[AuH2ORepublican]

"Lets look at that superscript TH again. If it was converted in scanning, it would always be converted in scanning & one of the docs has it both ways."

---

It's even simpler than that. The memos could not have been scanned (i.e., had a scanner convert the letters on the print document into letters on a computer document), they were PDFed as an image file. Only an image file could replicate the signature---merely scanning the document would have converted the signature into gibberish. Therefore, the "th" would not have been converted to a superscript when the document was PDFed; in fact, the PDF image file wouldn't even have been able to read the letters t and h, it merely would have viewed a picture of all of these lines that, to human eyes, form letters. If it is true that no typewriter of that era had a superscript key that reduced the size of the "th," then the memos are definitely forgeries.

[MEG33]

I believe IBM had a selectric ball that had to be exchanged with the normal ball to make that th and that would seem to be rather much for a memo not for official files(freeper thread fom last night was info source.)

[GoLightly]

I don't know how a program that converts an image into PDF treats characters. I believe that old fax technology made conversions of characters to code, cuz it sped up transmission speeds.

I saw one post, in one thread where someone said they had a "th" char on a daisy ball, but there are so darn many threads about this today, I'd be at a loss to find the post again.

Seeing the differences in the signatures finally convinced me, though I was trying to poke holes in the story for a good portion of the day today.