Not by Polarik, he could not tell my COLB from Hawaii was real.
Shoot, he can’t even tell if ANYTHING is real in a Picture. No one can. You ahve to look at the DOCUMENT itself, the real one. No one can prove anything with a photo.
Polarik’s evidence has been submitted to court review and recommended by a renowned document expert — the same expert who certified that Bush’s TANG documents from Dan Rather were a forgery. Keep an eye on your snickerdoodles.
No one can prove anything with a photo.
***You can point out a lot of discrepancies with photos if they are blatant forgeries . I would guess that team zer0bama will be bringing out the big guns with multiple experts declaring this to be a forgery within 5... 4... 3...
True enough. But it passes the initial smell test: the text and typing fonts are consistent with the era, and the language is consistent with British usage of the era.
I don’t know anything about your Hawaiian COLB, since I haven’t had a chance to evaluate it or review what Polarik has said about it.
But more to the point, I have followed Polarik’s analysis of the forged COLB over the past year, and have found it convincing.
Digital photos are worthless for proving the authenticity of anything. Anyone who does serious work in computer graphics knows that.
You can prove a second rate photoshop job is fake easily. But you can’t prove the real one is real.
It’s going to be very difficult to prove the authenticity of printed documents in this debate. There is a lot of money and motivation here to get the best forgers in the world involved. In the end, it is going to take some independently corroborated testimony. Say 4 different people independently telling the same story with some others verifying that they were were they said they were to begin with.
Na - na - what did we agree to a couple days ago???