stored in your brain (nature’s computer) to detect guilty information. Thus, if you’ve committed a crime, you are shown images similar to the crime (or related words), and your memory reveals that you know all about it, information that only the perpetrator of a crime could know.

The recognition impulse that gives you away is called a “MERMER.”

You’re guilty..

This invaluable tool will not only catch domestic criminals, but will allow us to apprehend terrorists trying to enter the country before they can carry out their schemes. Sit an Arab down, take off his turban, hook electrodes to his head, and show him a picture of bomb making. His eyes flash with recognition. The meter reads in the red and bells go off. Take him away to jail.

Simple. (We might be better off trying to address Palestinian grievances rather then depend on technology).

Farwell says the testing is 100 percent accurate. How many times has it been tried?

There are a couple minor potential problems.

What if the terrorist is a dumb guy? You show him a picture of a bomb-making manual, and he’s never read it. He’s a poison-the-water-supply man.

On the other hand, what if he’s an innocent genius? He knows a lot about a lot of things. He could set the brain-wave meter off accidentally.

Yet another anomaly is the guy who, like O.J. Simpson, manages to block the crime from memory (or at least a portion of it).

Unlike a fingerprint, which is physical evidence left on the spot, or DNA, a brain wave is air, that’s all. A person who can misspeak—-can misthink.

Any machine that can read——can misread.

We all know the long list of inventions claimed to be infallible, from the Titanic (unsinkable), to the Space Shuttle (safe as riding in an airplane), to Frankenstein’s monster (he’ll go around doing good).

But let’s assume all the claims are true. If it can be used for good catching criminals, it can also be misused. Who would want to misuse such a device? Let’s see. This application could be expanded. I might be a company that wants to check up on you to see if you were ever arrested for drunk driving, show you a picture of a drunk driving arrest, and find out that in fact you were arrested—–30 years ago.

You’re not hired, even though you paid the price in fines and service time and learned from your mistake.

I could check your credit history. Show you a picture of a guy not paying his bills on time.

2 Responses to “Pros and Cons of Brain Fingerprinting”

  1. Turban says:

    I’m now not sure where you’re getting your information, but great topic. I needs to spend some time learning much more or understanding more. Thanks for excellent info I used to be on the lookout for this information for my mission.

  2. Susie love says:

    It is how the questions are phrased and asked that determines how accurate this is. And sure, just as some can fool a polygraph so can some fool brain fingerprinting. Companies often use the polygraph now and it could pick up that you were arrested for drunk driving 30 years ago. If they didn’t ask how long ago you would not get the job. My suggestion is don’t break the law and you have nothing to worry about.

Leave a Reply