tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8095807065479059898.post3933546077067210553..comments2023-06-21T00:36:40.840-07:00Comments on Plead Ignorance: TSA PornRobert the Skeptichttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10863488312604865183noreply@blogger.comBlogger30125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8095807065479059898.post-89162386810866257792010-11-28T18:28:03.841-08:002010-11-28T18:28:03.841-08:00SecretAgent This may sound strange coming from a f...<b>SecretAgent</b> This may sound strange coming from a fan of The Stooges.. but I never really cared for Benny Hill all that much either.Robert the Skeptichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10863488312604865183noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8095807065479059898.post-72918924869430702632010-11-28T17:49:44.741-08:002010-11-28T17:49:44.741-08:00For the record, I find male-bashing humor offensiv...For the record, I find male-bashing humor offensive as well. But the Benny Hill genre is disgusting to me.secret agent womanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03763879283931347382noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8095807065479059898.post-9410467570187957912010-11-24T10:58:55.937-08:002010-11-24T10:58:55.937-08:00Rain You bring up a question that is not easily de...<b>Rain</b> You bring up a question that is not easily defined and less easily answered. The issue is as complex as humanity is diverse. Deception, mis-perception, hidden motives, bias are all characteristics which we not only tend to impose on others but which we often carry unconsciously within ourselves. Add to this that most issues are not clear cut but involve nuance and trade-offs.<br /><br />There are things that are wrong but we must also recognize things we can be thankful for: That factions of one political party do not bomb or murder those of the opposing party, as happens in other countries. That we still have, or strive for, the rule-of-law here, that we have intelligent and sober voices which do occasionally get heard through the noise. We can disagree on the interpretations of our Constitutional form of representation, but we still have a Constitution.<br /><br />Tomorrow, Americans take a break from all this and give thanks for what do do have. Enjoy, and thanks for contributing in all the ways that you do.Robert the Skeptichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10863488312604865183noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8095807065479059898.post-29815460247552299152010-11-23T12:28:26.592-08:002010-11-23T12:28:26.592-08:00I am not sure what is wrong with us as a people. D...I am not sure what is wrong with us as a people. Do you have any idea? Something has certainly turned us from what I thought, at least, we once were. It's very depressing :(Rain Trueaxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07994628226501093880noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8095807065479059898.post-53276445224933807402010-11-23T10:30:02.968-08:002010-11-23T10:30:02.968-08:00Rain I agree as the point of my post was that ther...<b>Rain</b> I agree as the point of my post was that there are better ways to more efficiently provide the necessary security. The work that Dr. Jacobson is proposing is one of these. <br /><br />To some extent the public is asking for this kind of "theater" as it gives the impression that a aggressive security approach is being pursued. Whatever system is put into place, the public will also need confidence that it is effective. The public also becomes complacent as time goes on and no further hijacking takes place. However, the second another airline terrorist action is executed, the public will then be demanding further security. It is a dichotomy of human nature.Robert the Skeptichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10863488312604865183noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8095807065479059898.post-61840657423896988552010-11-23T10:15:21.221-08:002010-11-23T10:15:21.221-08:00To me, the issue of being forced to take a risk th...To me, the issue of being forced to take a risk that adds to our cumulative radiation is not something I appreciate; but it's minor for me. I don't fly frequently and do not have anything like a knee or hip replacement that would mean I'd be singled out every single time. This is particularly unfair to those who already have had life deal them a hard blow. I read one woman describe how the screener put her hands inside her underwear, against her skin and down to her genitals. There is nothing that justifies that.<br /><br />They could do a lot by figuring out a system like for instance concealed weapon permits where people can go through an advance screening (like concealed weapon permits, with a doctor signing on that they have say a replacement joint or a breast or whatever that lets them bypass this system. <br /><br />What is so nuts about it is that once a 'terrorist' with a bomb is in the airport, at the screening lines, they could detonate and kill hundreds plus destroy the airport's ability to function for a period of time. This all is to make us feel they are doing something but the 'something' needs to be before they are in line. Moreover, since the pat down doesn't go into the bodily openings, it wouldn't necessarily catch everything. <br /><br />What I don't like is the randomness of it (other than the disabled guaranteed to be pulled aside) which has an 80 year old grandmother being singled out or a child. There is no excuse for not having something figured out by now to let those who are definitely safe and have something like a replacement joint get through. <br /><br />There is nothing that will always make us safe even driving to the airport but assaulting people or forcing them to take a possible radiation risk, that's wrong. And all for 'our' safety. All I can say is our early ancestors who settled this land would've never gone anywhere if they'd been this afraid.Rain Trueaxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07994628226501093880noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8095807065479059898.post-77048342711788896902010-11-23T09:32:56.511-08:002010-11-23T09:32:56.511-08:00Sheldon Thank you for sharing the article!