Replies

Now, if the absence of the second fold is not enough to convince you, take a good look at the top fold in the allegedly photographed "paper COLB." That fold was made on a diagonal, while the fold on the FactCheck COLB is perfectly horizontal and parallel with the border. I measured at least a 20 pixel difference between the fold and border on the left side, and between the fold and border on the right side. Now, don't let anyone tell you that it was folded "Twice," because each of the two folds appear in the photos as clean creases.

It wasn't folded twice. And it wasn't folded on any significant diagonal. And the fold in the photos is perfectly consistent with the fold in the scan.

Photo 2 makes it appear that the fold was made on an diagonal. But that's simply because the angle of the page above the fold on the "DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH" side was more extreme than the angle above the fold on the "STATE OF HAWAII" side.

Take a look at photo 5 and you'll see that the distance from the fold to the top inside edge of the border does not vary in any significant way.

But sticking to photo 2 for the moment, pull it up, make it full size, and then scroll to get to where the fold meets up with the left side of the border.

As you can see, the fold there is located just above the pair of horizontal (or vertical with respect to the photo itself but I'm going to reference them as they would appear with the document right reading) bars, and right at the ends of the pair of vertical bars above them.

Then scroll down, following the fold until you get to the point where it meets up with the right side of the border.

As you can see, it's moved further above the horizontal pairs to the point that nearly half of the vertical pair above them is now below the fold.

Now pull up the Kos or FactCheck scanned images and you will find the exact same thing.

k

I wonder how long you’ll be a freeper, since the consensus is that you’re a CoLB troll.

It wasn't folded twice. And it wasn't folded on any significant diagonal. And the fold in the photos is perfectly consistent with the fold in the scan.

Photo 2 makes it appear that the fold was made on an diagonal. But that's simply because the angle of the page above the fold on the "DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH" side was more extreme than the angle above the fold on the "STATE OF HAWAII" side.

Here's photo 2 and it is diagonally folded twice.

Maybe “Factcheck” should rename their organization to “Factchuck”.

For them to breath new life into this COLB controversy by publishing photos of the alleged “real” COLB and continue to avoid the simple act of publishing a certified vault copy of Obama’s actual birth certificate(s), they really look completely incompetent. They will disappear as soon as Obama’s failing campaign is finished.

You contune to pull claims out of who-knows-where, and that are not backed up with documentation. P?retty much ev erything you have said is like that, "the signature stamp was visible with the naked eye."

No way, Jose.

I checked all of your prior posts, and you never said "Boo" about it before you ever saw others monkeying around with the color balance.

You also don't understand the principle of perspective: objects further away from an observer will look smaller than objects close to the observer. Yet the the distance from the border to the fold on the left side is greater than the right side. It's like 123 pixels to 145 pixels.

Take a look at photo 5 and you'll see that the distance from the fold to the top inside edge of the border does not vary in any significant way.

Measure it. You're slicing soime more balooney I've measured it before removing the perspective as well as afterwards, and I'll post a few pictures.

THe fold on the Kos image is horizontal and parallel -- not so for the FactCheck image

No, you won't find the same thing, re: the fold lines.

You need to show us the actual measurements. Again, you say a lot but show very little.

Here are the comparisons and measurements, via GIMP measure tool.

Left side measurements were taken from the bottom of the "T" in STATE down to the fold line.

Right side measurements were taken from the bottom of the "T" in HEALTH down to the fold line.

FACTCHECK PHOTO LEFT SIDE:

FACTCHECK PHOTO RIGHT SIDE:

FACTCHECK IMAGE LEFT SIDE:

FACTCHECK IMAGE RIGHT SIDE:

The left side of this FactCheck photo (BC #5) is only slightly slanted away from the POV, and if the law of perspective is going to be claimed, then you would expect the left side, that's further away, to be smaller than the right side, which is closer to the POV.

You can also try measuring the distance from the inside borders to the fold.

Next?

I have a special request for everyone on behalf of Virgina Travis, daughter of Patricia DeCosta. You may have noticed that I have been referring to that COLbas PD's COLB out of deferrence to Virginia -- who was very upset that her mother's memory was being tarnished by the misuse of her Mom's birth certificate. Therefore, please, from now on, refer to that COLB as PD or PD's COLB. Thank you.

Now, for a little touch of Polarik.

Here's a synopsis of my update here.

Some of the suspicious elements I first noticed about the FactCheck photo last Friday, turned out to be too problematic to use them as points of contention. In particular, the location of the date stamp, the location of the signature stamp, the size of the borders, and the look of the borders were not sufficiently different for me to make a judgment call. So I redacted them from my original post.

However, there are a few, highly significant differences between the COLB photo and the COLB image.

As you can see by measuring the distances from the fold to the bottom of the "Ts" (STATE & HEALTH) on either side(Figures 1 & 2), the top fold that appears in the photo is diagonal, yet, it is perfectly parallel on the image (Figures 3 & 4).
The embossed Seal clearly stands out as the most prominent feature in the FactCheck photo (Figure 5 - 6), and I do believe that someone with the grip of a lobster took the seal and almost cut a circle out of the paper.
As you can see in the FactCheck image (Figure 7), there was only one fold on it (that required edge detection to see clearly) . Putting the FactCheck photo through edge detection makes it shine like a beacon (Figure 8).
Also, look at the difference in how the seals show up in these same two images. In the FactCheck image, it looks half-eaten. In the FactCheck photo, it's hard not to notice.
The presence of only one fold cannot be explained away NOR can a second fold be found via the latest image enhancement techniques.
Something is very odd about only showing bits and pieces in photos of the back of the full-size COLB, as if showing it in one photo would reveal something fishy (Figure 9-10). *F
Speaking of fishy, FactCheck's' photos of the back present a strange texture to the paper, as if had gotten wet. There are paper fibers sticking out from the back (Figure 11)
There a better than chance probability that this was a printout made by FactCheck COLB image forgery. For one thing, they did not have to worry about the second fold appearing (and could now fold it anyway they chose). The lack of correspondence between the orientation of the top fold in the photo as compared to the image is an example of the "Close, but no cigar" method of folding. I also see either white pixels or "Liquid Paper"(aka White-Out) behind the Time of Birth (Figure 12). If they were trying to prove that the pixel anomalies I saw were "Scanner artifacts", which I have thoroughly debunked, they sure would not put them in the photo.
I accounted for the angle at which these photos were taken by graphically "tilting" them.
Lastly, isn't it curious that the one and only, shot taken perpendicular to the paper COLB, is out-of-focus.(Figure 13) FIGURE 1
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 3
FIGURE 4
FIGURE 5
FIGURE 6
FIGURE 7
FIGURE 8
FIGURE 9
FIGURE 10
FIGURE 11
FIGURE 12
FIGURE 13

I have a question:

In every photo of the embossed Seal on the backside of the COLB, the top part is cropped out right where the bottom fold should be.

Coincidence? Or intentional?