Koyaan was trumpeting the Kos COLB as the real deal, just like AJ and his packrats, but unlike them, at least he had some images to show for his work (not that they meant anything)
Anyway, he compares an image overlay of Michele's COLB to the Kos COLB, and proclaims, "the aspect ratio on the Michele COLB is messed up. Since I got this of of Polarik's posting, he must have done something to it."
Ah, but now I that bet he wishes he didn't say it.
The comment caused me to do my own checking of the aspect ratio (the raio of height compared to width) of the Kos image, Michele's image, and DeCosta image.
The aspect ratio of the Kos image is different from that of Michele's COLB, as Koyaan noted, but the aspect ratio of te Kos image is identical to the DeCosta image.
Why is this now significant?
Because the reason why the DeCosta image has a different aspect ratio, is because of the two massive folds present in the paper document. These two big folds caused the paper to be "scrunched down," making it impssible from copying the full length of the paper document.
To put it another way, the two folds caused the HEIGHT of the image to be SHORTER than it really is.
AND...
Since we know that the Kos image only has ONE THIN FOLD in the entire image, AND...
if the Kos image was a real copy, then it should have produced an image close to its full height.
HOWEVER, the almost, if not totally, flat Kos image is exactly the same height as the "scrunched down" DeCosta image.
And, the odds of that happening are NILL!!!!
Nil is right.
Well, how do we get Malkin/Coulter/Rush/Hannity/Nat. review/Human events etc to run with this story?
I’m curious; is the notary seal on the KOS certificate in the exact same spot as on the DeCosta certificate? What are the chances of that randomly happeining?