/yawn
Please let us know when some law enforcement agency or court accepts your “legal” proof as anything other than something some dude on the internet attests to.
This is a dead conspiracy theory that is going exactly nowhere.
This guy may have owned a typesetting company for 11 years, but there is nothing new in any of his points (this document is a week and a half old already anyway), and all of them, at least as far as the document itself is concerned, have been factually DISPROVEN.
“Curved” type: This is simply wrong. If you examine it very closely, the typed words and letters curve just the same as the form ones do. It’s simply a very small curve.
White halo around the text: Is very specifically the kind of thing a human forger would NOT do. He would have to specifically create a white shadow. No reason for doing that. It’s an artifact of optimization of the scan.
“Binary and grayscale letters:” Is also an artifact of the computer optimization process.
The sequential number: Is out of sequence with the Nordyke twins’ certificate. It’s also out of sequence with the certificate for Stig Waidelich, who was born on August 6, and has a certificate number of 10920. This is almost 200 numbers off of both the Nordyke twins and the Obama certificate number, and indicates the whole theory is fatally flawed.
“Different color fonts”: Another artifact of computer optimization of a scan. A forger would’ve made sure these matched.
Muliple layers: A well-known artifact of computer optimization, which was demonstrated the day of release by National Review Online.
Thanks. A good summary of the various problems with this COLB.
“My dear readers: Today I have posted a bunch of important information. I have been absent from the comments because I have been working on these things, some of them to address input in the comments. I put all this stuff up now to make sure it gets out there and so I can take a break for a while and leave the information in the hands of the capable and dedicated people who are pushing to see the rule of law re-established. All along I’ve wanted to do the research and hand it off to somebody who would run with it so I could in good conscience go back to living a normal life. I’ll try to approve comments and I may be in and out but at this point none of the research matters unless we get either a court or a prosecutor to subpoena the embedded computer transaction logs which alone will tell us the real story of Obama’s records and the actions of the HDOH.
I’m asking each one of you to use this information to inform the public, leaders, and law enforcement of exactly why we need a criminal investigation and/or a lawsuit with standing so that the embedded transaction logs can be subpoenaed and we can get real answers. We need to work our buns off to get a state law passed which merely grants legal standing to any legal resident to challenge presidential eligibility.”
http://butterdezillion.wordpress.com/
Do I need to put it out again..."One Nation, Under God..."
Now, God does help those who help them selves...stand up and help or shut up and find a post about knitting.
Do I need to put it out again..."One Nation, Under God..."
Now, God does help those who help them selves...stand up and help or shut up and find a post about knitting.
you made your living selling document systems to Government agencies? How much did you make doing that? Enough to complain about high taxes?
I’ve used some of those systems, when I’ve had to go to the local courthouse, and they are some of the most overpriced scams going.
True black should sample at RGB 0 0 0, none came up with that or even close. I checked it against the actual .pdf file, same thing.
I don't know for sure what this means. I would have expected different results. Looks like a color scan to me, wouldn't expect these results with grayscale, and Photoshop tells me it's RGB color on the crops and affadavit as well as the text, 8 bits per channel.
However, the points in the affadavit itself sample in shades of gray, nowhere near green. There are also telltale chromatic aberrations (cyan fringing above the letters and pink below) on the text portion when zoomed up, again indicating it was scanned in color (how the author submitted it).
Sometimes in order to save for the web, you have to convert to color, and this is a new version of PS to me. but I used single point samples.
The green cropped sections are in .png format, but the affadavit is in .jpg format (how the author saved them).
I can't remember who put their name on the line on this analysis, but he presents some of the most compelling arguments yet, indicating there's something seriously amiss.
For his point 2, white haloing, there is white haloing around the lines on the form, and white haloing above the black shading in the top left (where the form curved into the book and scanned in black). So white haloing does not mean text was cut and pasted unless all lines, shading etc was cut/pasted.
Point 3, binary black/white and grayscale, the two Guthrie snaps of the image do not have binary/grayscale mixtures. Here is the wide view http://lockerz.com/s/96540937 and narrower view http://lockerz.com/s/96540721 which is better to blow up and compare the S in Stanley (box 13) in the narrow view to the WH PDF. In the WH PDF the S is grayscale. In the Guthrie snap, it is B/W like all other text.
One explanation is that the WH printed out a B/W version (an older version of their PDF), embossed it with a seal and showed it to useful idiot Guthrie who didn't bother to read the seal and took a crappy low res snap. Afterwards, the WH diddled the PDF into the current mixed gray/binary version.
Here's a bit more evidence to back up the Guthrie image. The AP scanned in the press handout http://media.syracuse.com/news/photo/obamajpg-50fc3c0a4c33e67b.jpg and, although crappy resolution it shows no binary/grayscale dichotomy Obviously that could be a B/W copier issue since the press version was made on a B/W copier.
For fig. 13, look at the AP image and see that "Date" and 'A' from Accepted are not grayscale like fig 13, but just as black as "ccepted". That is strong evidence that the WH press release B/W paper handout was made from a source different to (perhaps an earlier version) of the currently available WH PDF.,
On that point and my previous ones, it certainly does not rule out forgery, just that there were intermediate products during the forgery, one handout and a piece of paper held and photographed by Guthrie. But that means that the author cannot use gray scale and layers as "evidence of forgery" merely evidence of manipulation with intent to deceive (e.g. cover up the forgery by releasing an unanalyzable digital version and count on dolts like Guthrie to not look too closely at the paper artifact that she was handed).
I see no reason why the “h” in hospital would have been based on greyscale and the rest of the word “hospital” in binary. whatever they used as the base would have had the whole word “hospital” already there as part of the form and no need to mess with it. So that made no sense. After I noticed that I became skeptical of the whole article.
BC bookmark
I, for one, shall only believe you when the Bummer is removed from office. Otherwise.........
Great job putting this thread together!
Red ? if you look at some of the boxes, you can see a faint inner box as if someone superimposed a clear plastic over it with the lines and letters.
BFL
