President Obama’s Birth Certificate PDF has “Layers”

Video Wall ^ | 4/27/11 | video wall

[TigersEye]

That has never bothered you before. LOL

[Marie]

Please also explain how the digitally created green background was imported from the future to 1961, when there was no digitally created anything until the 90s.

To the naked eye, it does look as if the words stay straight. I held up a piece of paper and the letters do, indeed, curve. So that's OK.

[Yaelle]

The similarities on the signature birth dates are amazing - the slant of the dashes, the handwriting. The same person wrote all three of these dates, even though the two are signed by the Nordyke mom, and the one by Obama’s mom.

But an innocent explanation is that they were all dated by the nurse. Who would ever know or care, really, if a nurse made their signing easier? After giving birth, the new moms wouldn’t care.

[Marie]

Sorry! I was responding to the other part of your question about the curving letters.

As for the digitally created green background: The image was scanned and then printed on green/white security paper. That’s why that part looks weird. That *is* how it’s supposed to look. (It’s actually more accurate than the one he released in ‘09 in that respect.)

[Marie]

Yes. Your explanation does make sense to me!

Thank you for your patience with this techno-tard.

(I almost said, “you lost me at, ‘When you scan a document into a PDF...’” then I continued to read and it fell together.

I still wish someone would post a demonstration for the others to see.

[Marie]

GunRunner, I truly respect your knowledge and I would really appreciate your opinion of this:

http://market-ticker.org/cgi-ticker/akcs-www?post=185094

If you have the time and the inclination, would you please share your thoughts?

Marie

[Jeff Winston]

Hi CW,

I’m not sure what you’re referring to. I see the black text of the cert, but what do you mean by the security impression?

[Jeff Winston]

That actually makes a LOT of sense, GR, as an explanation of why there is a bit of whitish outline around the letters. Thanks for the explanation!

[Ladysforest]

Well listen,

This is the ONLY field on this form, other than the signatures of the parent and the Dr. that is not typed in.

Why would a nurse pre-fill the date? It won’t save time or be more accurate.

The dates on the Nordyke bc’s look dissimilar to each other, while the dates on the obama and S. Nordyke look nearly identical. Especially the “61”. That looks exactly the same on both forms.

I just personally don’t think the nurse filled in the date - they didn’t when I had children.

[Jeff Winston]

Not everyone would agree that the dual citizenship issue is a non-starter (Leo Denofrio, for starters). Thanks for the explanation, though.

I do think (especially in light of your explanation) that it would probably be difficult to get traction with that particular issue, though.

Any ineligibility (or fraud) issue IMO would have to be clear and undeniable. Else it’s not going to have enough traction to do... what? Force him out of office? Result in his failure to achieve reelection? If we’re just talking about eligibility issues for some reason that doesn’t have any real effect, then we’re just talking out of our hats.

[Marie]

I just personally don’t think the nurse filled in the date - they didn’t when I had children.

I don't know about that. When I had both of my children, I was pretty discombobulated. I can see a helpful delivery nurse wanting to make things easier on new moms. "Just sign here," and no other worries. It wouldn't be SOP, but it does make sense if you think of a rushed nurse tired of the 1000th woman saying, "what day is this?"

Also, if the new mom screwed up, the entire form would have to be redone. It could have been a serious problem.

Heck, they could've done this with me and I wouldn't know. Everything was fuzzy for awhile.

[GunRunner]

The discolorations don't stand out to me. You can see them all over the place such as the 'R' in Barack, the 'K' in Kenya, the 'S' in Stanley, and so on. I find it hard to believe that the conspiracy theorists took an enormous risk to deceive the nation by altering the 'R' in Barack.

The discoloration on the '1' in 10641 doesn't really mean anything to me either. There's discolorations all over the document and plenty of characters have aliasing going on around them. For all we know the '1' on the ink stamper could have been worn down and didn't imprint all the way.

This is a printed copy of a copy of a document from 50 years ago. Imagine what letters and numbers on a fax machine look like when they come out on the receiving end. I'm not surprised to see some graphical blemishes and shading inconsistencies, considering that these people were using stamps and typewriters.

Honestly, I can't explain the cuts on the clipboard, if they are indeed there. I haven't had Illustrator in a while and can't open it to see if they really are. That's definitely seems strange, but why would the grand conspirators want to alter the "Date Accepted by Local Reg." field, and why would they alter it to a day that's fours days after his birth? While I think Obama is a devious character, I tend to look to Occam's Razor on this thing. There's probably a good reason that there is clipboard cut there that doesn't have to do with malfeasance.

[GunRunner]

Also, the one that we've been looking at with the green patterned background is a certified copy.

