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.
Bookmark
That thing Obama calls a birth certificate is an absolute forgery. Even the delusional should come to that conclusion.
They don’t want to hear it Jeff. These die hard birthers will keep recycling garbage over and over and over again. This is what conspiracy theorists do. Show them they are wrong, they will just find more nonsense to post. It is exactly what 9-11 truthers do. Die hard birthers are just so emotionally invested in this blather that they will never be able to let go.
what are your credentials?
Amazing how many people believe that the most powerful man in the world can not have a competent forgery made.
I too spent years working in companies with graphic arts. And you don't have a clue what you are talking about. You are spouting twaddle designed to fool idiots with bullshit.
Jeff,
How do I say this as politely as I ca...
You are full of shit.
This author is factually correct on every one of his points, and as a computer software engineer with experience in creating imaging software I agree 100% with his conclusions.
He has presented his arguments elegantly and coherently, with video and photo proof.
Your argument against him seems to be “Nuh uhHHhhhhhh - other people told me so”
Show us proof of your statements or STFU - we are busy trying to unseat a traitor here.