From http://www.hackerfactor.com/blog/index.php?/archives/210-Bad-Science-How-Not-To-Do-Image-Analysis.html#comments
#19.1.1.1 Dr. Neal Krawetz (Homepage) on 2008-08-06 08:10 (Reply)Presidential candidates are vetted by "appropriate oversight committees". The [omitted] portion we can only guess at, but it would be likely to have involved calling his imagined opponents names and slurs such as "rascist".Hi Don Winkie,
Two responses come to mind.
1. My analysis is not questioning the authentication of the COLB. My analysis is answering the question "has it been modified". (There is a difference between "real" and "authentic".) To this regard, there is no evidence of modification. Moreover, I believe I have debunked a fictional analysis that claims to have shown modification.
2. As far as the political aspect goes, yes and no... Yes: someone must and will (and probably has) validated his eligibility. No: that someone does not need to be you. While we should trust that someone in our government will do the right thing, there are levels upon levels of oversight committees designed to make sure they do the right thing. If you wish to be on the list of presidential eligibility reviewers, then I suggest joining one of the appropriate oversight committees.
[omitted]
[Moderator: Sorry Neal. Please take the political debate to some other forum. The focus here is on image analysis. -Loris Kim]
Just to follow on to the last post. Neither Doctor Krawetz nor AJStrata have done any significant image analysis on the CoLB image. Both have used a number of unchecked presumptions to carry the logical bulk of their argument, still the bulk of their arguments remains emotional appeals of various sorts.