Posted on 08/25/2008 2:27:45 PM PDT by Koyaan
Starting with pissant's Inconsistencies abound in FactCheck report on Obama "birth certificate".
Comparing the high resolution Daily Kos scan (as opposed to the scan originally published) with the FactCheck photos, there are obvious and dramatic differences. The scan shows only the thinnest of fold marks at the top and none below, no seal and no signature block.
Actually the seal and some of the bleed through of the signature block can be seen in the scan even without any sort of enhancement.
Oddly, only the June 6, 2007 date stamp is visible.
Incorrect. See above.
Only after extreme manipulations of the Daily Kos image did some graphic specialists managed to squeeze out the blurred and color enhance image of something that just might be a seal or a signature block. But even then, not in the correct size or expected location.
Again, incorrect.
The seal issue had been resolved quite some time ago. It is of the correct size and not in any unusual location.
Here is an animated GIF of the 2008 "Michele COLB" overlaid on the Kos COLB with the two images centered on the seal.
And here's a zoom of just the seal area.
It's worth noting that in the original scan of the Michele COLB, the seal was not visible at all.
In order to make it visible, the raised seal was highlighted by going over it with the broad side of a pencil and the COLB re-scanned, producing this version of the Michele COLB.
Both the Obama COLB and the Michele COLB were printed on newer, thicker paper than the older COLBS such as the DeCosta COLB and the embossed seal being barely visible or not visible at all as in the original Michele COLB scan is not unusual at all.
The signature stamp being in the wrong place is also incorrect. This myth seems to have been started by Polarik in a recent thread here where in his laundry list of supposed inconsistencies between the scanned image and the FactCheck photos he says:
WRONG LOCATION OF SIGNATURE STAMP ON SCAN
And over on TexasDarlin, he'd also said this:
Remember the signature stamp that was barely visible, even under heavy image enhancement? Remember how this amorphous blob was located way off to the left side of the COLB?
Well, now it’s clear as day, right smack dab in the middle with the date stamp riding directly above it. Not only are date stamps never placed right above the signature block on any existing COLBs was on the forged COLB.
Note that he says that date stamps are never placed right above the signature block on any existing COLBs.
Not only is this incorrect, but Polarik knew it was incorrect when he said it.
Here is a scan of the back side of the Michele COLB, clearly showing the date stamp right above the signature stamp.
Polarik knew this to be the case because he's had the same image in his PhotoBucket album for over a month and had previously posted it on his blog. You can see it here.
And instead of being "way off to the left side of the COLB" the signature stamp in the scanned image is exactly where it's located in the photographs, "smack dab in the middle" where Polarik falsely claims it shouldn't be.
Here is an enhanced image of the area of the scan where the signature stamp is located. It's not any sort of high tech enhancement. It's just a simple change in color balance to bring out the blue ink of the date and signature stamps.
And here is the same image with some notations I've added to it.
Within the rectangle A is a concentration of rather indistinct bits of bleed through.
B shows a vertical element.
C shows a rounded element.
D shows another vertical element.
E shows a blotchy rounded element with an open center, followed by another vertical element, and finally a more squarish blob.
And here is an animated GIF which is an overlay fade made using a crop of the date and signature stamp portion of the Michele COLB overlaid on the enhanced section of the Obama COLB.
As you can see, the rectangle of A is where the "I CERTIFY..." block of text is located.
B corresponds to the upper portion of the "l" in Alvin, C to the upper portion of the "O" in Onaka, D to the upper part of the "k" in Onaka, and E to the upper parts of "Ph.D."
Further, there was enough bleed through on the "D" in Ph.D that it's evident even in the FactCheck photos. Look at both image 2 and image 6, just above the "ma" in "prima."
So, to finish up with pissant...
Those stark differences clearly validate the skepticism with which the scan was regarded by Israel Insider and others from the start.
Except for the fact that there are no differences, stark or otherwise. The seal and the signature stamp are both there, they are both the right size, and they are both in expected locations.
Ok, on to Kevmo and his FactCheck.Org's Obama Birth Certificate is dated March 2008
The word certificate may be pre-printed. The certificate number is variable information like Honolulu below. Honolulu is level with the background. But the certificate number doesn’t appear to be.
"Honolulu" isn't quite a fair comparison since it spans less than half the distance that the certificate number does.
But even so, to my eye, the H appears to be a bit closer to the horizontal element just below it than the last U is to the one below it.
