Obot “NBC” has now posted what is claimed to be a sample pdf from his/her many experiments that “replicates” the WH LFBC pdf.
http://nativeborncitizen.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/wh-lfbc-scanned-xerox-7535-wcpreview.pdf
This pdf is revealed in this blog post:
http://nativeborncitizen.wordpress.com/2013/08/09/helping-out-hermitian/
“NBC” in the past couple of days has been busy explaining or replicating:
1. the “clipping mask” issue (software generated)
http://nativeborncitizen.wordpress.com/2013/08/09/xerox-7655-clipping-path-and-objects/
2. the replication at the bit-map level of letters and numbers (which is evident in the WH pdf but NOT the AP scan, supposedly) which is software generated:
http://nativeborncitizen.wordpress.com/2013/08/10/xerox-7655-ap-copy-scanned/
http://nativeborncitizen.wordpress.com/2013/08/10/xerox-7655-ap-character-degradations/
I have no personal expertise in pdf analysis, but if these claims cannot be debunked, it will be time for Mike Zullo to stop claiming that these WH pdf features “prove” forgery and prove that a hard copy of the certified BC never existed.
There are still many irregularities, IIRC, that call into question whether this “document” was produced on a circa 1961 typewriter, and every attempt to gain legal release and discovery of the vault copy has been fought to the death by Barry’s team.
I am now even more interested in Reed Hayes’s 40-page affidavit and the extent to which he relied on “inability to replicate” pdf features in his conclusion that the WH LFBC is a 100% fabrication.
There is nothing in Hayes’s CV, IIRC, that suggests digital expertise, as has sometimes been claimed. His background is in handwriting and document authentication. I am hoping that he formed his opinion on that basis.
If the Xerox machine is substituting exact replicas every time a certain “blob” (such as a box) appears, then that should happen with every box, every letter, etc. If the Xerox is switching 6’s for 8’s then where are those numbers switched around in the White House PDF?
If NBC scanned in the White House document which is a print-out of a document that ALREADY had these effects within it, then the real test would be whether the scan he comes up with is DIFFERENT than the White House PDF, not whether it is the same. If scanning the White House document using the Xerox machine under these conditions results in a PDF that hasn’t been manipulated by the Xerox (different than the document that was scanned in), it would actually CONTRADICT the theory that the Xerox made the anomalies in the actual content of the White House image.