I didn’t post troll like. I posted what I believed to be true. As soon as I was made aware of my mistake, I admitted it, took responsibility for it and posted the proof of my mistake.
How is that troll like? I was only trying to help and to give the information I believed to be true. I screwed up. I admitted it. How is that troll like?
I got hammered by Polarik, for forgetting to send more scans, which I did as soon as I realized it, and still... I never got any sort of apology from the guy. It still is true, Polarik has photos and scans of Obama’s COLB, and of mine, he says both are fake. I know for certain mine isn’t and I posted the evidence of that as well. That being said, leads to it’s own conclusions.
I feel for the man behind the name Polarik, but I fundamentally have to disagree with his conclusions. If not for the reasons I already stated, then for this alone. You can not tell if a document is fake or real from a photo or a scan. You have to have it in your hands to do so. All you can otherwise say is that the scan or photo has been manipulated, and those are two different objects. Main document and scan of same document are two different things.
I am not disagreeing with the man, all I know for 100% certainty is that my COLB is real and issued to me by the State of Hawaii.
As for the rest of his research, that has to be left for the real Documents experts, of which I am not one!
Hmmm, I missed those arguments!
I didn’t post troll like. I posted what I believed to be true. As soon as I was made aware of my mistake, I admitted it, took responsibility for it and posted the proof of my mistake. How is that troll like?
***It would have been troll like if you had not admitted it and apologized. Apparently by post 604 in the monster thread, you were still not apologetic.
I never got any sort of apology from the guy. It still is true, Polarik has photos and scans of Obama’s COLB, and of mine, he says both are fake. I know for certain mine isn’t and I posted the evidence of that as well. That being said, leads to it’s own conclusions.
***He probably would withdraw the conclusion that yours is fake, but it is embarrassing for him. If you recall correctly, I said that what you had posted would prove valuable either way.
I feel for the man behind the name Polarik, but I fundamentally have to disagree with his conclusions. If not for the reasons I already stated, then for this alone. You can not tell if a document is fake or real from a photo or a scan.
***Apparently you can tell a few things, like the fact that your document said 2007 on it and you were so insistent that you got it in 2001 that you probably weren’t correct.
You have to have it in your hands to do so.
***That’s pretty much what all of us have been saying all along, and the analysis in its stead is on 3rd hand information to show that it is disingenuine.
All you can otherwise say is that the scan or photo has been manipulated, and those are two different objects. Main document and scan of same document are two different things.
I am not disagreeing with the man, all I know for 100% certainty is that my COLB is real and issued to me by the State of Hawaii.
***That’s why I thought that your input would be valuable, and it is turning out that way, isn’t it? Basically what you generated was a red herring. Professional investigators are skilled at not following red herrings, but Polarik is not a paid professional. He made a mistake. Unfortunately for all of us, that calls into question his analytical abilities. And now he’s leaving FR. So we’re left high & dry, unless someone with equal or better abilities steps in. So how do we establish bona fides? All of this is done in a more or less anonymous fashion.
As for the rest of his research, that has to be left for the real Documents experts, of which I am not one!
***And neither am I. I appreciate what Polarik generated, I just hope it withstands the storm headed its way.