<b>Sheldon</b> Thank you for sharing the article!Robert the Skeptichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10863488312604865183noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8095807065479059898.post-46264102287388877832010-11-23T09:26:26.177-08:002010-11-23T09:26:26.177-08:00Artist I am not sure why you think your comments a...<b>Artist</b> I am not sure why you think your comments are not welcome on my blog? You have mentioned this on more than one occasion; I don't believe I have censored you on any occasion.<br /><br />I welcome dissenting positions. In this case, I did some further research on the matter and found <a href="http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=231653" rel="nofollow">this article</a> which would appear to support your position. Of particular interest are scanners which could "malfunction" and emit higher doses of radiation. Also the focusing of radiation is a question.<br /><br />On the other hand, much of the technology we use daily (plastics, herbicides, pesticides, pharmaceuticals, consumer electronics...) all contain some levels of toxicity. For the most part, these compounds/devices can be used effectively and moderately. Water will kill you if you use too much of it or use it improperly.<br /><br />But again, the point of my article was that we may not be responding appropriately nor effectively to a perceived risk.<br /><br />Unless a commenter is profane or makes personal attacks, reasoned contrary opinions are welcome. That is what science is all about!Robert the Skeptichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10863488312604865183noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8095807065479059898.post-55684676365790792232010-11-23T09:23:55.334-08:002010-11-23T09:23:55.334-08:00Our comments may be of interest to your readers.
...Our comments may be of interest to your readers.<br /><br />http://illinois.edu/lb/article/72/45559Sheldon H. Jacobsonhttps://netfiles.uiuc.edu/shj/www/shj.htmlnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8095807065479059898.post-70288221099260404782010-11-22T18:23:14.526-08:002010-11-22T18:23:14.526-08:00Robert-I strongly believe in the sharing of knowle...Robert-I strongly believe in the sharing of knowledge so that people can make an informed decision. I also hope that when people take the time to comment, they're invited to discuss and offer their opinions. <br />At times I'm not certain that my comments in particular, are welcome on your blog.<br /><br />However, I read your response to RAIN. To compare any focused scanner with background cosmic radiation is inaccurate.<br /><br />The main problem with the scanner is that it focuses ALL of its "radiation" on our biggest organ: the skin. The settings are not lowered for children, who are much smaller. Even low level targeted radiation is cumulative and measuring it is not as simple as you suggest. Not all radiation is alike.<br /><br />Until definitive research has been done, many doctors are telling cancer survivors to ask for a pat down. And the horror stories about those have already started to pour in.<br /><br />If recent events are any indication, these new security measures may prove to be a complete waste of money.Artist and Geeknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8095807065479059898.post-68405009838762665062010-11-22T16:11:01.447-08:002010-11-22T16:11:01.447-08:00SecretAgent I Googled "explicit TSA body scan...<b>SecretAgent</b> I Googled "explicit TSA body scans" to see what would appear in images. I was a bit surprised - in some of the images one could clearly identify male genitalia! <br /><br />The question then becomes, as you point out, which methods are least intrusive. The point I am making that these intrusive scans applied to everyone may still not be the best way to ensure security.<br /><br />On the video: humor strikes people in different ways. Video is pretty low-brow for sure. Some may think it's sexist; though my wife, who we both consider a Feminist, thought it was funny. I think the British version of "The Office" is hilarious; the American version has been dumbed-down for American audiences. And most situation comedies routinely portray the father/husband as the blithering dolt while the mother/wife is the focus of intellect. I find that offensive. <br /><br />Come to think of it, I like "the Three Stooges" and my wife hates it.Robert the Skeptichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10863488312604865183noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8095807065479059898.post-78380658416110749362010-11-22T15:42:20.159-08:002010-11-22T15:42:20.159-08:00I saw a clip of a man going through a full body sc...I saw a clip of a man going through a full body scanner - it was embarrassingly detailed and I would be loathe to submit to that. And yet, I hate the pat-down thing as well, although it does help that it's a same-sex agent. But not much.<br /><br />(While I'm on the subject of hates, also hate that Japanese video. hat doesn't count as humor in my book.)secret agent womanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03763879283931347382noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8095807065479059898.post-20142560664954549802010-11-21T20:32:53.515-08:002010-11-21T20:32:53.515-08:00Artist I guess it is a matter of interpretation wh...<b>Artist</b> I guess it is a matter of interpretation what you refer to as "profiling", I would suggest that the Israelis are just using a sophisticated profiling method. However, the have very few airports in Israel, versus hundreds in the US, Europe.. etc. You see the logistics problem.