This device, when fully developed, sounds like it could possibly do the trick.
seattlepi.nwsource.com158464 brain29.htmlOpen ↗ ********************* exzerpt
******************************* Brain fingerprinting is coming to Seattle.
An Iowa-based company founded by a neuroscientist who claims to have developed the next wave -- in
this case, a brain wave -- in forensic lie detection has decided to relocate here [....]
The concept of using brain waves as a replacement for the criminal polygraph or as a method of
personal identification grew out of Farwell's basic research into patterns of electrical activity in
the brain.
While a researcher at Harvard University, Farwell became interested in a particular kind of brain
wave involved in recognition. Called a P300 response (so named because it occurs within 300
milliseconds of observing an object or processing information), it is a brain wave that is produced
only when the subject recognizes something familiar.
Building on the science of this well-known phenomenon, Farwell has identified a specific type of
P300 response he calls a "mermer" that can be used to identify an individual by studying his or her
involuntary response to relevant information [...]
In addition to the potential forensic uses, Farwell says, brain fingerprinting has medical
applications. The company claims that measuring P300 activity can help with early diagnosis of
Alzheimer's disease, allowing for treatment to delay symptoms and onset of the disease....
Writing in the Berkeley Medical Journal,
[Hey Bob, P-E-E-R R-E-V-I-E-W-E-D Literature]
a publication of the University of California, a researcher said he supports the science behind
Farwell's techniques. But Dr. John Polich, associated with the Department of Neuropharmacology at
Scripps Research Institute, said he believes there is not enough research on brain fingerprinting to
allow it to be used in court.
Farwell said it always takes time before new techniques and scientific discoveries are widely
accepted. Farwell said one of the company's primary tasks now is to educate the criminal justice
community and the public about the potential of brain fingerprinting.
*******************************************************************
The way it would work to measure intelligence, you would show the test subject a "standardized
video," to be developed, that embodied some sort of basic non-culture-specific information. Then you
would show the subject a second video, which has content that would stimulate various levels of
cognition in the subject, measured by the machine. IQ-75 dickheadz would respond very weakly to the
second video. IQ-160s would see lots of association and respond strongly.
The machine then spits out the subjects IQ, registered prominently on a digital display.
It would take a lot of work by psychologists to get the standardization properly calibrated. But
once you had it, you would readily see which, for example, children are better off being "left
behind." Can you spell D-A-F-N ??
Supreme Court, 1954, Brown vs DNA - a total LOOZer...