Posted on 09/09/2004 3:47:33 PM PDT by GOPcapitalist
(scroll down to the bottom of the article for the update section):
UPDATE: NEW PROOF OF FORGERY
Following the Little Green Footballs blog lead, CB decided to test the pantograph replication technique on another of the CBS documents to see if it held true. Using Microsoft Word on its factory default settings with 12 point Times New Roman font we copied the address line of CBS memo #1 and overlapped the two for comparison.
As you can see the test worked and, in doing so, inadvertantly uncovered more proof that the document is a forgery. The new evidence revolves around the fact that Microsoft Word auto-formats its text using the centering function. When the text alignment for “center” is selected each subsequent line will be precisely centered underneath the previous one with each word of the text readjusting to meet this alignment as new letters are entered into the line. Since typewriters mechanically stamp letters onto a sheet of paper one at a time, it is physically impossible to create a mechanical typewriter document that perfectly aligns two or more centered rows of text on top of each other. The address bar on CBS Memo #1 is perfectly centered and perfectly aligned, thus it had to have come from a computer word processor and not a typewriter. The replication experiment in Microsoft Word with an identical match further validates this origin.
Would you be willing to post a detailed uptake on the discussion on Brit's panel? Thanks. (Gave up our cable a few months back!)
I am willing to bet $50 bucks right now that Blather-boy is going to announce his retirement for "health reasons" or some similar excuse within the next 48 hours.
Any takers?
Yeah, it's one of those 1 in a billion something chances of a match.
Killian would have had to be sitting there for hours with a drafting ruler and perfect knowledge of the exact width of each and every letter to get them to line up perfectly centered!
Wrong.
There might have been an occasional case when the lines centered perfectly, but it was a function of the number of letters per line. With three lines, this is almost impossible to be mathematically perfect on a typewriter. I know. I used to do that. "Visually" centered, but not mathematically.
Mort trying to say this TANG business no longer matters and shouldn't be brought up, and Birnbaum basically stuck to the point that it does matter if the documents are forgeries.
Mort, Mort, Mort. It matters when it could kill the Republicans, but they want to change the subject when they get caught.
LOL!!! I was just wondering myself how long it would take before someone got around to mentioning that possibility. I didn't want to raise it myself because I don't want to be accused to giving the CRAPS any ideas.
No takers. Wasn't there something about him campaigning for Kerry part-time, or was someone funning us?
Excellent!
You just go to the center (you measured it), then backspace once for every two characters or spaces....
But it sure didn't look like the type on the letters in question.
I believe that this is going to be shown to prove to a lot more folks that CBS is on the Kerry payroll (so to speak). I'm hoping that there is a major backlash from this.
bump
Was the document created in MS Word?
Nobody knows.
But if it matches the word-wrap of MS Word exactly, odds are it was done on a machine that used the same paragraphing algorithm as MS does.
Which wouldn't be unusual - nearly all typesetting systems today, and the best typesetting systems for quite some time, have used a variant of Knuth's algorithm.
Which was first published in 1981.
Adobe has used Knuth's algorithm for 15 years, now. Microsoft for I don't know how long.
So it's not at all suprising that a word-processing or type-setting system would layout the text similarly to what MS Word would - if that word-processing or type-setting system had been developed after 1981.
It's close to an impossibility that a word-processing or type-setting system that predated 1981 would do so. Knuth's was the first to consider the layout of the entire paragraph when determining line-breaks. Which is what the typesetters had always done.
But no automated system prior to 1981 did so. Particularly no typewriter, no matter how sophisticated.
And no typist would manually lay out a paragraph while they were typing and break where Knuth's algorithm would break, except by random chance.
They're both right. The NG stuff doesn't matter. Media lies do matter.
Barnes on FNC said something about it being interesting that the doc without the superscript had a space between the number and the "th". Possibly so the word processing program wouldn't automatically create the supercript. Maybe that explains why the differences in the use of the supercript. Boy, it looks to me like someone wanted this to caught.
Democratic Party, CBS News and Dan Rather CAUGHT RED-HANDED perpetrating a fraud!!
This could have the effect of casting a "chill" over the rats' right to free speech.
Life is sweet when you win...
It is indeed possible to approximate your centering and get something there that is presentable, but since each letter is typed mechanically, it is virtually impossible to get it exactly centered like a word processor does. When you type a letter in a word processor it automatically readjusts every other letter to ensure equadistant variations around a center line. The word processer centers from the middle out in two directions whereas a typewriter centers in one direction from an approximation made going from a point slightly left of the center across the page.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.