In the 151, the 151 are close to the lower horizontal bar in the background. But by the end of the certificate number, the end 41 is far above the horizontal bar. The initial 1’s top seems to be slightly below the horizontal bar above the number. The final 1 seems to go into and overlap the horizontal bar above the number.
Yes.
And if you back away from the tree just a little bit and take a look at the forest, you'll find that that is perfectly consistent with the printing of the document, which is skewed slightly counterclockwise with respect to the background pattern.
Take a look at photo 6.
Bring it up full size and then scroll to the inside, bottom left corner of the image where the "OHSM" text is. There are a pair of horizontal "bars" there. The top one goes through the top of OHSM, the bottom one is just below it, and there's a space between it and the bottom inside edge of the border.
Now follow the matching pairs of horizontal bars as you scroll to the right, over to the inside, bottom right corner of the image.
Not only is the space between the bottom bar and the inside edge of the border gone, but the bottom bar by this point is actually located beneath the border.
And if you look at the original scan of the certificate, you'll find the exact same thing.
And this is not unique to the Obama COLB. If you look at the 2008 Michele COLB in the same fashion, you'll find that the printing on it too has a slight counterclockwise skew with respect to the background pattern.
So there's nothing unusual here at all.
And last but not least, Polarik and his FactCheck's photos of Obama's birth certificate just proved that their posted image of it was forged
Furthermore, the two vertical borders on each side of the FactCheck COLB image were not drawn as long, parallel rectangles, but as divergent ones! When comparing them to real 2007 borders, the border on the left side went from being narrow at the base to being wider at the top. Conversely, the border on the left side went from being wider at the base to being narrower at the top. These disparities show up when the FactCheck COLB is made semi-transparent and laid on top of a genuine 2007 COLB image (as shown below).
This is incorrect. There is no divergence. It only appears as such because the "2007 COLB" image is skewed counterclockwise relative to the FactCheck COLB. You can't do a fair comparison between two images if one of them is skewed.
Since Polarik hasn't made available the original image of the 2007 COLB, I had to use his overlay image.
I rotated it so that the left outside edge of the 2007 COLB's border was as perfectly vertical as I could make it.
Then I pulled in the Kos COLB and did the same thing.
I then overlaid it on the 2007 COLB portion of Poarik's overlay image.
What a difference doing things right makes.
Since I was overlaying an image on an image that already had two images overlaid, I turned the Kos COLB red for better differentiation.
The dark red text is the text of the Obama COLB and shows just how out of whack Polarik had it with respect to the 2007 COLB. The lighter red text is the text of the 2007 COLB. The text matches up perfectly except for fields where there was different text, such as "MALE" versus "FEMALE" for example.
I'm not going to bother with the PD COLB overlay. I've wasted more than enough time on that already and the PD COLB is wholly irrelevant.
So on to the laundry list.
WRONG PATTERN AND DEFINITION OF BORDERS ON SCAN
This is incorrect.
Not only is the pattern identical, but even the little blips within the pattern are identical, as indicated by the arrows in the image above.
As for "definition," I don't know exactly what that's intended to mean. Certainly the scan isn't a very good one. It looks as if the brightness/contrast was jacked around a good bit, and maybe the color balance as well, but there's absolutely nothing to indicate that the scan is not of the document shown in the photos.
WRONG SHAPE AND CONSISTENCY OF BORDERS ON SCAN
Wrong shape? I don't know what this is intended to mean either. The shape of the borders in both the scan and the photos is um... square. As for consistency, again, this is much too vague.
WRONG LOCATION OF SIGNATURE STAMP ON SCAN
This is incorrect. It's in the same location on the scan as it is in the photographs, as I'd already pointed out above.
NEARLY INVISIBLE SIGNATURE STAMP ON SCAN
And it's nearly invisible (in fact a bit more invisible) in the photos compared to the scan. But it's there in both the scan and the photos.
WRONG IMPRESSION OF SIGNATURE STAMP ON SCAN
Don't know what's meant by wrong impression. It's the same signature stamp as seen in the photos as well as on the back of the Michele COLB.
WRONG LOCATION OF DATE STAMP ON PHOTO
Once again, absolutely incorrect. The date stamp is in the exact same location in the photos as it is in the scan.
In the scan, the "J" of "JUN" lays right on the left bar of the vertical pair of bars which are the third pair of vertical bars directly above the word "COURT."
As you can see, the "J" is in the exact same location in the photo.
