You are probably mistaking my repetitive postings for caring about the issue or more nefarious motives. I repeated the same thing over and over (which I will do here again: the factcheck photos cannot be created with photoshop, they must have been created with a real embossing instrument and rubber stamp), because it obvious that Polarik and his followers here don't realize that.
Polarik's theories of photoshopping would only work on the low res flat scanned images at Kos, smears and politifact. There's a lot of people who apparently have not looked at the image ( http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/birth_certificate_5.jpg) and hit the magnifier, scrolled to the right and down, and looked at the seal embossed on top of the crease in the paper. That cannot be created in photoshop (with shadows and light sources) but could be created if someone had the embossing tool, the hashed paper, and the notary stamp
I realize all those things are possible to obtain and I am certain that birth certificates have been forged by other people for other purposes. But as those tools are obtained (or the equipment to create the embosser is obtained) then that would leave witnesses and possible records. I also realize there are plenty of infiltrators that would try to create an false impression about this issue.
What you don't seem to realize is that can work both ways. There is a 6000+ post thread starting in July that I have only recently posted on about the alleged forgery. That was a huge waste of time as far as the election went. So don't accuse me of following too closely without looking at the prior 6000 posts, which I had nothing to do with. If I an in fact a plant, I should have argued about it back in July in that thread or the hundreds of others that were posted.
In fact it is much more likely that a number of people here were duped, or even planted, to argue this issue as the low res images were posted because those images could have been rather easily forged without an embossing tool or stamp. Were the smears scans worth arguing over? Perhaps at the time, but not in retrospect since it was not a winning issue by any stretch of the imagination.
The factcheck photos are a different story altogether and will convince any reasonable and knowledgeable person that the artifact that the photographed is real. The artifact could still be forged as I explained above and over and over in this thread. But it would have to be forged with the tools and paper that I indicated and not the way Polarik says it was forged (with the embossing forged in photoshop).