Posted on 07/15/2008 4:36:41 PM PDT by pissant
OK, it’s time to let the genie out of the bottle., and prove, once and for all time, that the images posted on the Internet are NOT true, original copies of Obama’s birth certificate (rather “Certification of Live Birth”, or COLB), that they NEVER WERE true, original copies, and if anyone tells you anything different, that they are flat-out wrong.
Period.
Exclamation point.
I direct your attention back to my main thesis – and what I said in my first post, “Was Obama's "Certificate of Birth" manufactured?”
I theorized that the fuzzy outline found in between the letters of the data fields on the Kos image is a dead giveaway that these letters were made by a graphics program.
All one needs to do to prove that Kos image was altered, is to view the space between the double “s” in Obama’s (alleged) middle name, “HUSSEIN,” under increased magnification, such as making the image 300% or larger.
Now, if you had a graphics program that could enlarge “HUSSEIN,” up to pixel level, the smallest unit of the image that can be seen, and look just at the pixels in the vertical space between the double “S,” you will see only FOUR (3) PIXELS, out of about 120 pixels, that are colored any shade of green.
Check it out:
Zoom in on this image. Notice how similar are the HUSSEINs?
If you are unable to zoom in far enough, Here's a close-up view of the pixels:
That second “HUSSEIN” was added by a graphics program that works with 8-bit, 256 color bitmaps. When one opens an image of a different format, let’s say the Kos JPG, it temporarily converts that image format to an 8-bit, 256 color bitmap.
Now, you can re-save your image back to JPG, but when you do, you do not get a bit-for-bit copy because JPG files are 24-bit, 16.7 million colors versus 8-bit, 256 color bitmaps. Hence, the loss of color pixels.
Why is this significant?
Because when you look at any other image that really is a true copy of an original COLB, the space between letters mostly contains green-shaded pixels. These green pixels come from the green part of the pattern that is found on the actual paper document.
As an example, compare the letters, “BIRT” taken from “DATE OF BIRTH” on image crops taken from both Obama’s COLB and DeCosta’s COLB and enlarged to show the pixels.
First, OBama's:
Now, DeCosta's
Both crops are approximately the same size, the same resolution, and the same JPG compression ratio.
Clearly, when comparing Obama’s to DeCosta’s, there is very little in the way of green shaded pixels between the letters on the Obama image as compared to the DeCosta image.
I can tell you what is NOT the cause of this difference:
Laser Printing
Anti-Aliasing
JPG artifacts
There is only ONE way for the lack of any green-shaded pixels to occur on the image.
Only ONE way for the predominance of white and grayish pixels to occur on the image.
And, that way is by importing the original scan as an 8-bit, 256 color bitmap into a graphics program and proceeded to change/add text to the image.
Don’t believe me? Then take another look at the "HUSSEINs" again on this modified Kos image right below Obama’s middle name:
Can you see the similarity at normal size? Here's a close-up:
It should be obvious to anyone seeing this that if I can add the name, “HUSSEIN,” to where it looks pretty darn close to the Kos image “HUSSEIN,” then the claim that the Kos image is a direct copy of a laser printed document is BLOWN CLEAR OUT OF THE WATER!
Now, if the forger was smarter, he or she would have altered the text using a 24-bit JPG editor and would have produced a higher-quality forgery as a result.
Here's what it could have looked like if MS Paint were used to modify the text. Again, look at the two HUSSEIN's. The one below is much higher in quality than the one in the original Kos image.
Here's a closeup of the "new and improved" forgery:
That’s it, folks. Listen, if I had the original scan to work with, as opposed to the copied Kos image, I could have produced an absolute, dead ringer for the Kos image using my 8-bit graphic editor.
To conclude: I just proved that the Kos image is not a true copy of a paper document by demonstrating why the text on the Kos image looks so differently from the text on the DeCosta image. I have ruled out ALL other theories as to how the Kos image got to be the way it is.
I have also shown that all of the images on the internet are directly related to the Kos image, so if the Kos image is a fake, then all of them are fake.
It is time to stop the fraud being perpetrated on the American public. It is time to demand that Obama produce a paper record of his birth instead of carrying on this charade.
Plain talk’s question is not ridiculous. There are two ways you could produce the certificate we are seeing. You could laser-print the database output on stationery preprinted with the green pattern and Hawaii insignia and black border (or, as long as we’re antiquing here, you could feed pin-fed forms through a 1403 with a PN train and a mylar ribbon). Or you generate the entire image in the computer, database output, green pattern, black border and all, and laser-print that on plain paper.