DATE STAMP TOO FAR FROM BOTTOM OF SEAL ON PHOTO
Yet again incorrect.
It's already been established that the date stamp is in the correct location. And if you go back and look at the seal size animated GIF, you'll see that the bottom of the seal aligns vertically with the very top of "DATE FILED BY REGISTRAR." Which is where it also aligns in the photos (see photo 6).
EMBOSSED SEAL IS MUCH LARGER ON PHOTO
Still incorrect.
In the scan, the top of the seal aligns vertically with the bottom of "MOTHER'S RACE." This is also where it aligns in the photos (again, see photo 6).
EMBOSSED SEAL IS CLEARLY DEFINED ON PHOTO
Yes. Because there was incident lighting on the seal in the photos which cast shadows to more clearly define the embossing. With a scanner, a very bright light source (and the imaging element) is directed straight at the document, virtually eliminating any shadows which would make the embossing more distinct.
And again I remind you that the original scan of the Michele COLB had no discernable embossing in it and it had to be enhanced with some pencil lead. So there's nothing unusual about this.
ONE BARELY VISIBLE FOLD ON SCAN
Yes. But because of the issues mentioned above, that one of the folds wasn't visible in no way means it was never in the original document.
WRONG LOCATION OF LOWER FOLD ON PHOTO
Er, wrong location with respect to what? It was just said that the lower fold wasn't visible in the scan. So how does that make the location of the lower fold in the photos the wrong location?
If we use the Michele COLB as a guide, we see that the lower fold cuts across the top half of the embossed seal, which is also where the lower fold in the photos is located.
"ANY ALTERATIONS..." TOO WIDE ON SCAN
And last but not least, yet another incorrect.
Referring once again to trusty photo 6, we see that the "A" in "ANY" begins right at the left bar in a vertical pair of bars and the "E" in "CERTIFICATE" ends just to the left of the left bar of the twelfth pair of bars later.
And lo and behold, this is just as it is in the scanned image.
I really find this laundry list truly incredible as even a cursory comparison shows so many of them to be flat out incorrect. It seems as though most of them were just made up out of thin air with the expectation that most of those reading them would never bother to question them and just accept them as fact.
k
You attract all the best trolls. It must be your login name.
Tomoyasu COLB image:
http://i305.photobucket.com/albums/nn227/Polarik/Jason-Tomo-BC-sobel-edge.jpg
TWO CLEAR FOLDS. CLEAR SEAL STAMP
PD's COLB image:
http://i305.photobucket.com/albums/nn227/Polarik/doc_decosta_pat_birth-sobel-edge.jpg
TWO CLEAR FOLDS. CLEAR SEAL STAMP
Smith's COLB image:
http://i305.photobucket.com/albums/nn227/Polarik/4hchew-Sobel-edge.jpg
TWO CLEAR FOLDS. CLEAR SEAL STAMP
Dan's 2007 COLB image:
http://i305.photobucket.com/albums/nn227/Polarik/File0015-cropped-Sobel.jpg
TWO CLEAR FOLDS. CLEAR SEAL STAMP
FactCheck COLB photo:
http://i305.photobucket.com/albums/nn227/Polarik/birth_certificate_2-sobel-sm.jpg
TWO CLEAR FOLDS. CLEAR SEAL STAMP
FactCheck/Kos COLB image:
http://i305.photobucket.com/albums/nn227/Polarik/BO_Birth_Certificate-Sobel-Edge.jpg
ONE CLEAR FOLD. NO SECOND FOLD. MUDDLED SEAL STAMP
OK, what have we learned here?
That the FactCheck COLB photo has two folds and a clear stamp just like all of the above.
That the FactCheck/kOS COLB image has only one fold, with no second fold in sight. Not even SEEN by image enhancement.
Yes, I can see that the FactCheck photo and image have vestiges of the signature stamp right under the date stamp and seal.
Only problem is that all 2007 COLBs had the signature stamp set off to the left -- and not in the middle like 2008 COLBs.
What? You thought their placement was random??
obumpa
WHy not take it up with Jimrob instead of kneepadding in public for an Obama troll. Talk about embarrassing.
You better beleive the Obamunists know who pissant is. LOL
What you said about us doesn’t square with how pissant said, “I’m all for leaving it up.” You see what you want to see.
Wait, what the hell does Michelle Obama have to do with this? She wasn’t born in Hawaii. This whole thing is f#%&ing retarded.