<br /><br /><b>Rain</b> I would prefer the scanner myself. However, years BEFORE 9/11 we were traveling to Europe and changed planes in Stanstead airport outside of London. I was asked to spread-eagle and was physically patted down by an airport security person. It's been going on YEARS prior to the US becoming interested and concerned.<br /><br />As far as the safety of the scanners, I would not just assume our government automatically lies to us (Tea Baggers do this). Measurement of the scanner's radiation output is easily measured by simple instruments. If you look at the images, they expose an area just sufficient to penetrate the clothing; in fact the radiation HAS to be low or it would look like an x-ray and you would see skeletons. It shows the difference in the absorption of dense physical objects versus clothing. <br /><br />It is true that you would receive far more background radiation exposure actually flying in the thinner, and therefore less protective, atmosphere at 30,000' altitude. <br /><br />There are several sources for information on atmospheric radiation. One states: "<i>At commercial aircraft altitudes cosmic radiation is much more intense than on the ground. Even though exposure can be a hundred times greater at these altitudes than it is on the ground, it is still fairly small. It would take about 100 one-way flights between Toronto and Vancouver to obtain the same exposure as we get in one year from other sources of natural background radiation."</i><br /><br />That the cloudy images have any "sexual" or suggestive attributes I think are, of course, silly. The point of my article is that there is a more efficient and effective method than the inefficient and ineffective procedure of checking every single passenger.Robert the Skeptichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10863488312604865183noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8095807065479059898.post-57226857367635449172010-11-21T19:14:54.569-08:002010-11-21T19:14:54.569-08:00I'd prefer the 'naked scanner' to the ...I'd prefer the 'naked scanner' to the pat down given how they seem to be doing it including for one woman under the underwear. That just seems invasive beyond belief and if someone wanted to hide something they could put it inside the body; so how far will these people take this whole thing? I think Americans need to say this was too far. <br /><br />Worse, they are lying to us. They said it doesn't save images and then the images showed up elsewhere. They say they don't do it on children under 12 and I saw a video of a boy in an airport with the screeners where they took off his shirt and patted him down. He was clearly around 7 or 8 at the very oldest. They say the radiation is safe. Why should we believe them on this where they lie about the rest? If someone has to fly frequently, I'd guess that radiation is not going to prove to be safe.<br /><br />I'd say the terrorists just keep winning.Rain Trueaxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07994628226501093880noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8095807065479059898.post-73404731936929945512010-11-21T16:59:35.969-08:002010-11-21T16:59:35.969-08:00Robert-a number of blogs have recently been postin...Robert-a number of blogs have recently been posting a link to an article called:<br />"The Israelification of airports, high security, little bother."<br />Thought it was interesting if you haven't already come across it.<br /><br />They claim that they're not profiling, instead have highly trained (ex-military) asking everyone questions and observing behavior.<br />It seems to work.Artist and Geeknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8095807065479059898.post-79896874401789218142010-11-21T13:43:11.946-08:002010-11-21T13:43:11.946-08:00Orhan Big uproar her for using credit scores to ca...<b>Orhan</b> Big uproar her for using credit scores to calculate car insurance premiums for drivers. That aside, I am not proposing using credit records but creating a "traveler profile record" for individuals, similar to a credit record, but for travel risk instead. We have a "no fly list" but that has been shown to be almost completely useless. My father-in-law showed up on a No Fly list; his name is "John Smith"... like there is only one John Smith in the world?? <br /><br /><b>Gutsy</b> My point exactly, people are conducting this screening process who may be of marginal (how do I put this diplomatically) intellect. They are going through "motions" of security checking, unlike the Israeli level of profile screening. Any "smart" terrorist can likely bypass these screeners as testing of them has already demonstrated.Robert the Skeptichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10863488312604865183noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8095807065479059898.post-13411462754424422952010-11-21T13:11:55.630-08:002010-11-21T13:11:55.630-08:00What a laugh I had with this video. I don't ha...What a laugh I had with this video. I don't have a solution, however, when I travel, it really doesn't bother me to be scanned or x-rayed, as long as it doesn't cause cancer in the long run. I agree though, at LAX, it bothers me when TSA staff barely speak English themselves, and many look fed up with their job making you wonder if they're paying attention to wht they're doing.Gutsy Livinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02226653890127738115noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8095807065479059898.post-31361333736338538302010-11-21T12:49:56.101-08:002010-11-21T12:49:56.101-08:00I was recently told about the whole credit record ...I was recently told about the whole credit record thing that follows you Americans around the country. It blew my mind! I think thats just insane and absolutely unfair. We don't have anything like that here unless you're looking to hire or loan something. To think that credit record has anything to do with me flying around my country is just insulting. I simply wouldn't travel.Mehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16888125796129754219noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8095807065479059898.post-19736466266215616092010-11-21T10:40:53.226-08:002010-11-21T10:40:53.226-08:00Madame Indeed, some random "tests" of sc...