Nice try to spin away the reality. That ‘no value’ imagery fo forged documents was cited by a judge in order to deny a suit to cause your messiah to bring forth actual evidence that he is Constitutionally eligible. So, at least one idiot judge disagrees and places high value on the obvious forgeries you’re seeking to draw attention away from by slugsliming Polarik’s character rather than addressing the nature of the forgeries.
One last try, and I’m dropping all this again: I’m going to point out that the FReeper in question has been questionable all along, outside of FR, possibly Town Hall, and a few other blogs. He was being questioned and mocked last summer, because he had an odd habit of exploding whenever anyone questioned his blossoming resumé and his increasingly grandiose claims. His identity has now been disclosed, and his efforts were themselves an apparent fraud. He’s reportedly withdrawn from FR and ceased using the screen name in question, out of fear of being served a summons due to a lawsuit.
As far as the value of any, purported “forensics” on a JPEG, you should consider just why you believe anything to be genuine, within such an image, that you’ve deemed a forgery. “Bleed through” on a JPEG? Really? You accept that as genuine, because you were led to accept it as so. I work with PhotoShop myself, daily, and can tell you that it’s entirely possible to create such an image from whole cloth, given a reasonable amount of time to accomplish such a thing, but you accept that there is some paper original, that has been modified and therefore falsified. Think about that.
But, as far as the legalities of the matter are concerned, the visible, legible, printed information, presented as factual, contained within this JPEG image of a purported Hawaiian birth document poses another level of difficulty, if it’s falsified outright. Think about that, too.
So, looking at and questioning the significance of “African” on this thing is very likely more valid than following the lead of a now-known serial manipulator, a psychologist with a string of strange online efforts, such as being an “online dating expert,” who claimed at one point to have a PhD in typewriters.
Now, flame away with your patented, personal style. I’ve found it highly amusing, myself, whenever it’s not being directed at me. You’ve been wrong in doing so, whenever you have, though.