Hey Pissant:
I found this article on Media Matters. Free Republic does not allow it to be posted as a separate thread. The weird thing is that I can’t find the claim on the WorldNutDaily website. I would expect this article to be taken down soon from the Media Matters website as an embarrassment.
http://mediamatters.org/items/200808260014
Even WND disputes Corsi’s phony Obama birth certificate claim
Summary: WorldNetDaily.com, for which Jerome Corsi, author of the debunked and discredited book The Obama Nation, works as a staff reporter, has now taken on the claim that its own writer has been promoting, and determined for itself to be false — that the campaign of Sen. Barack Obama “has a false, fake birth certificate posted on their website.” WorldNetDaily reported that a “WND investigation into Obama’s birth certificate utilizing forgery experts ... found the document to be authentic.”
WorldNetDaily.com, the right-wing website for which Jerome Corsi works as a staff reporter, decided to look into a claim made by Corsi and made repeatedly in right-wing blogs and on talk radio — that the campaign of Sen. Barack Obama “has a false, fake birth certificate posted on their website” — and reported that it was false. In an August 23 article, WND reported that “FactChecker.org [sic] says it obtained Obama’s actual birth certificate and that the document was indeed real,” and added, “A separate WND investigation into Obama’s birth certificate utilizing forgery experts also found the document to be authentic.” Corsi is the author of the debunked and discredited book The Obama Nation: Leftist Politics and the Cult of Personality (Threshold Editions, August 2008).
WND stated that the August 21 Factcheck.org report “discredited some of the claims of Internet bloggers, such as that the certificate as viewed in a scanned copy released by Obama’s campaign lacked a raised seal,” and that the WND investigation “revealed methods used by some of the bloggers to determine the document was fake involved forgeries, in that a few bloggers added text and images to the certificate scan that weren’t originally there.” But WND did not mention that Corsi repeated the charge that Obama’s birth certificate was fake on the August 15 edition of Fox News’ Fox & Friends. Factcheck.org, however, did note in its report that the “charge leaped from the blogosphere to the mainstream media earlier this week when Jerome Corsi ... repeated the claim in an Aug. 15 interview with Steve Doocy on Fox News.”
WND’s August 23 article also did not note that the website previously reported allegations that the birth certificate posted to Obama’s campaign site was a “fake document.” In an August 8 article, WorldNetDaily reported, “Israel Insider is reporting that analysts working separately have determined the birth certificate posted on the Daily Kos website and later on Sen. Barack Obama’s ‘Fight the Smears’ campaign website is fraudulent, and now two different actions have been launched to try and obtain the truth about the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee’s birth.”
From the August 23 WorldNetDaily.com article:
However, FactChecker.org [sic] says it obtained Obama’s actual birth certificate and that the document was indeed real. The site discredited some of the claims of Internet bloggers, such as that the certificate as viewed in a scanned copy released by Obama’s campaign lacked a raised seal. FactChecker.org also established that many of the alleged flaws in the document noted by bloggers were caused by the scanning of the document.
A separate WND investigation into Obama’s birth certificate utilizing forgery experts also found the document to be authentic. The investigation also revealed methods used by some of the bloggers to determine the document was fake involved forgeries, in that a few bloggers added text and images to the certificate scan that weren’t originally there.
How many forensic document experts examined OB BC?
Can’t rely on factcheck.org experts....conflict of interest here.
Bwahhh!
How many forensic document experts examined OB BC?
Can’t rely on factcheck.org experts....conflict of interest here.
***None. Because Obama hasn’t offered the document for examination. But there have been Technical Guys that have examined the electronic version offered on Obama’s FightTheSmears website and they’ve determined it to be a forgery. One of the premium examiners is the freeper Polarik.
Thanks for the ping and the plug!
Pakistan....
What is wrong with Obama going to Pakistan during his college days?
Nothing is wrong with it, per se. However, if he used his Indonesian citizenship to travel there, then it is a problem.
I've only posted the answer to this like a dozen times already, so why not do it again.
Alvin T. Onaka, MD, is the State Registrar, but not that long ago, Onaka also became the Head of the Office of Health Status Monitoring.
Because of having two roles to fulfill, Onaka does not even see these paper COLBS or the requests for them any more. Now he has a staff member stamping his signature block, the date the COLB was stamped, and also the embossed Seal.
In other words, Onaka has not ACCEPTED a COLB since he became the Head of the OHSM -- but has the COLB "FILED" by the office staff.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
