Lawrence Gostin, professor of global health law at Georgetown Law in Washington D.C., said screening would identify no more than a few Ebola cases at best, and agreed as to the risk of false alarms.
"Will it keep America safer? Probably not, but if it worked at most it would pick up a rare case," Gostin told CNBC.
"We are currently entering peak flu season. This could divert attention and resources from other areas of importance such as public health and hospital preparedness, which broke down in Dallas (where Ebola victim Duncan arrived)," he added.
Airport screening has been used in other epidemics, such as the 2003 severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) outbreak, which killed over 8,000 people.
Lessons from SARS?
China and Hong Kong were at the epicenter of the epidemic and the latter adopted intensive screening to identify potential sufferers. Other countries also adopted screening measures, but the success of these is disputed. Canada, for instance, failed to identify any cases of SARS through airport screening, but suffered around 400 cases. Forty-four of these patients died.
"Past studies (of airport screening) did not demonstrate this measure to be effective in containing transmission of emerging infectious diseases like SARS and pandemic influenza," said Balicer.
Read MoreEbola weighs as risks to business rise
Instead, experts said the most effective way to stop Ebola spreading globally was to boost affected countries' health infrastructure such that the outbreak stopped there.