Again, you are interpreting what you are seeing, but without an explanation.
What name do you think they had an image for such that it spelled “Ba-ack”, and they had to add the “r”?
Do you think Barack was not born anywhere? Is he some alien life force from another planet? You don’t think they have some form with his full name on it, so they had to construct his name from parts?
How does that possibly make any sense to you? And what word do you think they found that had the letters “-enya”, so that they had to add the “K” to spell “Kenya”?
Your theory is based on a hypothesis that what we see is a combination of parts they had on the document, and parts they had to add. But the parts they had to “add” make no sense, and the parts the “had” make no sense.
Your theory would at least have some logical possibility if you found an entire name replaced, you could argue they took someone else’s certificate.
Further, where do you think the basis came for the document? Hawaii officials have said they sent THIS document to the White House. Are you arguing that the people who GENERATED the original had to cut-and-paste to build the name “Barack”? Or did the white house have to do that to what was sent? If the latter, why? Why wouldn’t Hawaii have printed a document with Barack’s full name? Why did they leave out the “r”?
Your analysis is lazy.
When the Dan Rather forgeries hit, a good freeper spent long hours on the issue. And the things found that were wrong made sense — bad kerning because they used a word processor instead of a typewriter; proportional fonts that weren’t in use on the typewriters owned by the guy who supposedly wrote the documents, among other things.
You have a mystery here of sorts, what caused the layers and the oddities you are seeing. But rather than solve the mystery, you are simply claiming the mystery proves your hypothesis, when you give no reason why that interpretation makes any sense.
Scanning software can be set to try to convert images into text. They apparently can do this in layers, so that the things that are text can be separated from the things that have to be left as images. Why is this not a more rational explanation for why some letters were turned into computer-looking letters, while others are still images? That’s exactly what the software is trying to do.
And it’s a better reason for “r” in barack to be wrong, rather than some unexplained need to substitute the “r” out from “barack”.
On the other hand I had a good source who'd worked with the War Department/Navy Department standard memo and orders layouts in the 1940s and she advised me those documents met the standards she had had to follow back then.
I think the screw up on the formats was in the Photocomposition guy being handed the WRONG STYLE BOOK for Department of Air Force ~ most likely he got a U.S.Army Air Corps style book with the cover ripped off. Probably no dates in there ~ just inside the inside leaf.
They are all so embarrassed at having gotten caught so soon after they produced their nonsense they won't talk about it.
The Photocomposition guy is still jittery though. You just drop the term "kerning" in the middle of a thread and it's like you'd walked up behind Ned Beatty and said lowly "Squeal like a pig".
Ya know, your blather5ing is getting tedious. The ‘r’ was not picked up in the OCR copying conversion. A digital addition was made to finish the word. You knew that and that the n00bie poster wasn’t claiming the mischaracterization which you’ve tried to float now for several posts. You’re working for the other side. Shut the hell up if all you can do is sow mischaracterizations that you then attack. You have the axelrod stink about you, charles.
Don't call him lazy. He only has proven that the doc was altered. Why should he tell you WHY? He has no idea why!! This is not about explanations. That is something we American people, Obama's boss, have very little of, when it comes to his actions.
WE DON'T KNOW WHY. That is what we need to ask Obama and Hawaii. You're wasting your time criticizing the original poster. No one here needs to jump to conclusions why Obama's hiding things. It's up to Obama to explain that to US!