[MMaschin]

I agree.

Open the PDF, and go to section 4. Zoom in, and see if you notice anything.

Those 2 boxes are exactly the same, pixel for pixel. The idiotic obots would want you to believe that after this form was created by hand, photographed to microfilm, printed onto security paper, and then scanned into a pdf, that the two boxes would be exactly the same?!

First the boxes are part of the pre-printed form. At that time, before computers, these pre-printed forms were created by hand. These boxes could not be identical.

There is no chance that these boxes would be identical, unless one is a copy of the other, after in digital form.

[MMaschin]

Also, zoom in to the box next to "Twin" in section 3, and the box next to "Yes" in section 7G. Those two boxes are exactly the same, pixel for pixel. No way for that to happen, except for a digital cut/paste.

It's obvious that the BC that was used as the basis for the forgery was one from a twin. One empty box in section 4 was copied over another box in section 4, because for a single birth they should all be blank. And the box next to "Yes" in section 7G, was copied over the box next to "Twin", in section 3. These were done to hide the facts that the BC was for a multiple birth.

[Seizethecarp]

“There is no chance that these boxes would be identical, unless one is a copy of the other, after in digital form.”

Check out this link from up-thread showing that the Xerox can duplicate image blocks for efficiency...but can make mistakes:

http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/xerox-machines-change-documents-scanning/story?id=19895331

“Xerox Machines Change Documents After Scanning”

“The problem stems from a combination of compression level and resolution setting,” Tse wrote. “The Xerox design utilizes the recognized industry standard JBIG2 compressor which creates extremely small file sizes with good image quality, but with inherent tradeoffs under low resolution and quality settings.”

Kriesel said that it’s more than just a resolution problem, but that JBIG2 actually changes the numbers in the scanned image. He explained that the document is segmented into discrete sections and that the WorkCentre machine compares each section to a library of stored patches. “You only need to save a representative patch,” he said. “If a section looks like the number 8, then it gets replaced by the representative 8 patch.”

Unfortunately, replacing each section with representative patches can result in errors. Kriesel documented some of these changes in his blog. Some models of the Workcentre machines consistently make the same substitution errors, for example replacing the same 6s with the same 8s. Others models make arbitrary number substitutions that are not consistent each time the machine scans a document.