Mine at 3200% magnification:
Box 1:
Box 2
Posted on 06/07/2011 6:45:09 PM PDT by conservativegramma
Typeface analysis shows images come from different machines
The online image of a Hawaiian "Certificate of Live Birth" was trumpeted by the White House when it was released on April 27 as "proof positive" that Barack Obama was born in Hawaii.
Now an expert in typefaces and typography says it sure was "proof," but not of what the White House would have wanted.
Paul Irey, a retired professional typographer with 50 years experience in his business, has says an analysis of the typefaces used in the Barack Obama's long-form birth certificate that the White House released on April 27 reveals it absolutely to be a forgery.
"My analysis proves beyond a doubt that it would be impossible for the different letters that appear in the Obama birth certificate to have been typed by one typewriter," Irey told WND.
"Typewriters in 1961 could not change the size and shape of a letter on the fly like that," he said. "This document is definitely a forgery."
Irey acknowledges that an IBM Selectric typewriter could have produced different typefaces in a given document, but only if the Selectric ball was changed every time a different typeface letter was struck which would be unlikely to have been done to produce the word "Student," for example, that had two different styles of the lower case "t."
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
Uh, my comment was tongue in cheek. I was referring to the definition of “anomaly” meaning “abnormal.”
You can analyze computer copies of the image all day long and depending on the software/hardware used to store them, read them, copy them, convert from one storage format to another, manipulate them, break them into layers, zoom in on them, etc, you’re going to see all kinds of anomalies.
There is no way to know how many times the images in these exhibits have been copied, stored, converted from one storage format to another, different resolutions, even different versions of the same software product on different machines.
The very best you can do is analyze the only source document available using the tool that is available where it’s stored. Even there it can be distorted by your own hardware/software that you’re using to view it. The moment you download it, you’re no longer analyzing the true document.
You cannot do accurate forensic analysis at this level on a computer generated document (copied, digitized, stored, printed, scanned, rescanned, converted, downloaded, etc) that has been digitized and stored on a computer. This analysis can only be done on the original hard copy. When analyzing copies, the best you’re going to get is someone’s opinion. And the people doing this particular analysis are not unbiased by a long shot.
Now if it’s OBVIOUS that there are different fonts on the document, you’d probably see that on all copies. But these are not obviously different fonts. We have people analyzing COPIES of re-digitized documents jumping to conclusions about slight anomalies that were introduced during one or more generations of copying, scanning, digitizing converting from one storage format to another, etc.
An example is the exhibit posted on reply number 21 on this thread that makes a big deal out of the letter “e” in the word “male.”
Well, check the only source document available (and there’s no telling what generation it is from the actual hard copy source), but it does not show the curious exaggerated distortion of the letter “e” in “male.” It is definitely not an “obviously” different font or typeface as claimed.
Look for yourself:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/04/27/president-obamas-long-form-birth-certificate
Mine at 3200% magnification:
Box 1:
Box 2
I rest my case.
Oh just admit it Jim. You are just an Obot sleeper agent. You must have started FR just to be ready to cover for Obama when the time came. /birtherlogic
...Mr Obama said he regretted not being present because of his own experiences in his troubled childhood. ‘I grew up without a father around. I have certain memories of him taking me to my first jazz concert and giving me my first basketball as a Christmas present. But he left when I was two years old,' he wrote.
The jazz concert and basketball may have been something he recalls from the visit the kenyan made to Hawaii in or around 1970, they are not the memories of two-year-old.
And IF zero was born in August 1961, when the kenyan left Hawaii on 22nd June, 1962, how old was he?
No I may be dense, but I checked your link. The E on the short form COLB is capitalized (more on that later), and the e on the LF is lower case and closed like the Greek letter theta, maybe slightly smudged, a little thicker. I think that's the right letter, but not sure that's what I was supposed to notice. The LF at the link won't zoom for me but I checked my dl'ed copy. That doesn't matter to me. I'm not the one making too big a deal about the fonts except stated that it makes no sense to mix 'n match within words; I don't necessarily buy in to all of that; however, even what was released can offer some clues as to its authenticity or starting points for further verification by some other means, preferably actual source documents we're never going to see.
The first short form that appeared was flat, no seal evident, no creases evident, cert # blacked out. The one on factcheck was folded, looked longer (could be an optical illusion), cert # not blacked out, seal visible, obviously to me two different copies which is neither here nor there.
But some went on and on about the border, the word African, etc., etc., and I was never convinced one way or the other and am not to this day on either.
So I take it you assume it's genuine? Do you think it looney tunes that some of us question and attempt to analyze it and that we should cease and desist? I don't know with reasonable certainty either way. I still think some aspects about the LF are odd, that is all. I don't have him born in Kenya, but neither can I prove he wasn't.
All I know for certain is that somebody occupying the White House was born (and a few other obvious things). And it would be nice if we can put forth a viable candidate who can defeat him in 2012.
“My analysis proves beyond a doubt that it would be impossible for the different letters that appear in the Obama birth certificate to have been typed by one typewriter”
I don't find the lower case letters that different,I am just a layperson not a typographer but I do find the uppercase comparison pairs RR, KK and SS do make a far stronger case.
Well, hell, even the preprinted square check boxes on the form and the preprinted letters look different from one another because of computer digitized anomalies.
Have no idea whether or not it’s a fraud. Only one way to know and apparently Hawaii is not going to release it. But chasing these so-called anomalies on a digitized copy of unknown parentage is futile. That said, I don’t believe the State of Hawaii would conspire with a corrupt president to perpetuate a forgery of a state certified document.
Well, I've been swayed...the document is clearly a fraud. Count me a neobirther. Did you see the pixels? They're all black!!
The only possible explanation for your remaining unconvinced is...they got to you. I guess it was only a matter of time. Sad. It's not your fault...you have to watch out for your family. Freeper-in-Chief...an Obot...dark days...
Did you see the pixels? They're all black!!
You eyes deceive you; actually they sample out with consistent RGB numbers as I noted before as a very dark green lol. Yes, they look black to me, too.
C’mon. I know it was the letter “e” in “male” that sold you. It’s obvious to all that Obama erased the information in that field and used two different typewriters to forge its replacement. Wonder why he did that?
Hmmm... maybe the original word was “unknown?” Or perhaps “alpha-male?” Or “metro-male?” “Shemale?”
Where would we be without good FRiends?
The jazz concert and basketball may have been something he recalls from the visit the kenyan made to Hawaii in or around 1970, they are not the memories of two-year-old.
I could be wrong but my understanding is that Sr. only spent a few hours in Honolulu that day. Time to give him a basketball and go to a jazz concert? Maybe. Too bad no prestitute will ask him.
And IF zero was born in August 1961, when the kenyan left Hawaii on 22nd June, 1962, how old was he?
Math was not my best subject but by my reckoning that would have made 0bieWon 10 or 11 months old. Just a leetle bit short of two years old. /s
Oh, good grief! Apparently you're a hard core liberal who has no respect for the rule of law.
It's my understanding he was there for a month or so...but more important than how long he was there, is what was the purpose? There have been suggestions made that an adoption in Indonesia was annulled. That the kenyan was brought to Hawaii to object - on the grounds he was not consulted.
That name Soebarkah, removed from the passport docs, suggests an adoption by SOEBARKAH, not SOETORO. There may have been a family court hearing during that visit, and an adoption annullment would have returned his name to what it was according to the 1964 divorce documents.
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.