I use Adobe Creative Suite every day. A PDF is a document format, a file type. It can have layers. It can have vectors. It can be a flattened uneditable document. It can be RGB, it can be CMYK, it can be grayscale, etcetera etcetera. Attempting to ascertain or condemn the accuracy of any content of a PDF by means of the manner in which the file was saved is meaningless. A PDF, again, is merely a document file type, one of many. It is not automatically a scan of anything and it is not “fake” or a “forgery” if it isn’t. It’s not automatically authentic or valid if is a scan. This whole thing is a fool’s errand. It is what it is, independent of the factuality of any representation it may appear to make.
No it is not a fools errand.
Millions of people regularly use Adobe Creative Suite every day. They also use many other graphics programs and are familiar with file types and how they work.
Right here on FR we have people who have actually written the software for these types of programs.
It doesn’t matter that it was ultimately saved as a PDF file. What’s important is what is revealed by the fact that the creator forget to flatten the layers.
We get information when it is opened up in Adobe. And you can see that it was NEVER a scan of one piece of paper as is the story from the White House. That is a lie.
What was represented to the public was that Judy Corley (a lawyer for Obama) personally flew to Hawaii to pick up two certified copies of Obama’s long form birth certificate. Hard copies complete with an embossed seals, hand-stamps (both security features) and on printed security paper.
One of these copies was purported to have been scanned and ultimately released as a PDF document.
What was put on the White House website demonstrably was NEVER the scan of one paper document. It is a created computer image that was manufactured out of different parts and then SAVED OR CONVERTED to a PDF file.
Regardless of whether the original computer file started out as an .EPS, .SVG with a combination of bitmaps and then was converted to a PDF file one can plainly see that in no way would a scanned document have a hand-stamp that was labeled as “imported” be ROTATED 90 degrees and then REDUCED in size as the hand-stamp was. That means, the hand-stamp was scanned in vertically instead of horizontally. That means it was scanned at a different time than other “PARTS” of the “supposed” birth certificate
It’s absurd to think that, for example, a cover letter with a signature at the bottom could be scanned to a PDF file and through some process of Opitimization/Optical Recog. have the signatures signature show up vertically instead of horizontally.
I seem to recall that even the security paper background was actually reproduced using the “tiling” feature. That means not even a security sheet of paper was scanned. Only a tiny bit that could be repeatedly tiled to create the background.
AGAIN, that is not something that would happen with a scanned piece of paper from Hawaii.
That makes everything suspect since Hawaii doesn’t release computer files in lieu of certified paper birth documents. It means somebody that was not authorized was representing themselves with authority to notarize something. That’s FRAUD.
The authority with the power to notarize birth certificates in this case is Alvin T. Onaka, the state registrar or a representative of his.
Even with that weasely worded verification letter, Onaka DOES NOT represents that what Obama released via PDF file has his legitamate stamp on it. He says that the INFORMATION MATCHES, not that it is a TRUE COPY.
Why is he letting his stamp be used in what appears to be unlawful?
Perhaps so. You didn't watch the demo did you?
A PDF, again, is merely a document file type, one of many.
Well, duh.
It is not automatically a scan of anything and it is not “fake” or a “forgery” if it isn’t.
No one has said it was.
It’s not automatically authentic or valid if is a scan.
No one has said it would be.
Nice bunch of Red Herrings you tossed out there. lol