<b>Madame</b> Indeed, some random "tests" of screening processes have show any number of contraband items being allowed through. Think about it, if as a TSA agent you are doing a mundane job for weeks, months, years never detecting a genuine threat, what are the odds that your complacency would reach a point where you would completely miss catching a genuine threat?<br /><br /><b>Jerry</b> One consultant termed the current screening process as "security theater", giving the illusion that substantial protection is being afforded. I personally have resigned to myself that I will trade of a lot of hassle just to reach a destination in a few hours. By the way, the business of private corporate (executive) jets is rapidly increasing. Moneyed people avoid all this bother.<br /><br /><b>Entre Nous</b> Probably not, but the agents will likely jostle each other for the opportunity to "screen" you to find out.Robert the Skeptichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10863488312604865183noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8095807065479059898.post-56108580295975835282010-11-20T20:08:58.980-08:002010-11-20T20:08:58.980-08:00The only thing that concerns me is... are they goi...The only thing that concerns me is... are they going to be able to tell exactly how MUCH padding is on my padded bra?????? :}Entre Noushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00186796216462041421noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8095807065479059898.post-37567905046043827082010-11-20T16:04:59.281-08:002010-11-20T16:04:59.281-08:00The government seems to be adept at one thing, tak...The government seems to be adept at one thing, take a straight-forward proposition and skew it all out of proportion. For myself, I don't mind being 'scanned' -- I'm old enough to not even care, even though I consider it an absurd waste of time and money.Jerryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04278403041887060649noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8095807065479059898.post-82457253353207867762010-11-20T13:54:51.649-08:002010-11-20T13:54:51.649-08:00I loathe idea of those scanners, and am not convin...I loathe idea of those scanners, and am not convinced that the numpties working at most security checking would recognise anything if it bit them on the nose (I'm being polite here).Madame DeFargehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08172239340844485940noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8095807065479059898.post-15018246956480211092010-11-20T10:28:47.314-08:002010-11-20T10:28:47.314-08:00Dr. Mom I want to just see someone with balls in t...<b>Dr. Mom</b> I want to just see someone with balls in the White House!! Who's with me?<br /><br /><b>DJan</b> The university video speaks of that very clearly, we are good to responding to what has already happened, not so go on anticipating the next strike or tactic. <br /><br /><b>BackRow</b> Even our profiling is lame; you can tell that the agents who pull people out do so for clearly unconsciously biased reasons. As I mentioned above, I speculate that I have been pulled out because I have a beard; but I never see them pull the guy aside in a suit and tie. Hmmm, I suspect that the next terrorists will be a dapper businessman wearing a suit.Robert the Skeptichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10863488312604865183noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8095807065479059898.post-80170983918330961892010-11-20T09:50:54.345-08:002010-11-20T09:50:54.345-08:00Bananas Benny would have done great in Japan. His ...<b>Bananas</b> Benny would have done great in Japan. His humor, like this one from Japan, require no understanding of the language to understand the hilarity. <br /><br /><b>MartyrMom</b> I've been pulled out of line for further screening as I apparently I meet their "profile" which is I am not wearing a business suit. They wand the bottoms of my socked feet. Strange. <br /><br /><b>Peter</b> That's cool about your daughter. During my tenure in the banking system I spent three of my 12 years there in Operations Research. I loved it, it was a natural fit for me. I used to love it when I would propose a system and someone would reject it saying "we've always done it this way." When I heard that phrase I knew my proposal was on the right track.Robert the Skeptichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10863488312604865183noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8095807065479059898.post-72511236502282923182010-11-20T08:16:35.321-08:002010-11-20T08:16:35.321-08:00I am with DJan. Once someone figures out a way aro...I am with DJan. Once someone figures out a way around the security, then the security tries to prevent a recurrence. Ridiculous. Profiling works only if the bad guys actually meet the profule model. Did Timothy McVeigh meet that model before he bombed that Oklahoma City building? When middle class, middle age women are nonprofile suspects, then the terrorists will find persons who meet that criteria to pass through the security. <br />I hate the idea of the current security methods. I think they are crazy as well. With all of the technology in this world, I can't believe it is not possible to secure our transportation system in a more effecient and less invasive manner. <br />Focus on finding the best mathematical/scientific system or a program which will find the most random way to ensure safety without a profling model.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com