We used to use STEEL LETTERS to type ~ and they could do an incredibly fine job.
Typical electric typewriters back in the primitive early 1960s could produce letters to stand the ages. Manual typewriters in the hands of someone who knew what she was doing could do as well, but usually didn't because by then manuals were not being produced ~ just repaired ~ and wobbled around a bit from time to time and could be deflected from a perfect strike by an itch on your forearm.
It’s not just a question of the letters matching each other on the page. It’s a question of the letters being photocopied exactly alike, so the pixels are aligned. That doesn’t depend on the typewriter alone. It means that someone has been moving stuff around within some computer program.
“We used to use”
You obviously don’t have the experience to understand what pixel to pixel exact match means. It occurs ALL OVER the document.
And it is NOT normal. I have been dealing with digital documents for a very long time. This is a digitally-created document.
Typewriter companies were introducing new fully manual, non-electric models throughout the 1960's and continued manufacturing fully manual machines well into the 1970's, perhaps even later.
Somehow that is very similar to a sexist pig remark...teehee...
Even a "carbon copy" made with carbon paper would be affected by this because pressure for transferring the carbon would vary slightly with the ribbon threads. You can see this in old carbon copies made on typewriters with cloth ribbons. You get a bit of the ribbon fabric impression even in the carbon copies, plus some effects from the fiber of the first layer of paper.
Finally, unless the mechanisms of the typewriter were absolutely perfect, and the scanner was set to an exact division of both the vertical spacing and horizontal spacing, there would be some difference in the way the scanner handled the edges and "antialiasing" of the same letter from the same type element on the same page. For example, at 100dpi, 200dpi, 400dpi, most typewriters have spacing which would make the same letter on different lines or in different horizontal positions on the same line scan differently. If there's any wear in the typewriter mechanism(s), even scanning at something that was an exact match for vertical and horizonal spacing (possibly 150dpi, 300dpi or 600dpi) would show anamolies from spacing variations from the wear.
I haven't repeated the experiment in the youtube video. However, identical pixels on the scan in two different positions on the paper would be very suspicious. It's difficult to explain other than digital modifications (copying) after the scan.
and even if a steel typewriter, can make identical pixel perfect characters,
it CAN’T explain multiple places on the document ITSELF have identical pixel perfect characters on boxes that were originally hand-drawn.
not to mention the many other things, like words that curve next to words that don’t curve, signatures that have DIFFERENT resolutions, etc.
CIA agents have said it’s a fake. some experts with years of experience, have signed affidavits that it’s a fake.
... i’d like to see ONE, just ONE credentialed expert sign an affidavit saying it’s not.
Are you a moose limb too?