Someone on our side needs to do a serious review of mid-’80s electronic document processing - before we get seriously embarrassed by the ignorant rhetoric being thrown around by the “multiple layers + multiple resolutions = fake” crowd. Please trust me guys: you’re building yourselves a trap and walking into it.
No trap as far as computer created documents versus a scanned photocopy. Hawaii did not start to computer generate birth records until 2001. Until then they were done on forms with type, date stamps and permanent ink for signatures. Photo copied when people wanted a certified copy. And he was born in 1961, we are told, not the mid 80’s.
The mid-80's may have been a little while before I got into computers, but I recall seeing a demo of Adobe's OCR scanning package and assumed that it would become "the industry standard."
The demonstrator hailed as a significant new feature a feature that created a miniature tiff of an unrecognizable character and assigned it to a separate layer. I assumed there should only be two layers.
One thing I noticed about the scan at the gov. website, which is flat, is that comparing the characters "6d." with the "6e." in the fold of the page you see that the shaded region is anti--aliased but that from the middle page is not, as if scanned at a lower color resolution. Also, note the period in both figures: they are exactly the same except for the left most column of pixels is missing from the shaded side.
One other thing, OCR software would have printed the doc in true-type or post-script fonts, which would have been smoother, it would seem.
Two other things come to bear in assessing this thing: the sheriff who's investigation found inconsistencies in 'bam's selective service registration, and the fact that 'bam went to a great deal of trouble avoiding their release.
Go learn something about document forgery and how photoshop works before you make such an illogical statement. Look at the content of the layers. If nothing else, look at all the Arpaio press conference video handouts and those videos and analyses published elsewhere.
Yes, it is idiotic to parse a PDF which breaks a document scan into layers. 30 minutes of research, or a simple download of Adobe acrobat would explain all these issue. Plus it ignores the other image released the same day that wasn't layered. It is trailer park analysis of a computer document - embarrassing for conservatives, and helping Obama.
It would be wiser to learn something about pdf's, Adobe, and Photoshop before making such a statement. If it was EVER published in layers, you should know that correcting that FUBAR by subsequently flattening it simply proves it is a forgery.
It doesn't even pass the common sense test. What forger would put together a document using this bizarre cut and paste, layering method...and then forget to merge the layers or flatten the image? The answer...NONE!!!
A dumb liberal staffer or lawyer with more skill than sense! Who says some liberal lawyer or legal aid that is smart enough to know how to fiddle with photoshop isn't dumb enough to know to flatten the resulting document before publishing it. There are a lot of people out here that are smart enough to photoshop it ...but... which are not forensic document examiners to know what NOT to do!
If you want a real-world display of the incompetence and hubris of the Obama administration and staff, the idiotic nature of the forgery simply confirms it in spades!!!!
"Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." Martin Luther King, Jr.
"The two most common elements in the universe are Hydrogen and stupidity." Harlan Ellison