An interesting read for those who have questions. Written by Paul Ekman, professor emeritus of psychology at the University of California at San Francisco.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...102701478.html

This is why this program needs to be abolished. Harassing a passenger that is grieving for the loss of a loved one. Totally unacceptable.

Ron, where is the TSA's big catch from this program?

Not exactly an independent opinion

yeah...'Emeritus'

translated from the Latin it means 'you're not fired, but get lost'.

This article is nothing but biased hogwash.

Yeah...not only that....he probably needs to keep his "supplemental income" stream going (gotta milk that golden goose)...so lets do this at all airports!!!

Almost lost my lunch reading this pile of crap!

As another poster already said, harrassing somebody who lost a loved one is about as low as one can go. Maybe, I should not say it - they will come up with a new one.

Actually, in general, the title of emeritus faculty is a matter of considerable distinction, bestowed only upon retired faculty who have distinguished themselves during their active time of employment at the university.

Of course, that doesn't mean they're always right.

Disclaimer: I haven't read the article in question --- yet. I'm just objecting to disparaging his title ...

The question I have is that how many x-ray machines with better bomb-detection technology could the TSA have purchased with the salaries and training of these people?

What strikes me the most is the absence of data and research. Has anyone TESTED these behavioral analysis techniques? Is there data? If so, where is it? (Let me guess, it's secret.)

Look at personality testing for example. Although still hugely popular, this has not been shown to be accurate, applicable, or consistent.

Much of what this article describes is too ethereal... "I just had a bad feeling about that guy."

When I taught, I would freak when my students would use these zen observations like, "I could just tell she had a pulmonary embolism." No. You didn't magically sense it: you noticed that she was breathing fast, had changes in her electrocardiogram, and that she was taking an oral contraceptive on a 15-hour flight. A good physician or nurse uses OBJECTIVE data and pieces it together.

A low-facing glance or checking one's pockets isn't reliable, objective information. It's not specific or sensitive to constitute a reliable screening test.

Or they could have bought new, pretty uniforms with shiny metal badges.

Oh wait, they did.

There's never been one, of course, just as TSA has never caught any of those elusive shoe-bombs or shampoo-bombs.

Of course, one also has to wonder why Ronny is posting a two-and-a-half year article that predates USAToday's reporting about the utter failure of the BDO nonsense to catch anyone or anything who presents a threat to aviation.

my tow or so hockey pucks.....

i will give the author credit as (he says) he has been doing behavioral analysis for some 40 years.....but......what is the training time for spotniks (we can't call them 90 day wonders as iirc, the training time is less tan that

emphasis mine: excuse me?????? when did this happen as the tsa would have been gloating, gloating and gloating over it's big catch.

emphasis mine: wrong professor....the screener you refer to did have the training and it's called "your own gut feeling". ask any bank teller who's been on the job for 6 months and they can tell you all about gut feelings when someone comes into the bank trying to cash a stolen check.

what a load of baloney sandwiches and to show you that spot doesn't work.....i wear a black leather jacket (a2 style for those that know ), a sweater and jeans every time i travel. it doesn't matter if i'm going to bos in january or las in august, i never change my outfit and you would think that with me in las in august or at iad when it's 95 degrees and humid, i would stand out, right? nope-i have yet to be spotted

The one I ran into at STL was in my face & all but trying to pick a fight with me. That's not behavioral detection, that's provocation.

This agency needs to be trimmed down to minimum staffing needed to operate the checkpoint lanes & inspect checked baggage.

goalie, ya gotta learn TSAspeak.

They were "suspected terrorists" or in English, suspected of being terrorists. Turns out they weren't, but TSA feels it can still claim some kind of victory.
Twisted minds twist words.

How annoying.
Has TSA started a BDO quota program?
I wonder how they deal with Tourette syndrome?

And Tourette's Syndrome Association has a website! www.tsa-usa.org