The White House also released a scan of the original which is much clearer, and doesn't carry over some of the graphical inconsistencies that you see in the certified copy. When you look at the two dates on the bottom for example, you can see that the shading differences are self explanatory. It looks uneven just like most manual ink stamps do:

http://abcnews.go.com/images/Politics/ap_obama_certificate_dm_110427.pdf

[Marie]

There are still things that bother me; but, like you, there’s enough that holds true for me to accept the few things that are still bothering me. (I won’t be completely relaxed until I get a few more “gigs” explained in a serious way.)

One thing that make me accept this is that I truly believe that the typewritten part is legit and was done by the same typewriter/typist. There are consistent flaws that speak to the same fingerprint for that particular typewriter. Yet, no two lower-case “a’s” are exactly the same, which is correct. With a typewriter, there are too many factors that go into one type-stroke to make any two letters identical.

Had this been forged on a computer, the same letters would be perfectly identical. All the lower case “a’s”, for instance, would have the same chips and dents, but they don’t.

[okie01]

Not everyone would agree that the dual citizenship issue is a non-starter (Leo Denofrio, for starters). Thanks for the explanation, though.

And thanks for your consideration.

The simple fact is that what's left for the birther argument is a.) this LFBC is forged in some manner and b.) the NBC argument (which I personally believe is a red herring, nothing more than a distraction). If Chester A. Arthur was eligible to serve, so is Barrack Obama.

[Ladysforest]

This was signed three days after he was born. It is also considered a legal doc.

Shizt - even when I rent a car they make me fill in the date. I have never signed a doc. that someone else has hand signed the date. If ever the date was already filled in it was typed, and I had to initial it.

Just saying. Women back then were NOT ushered out of the hospital 24 hours after delivering a baby, like they are now. She wouldn’t have been doped up after three days. :)
Unless she was lucky.

[Marie]

I wasn’t “doped” after having my son and, although I was released 5 days after his birth, I was still a bit fuzzy. (Sadly, this hasn’t gone away in almost 18 years... Just this morning I dated a check for 24Apr11. Last year I dated one for 1970... OK, maybe I’m just retarded! lol!)

;-)

[bluecat6]

Here is my take on this....

1. The OCR stuff is @#$@#$.

No way. No how. OCR will find and convert images INTO characters. OCR does not chop things up and then look for them. It looks at things as rectangular block one character or possible character at a time and tries to create a character.

Here is what you get (actual OCR subset from WH document):

/f’) /l P ..... t
V~Othr
I CERTIFY THIS IS A TRUE COPY OR
ABSTRACT 01” n:e RECORD ON FILE IN
18b. O .. e o( Sipature
¥”’7~/
19b. Date o( Signature
r;j~1
THE HAWAII STATE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
T. O~I “?h . .D.

Characters is what you get no some layering BS.

2. The Nordykes are the template.

Tip-offs...

a) The bent page on the left side of the image. Look at Nordykes...same thing. Why? Its a photo. Not a scan or a copy off a copier or laser printer. The twins BCs were printed or created in 1965, not 2011. It looks like the book was left bound set on top of a premade template for the bottom part with the DOH and Registrar signatures and ....took a picture. For security they put an EMBOSSED (actual raised seal vs. DEEMBOSSED) on the photo and made sure it wen over the certificate info from the book and the signature template on the bottom.

b) The Obama image has varying shades of text.

This should not happen with a modern printed version from an electronic stored image. It WILL happen with the photo method from 1965 since the photo merely pics up the actual document with the stamps and typewritten letters. In 2011 the IMAGE of the original certificate will PRINT onto security paper and will not vary in shading. And there are methods to pull out only the text if its printed on security paper.

c) Compare to known recently printed long forms. They are flat (no bends on left side) and they are very uniform in their printed material color. The image is bonded to the security paper and covers the image - including the pattern behind it.

3. No sign of a real scan. If this was a scan they cropped off the edge of the paper that would show up in the scan. These are perfect crisp edges that show no sign of a paper edge. There are no shadows, no end of the paper with some white behind...this is another cyber image vs. a real scan.

4. There are 3 images in the pdf. If you do an Export All Images....you get 3....so yes there are layers, multiple images, etc. No way this should happen with a scan or photo. You get 1 jpg image...not 3 magic images. Where they really this dumb?

5. Sandra Lines said it. To determine authenticity you need a real, actual document. That was never truer.

[Yaelle]

I’m listening, lol. It really really looks like the same person wrote all three dates. I made up the explanation of the nurse helping. I have no idea. Each signature date is very slightly different, but obviously written in the same hand. I don’t know why.

[MagnoliaB]

One thing that stands out to me after seeing all three forms together is the fact that whomever typed the Nordyke twins BCs made no real attempt to center anything within a block. Whereas in almost every single block on BO’s the type looks perfectly centered.
Anyone that has ever used a manual typewriter knows that in order to do this much care has to be taken. You have to know how many spaces per block, divide that by 2, space over to that point and backspace once for every two letters you are going to type.
We are so lucky today that word processing programs do that for us on forms. Amazing that back then someone would take such care to center so much of his information.