********************************************************
I thought that it was a foregone conclusion that birth certs were printed on specially printed forms... these certs all have printing all the way to the edges which is not possible with any laser printer that I know of... if these were produced on a color laser we would see a yellow dot with encoded information somewhere on the form that gives us the ESN of the printer that produced the document... find that dot and you can say beyond a shadow of a doubt if these various docs were printed on different printers or if they are all generations of one master forgery.
P.S. wasn’t a 1403 a hammer and band type? pretty hard to get printing that good out of one ,, at best they always looked like selectric output with dirt/crud embedded in the crevices of the “tighter” letters.. The only laser that might be involved would be a desktop HP model if preprinted forms were used ,, a 3800 would be too old for current use and too new for back then..
Most immigrating Arabs classify themselves as white as per the U.S. Census.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2046311/posts
Brief Review of “Obama: The Man Behind The Mask”
I agree with you. I was just pointing out that the other possibility exists. In any case, the certificate is not the real, original one. It's just a state official printing the output of a database query and certifying that is true. That's why they emboss the seal onto the paper output and sign it. Of course the only certain way to verify the information would be to go back to the state and ask them to testify that they really produced the certificate in question.
As to the edge-to-edge question, you'd have to trim the laser output. Doable, but enough of a PITA to kill the idea if something else didn't first. An ESN, if present, would be another security feature. A forger would need to fake a correct one and then print on a printer that didn't add a conflicting one.
P.S. wasn’t a 1403 a hammer and band type? pretty hard to get printing that good out of one ,, at best they always looked like selectric output with dirt/crud embedded in the crevices of the “tighter” letters.
That's why they used to use mylar ribbons for stuff like personalized computer fund-raising letters and camera ready offset printer copy. The resulting output looked like it was typed on a Selectric by the boss's secretary. For the high quality output, they also used the TN train, in order to have lower case letters available. Of course, the TN's larger character set slowed the printer down, and the mylar ribbons were more expensive, so for regular jobs like bank statements, reports, and core dumps, they used the PN on an ordinary ribbon.
No, they are not a result of scanning...not given the size and resolution of the Kos image.
You cannot have 70,000 different colors in that JPG, and have only grey and white pixels between the letters.
I’ve tried to replicate the Kos image every way possible, including scanning at the same size and resolutions, and it will not produce the haloes.
See, you cannot make a judgment solely based on speculation.
I’ve created over 320 variants of the Kos image, and there is only one way to have a situation where there aare no green pixels appear between the letters.
Sure they have! ;-)
No, they are not a result of scanning...not given the size and resolution of the Kos image.
You cannot have 70,000 different colors in a 2427 x 2369 pixel, 300 DPI JPG, and also have only grey and white pixels between the letters.
It cannot be produced by scanning an image. Even if you intentionally lighten the scan, that should effect everything in the scan, and there are no “haloes” anywhere around the borders.
I’ve tried to replicate the Kos image every way possible, including scanning at the same size and resolutions, and it will not produce the haloes.
See, you cannot make a judgment solely based on speculation.
I’ve created over 320 variants of the Kos image, and there is only one way to have a situation where there aare no green pixels appear between the letters.
bttt :)
Interesting analysis. But some of the key questions were whether on the newer birth certifications do the borders match the older known genuine ones or do they match Obama’s and whether the state seal and signature stamp show clearly through unlike Obama’s.
You didn’t address these questions or show this newer Hawaii birth certification in full so we can determine if this is the case.
PhillyGuy1
Hugh Hewitt said there is some phony stuff about Obama on the internet and we didn’t need to go there.
He mentioned the fake Maureen Dowd column, but I’m guessing he was also alluding to this one.
The "Certificate of Live Birth" text looks white, with no hint of background color, in Obama's scans. I haven't seen scans of known real certificates with resolution adequate to clearly see the background behind the "Certificate" text, but the color seems to show through at least.
Has anyone seen a Certificate of Live Birth in which the border was preprinted? Has anyone physically examined the DeCosta certificate to determine if the border was printed in the same fashion as the text?
I've noticed a number of videos popping up on youtube. I've e-mailed this one to friends and family since it presents a lot of the info in a quick overview with great music:
More info at this site
http://texasdarlin.wordpress.com/2008/06/page/2/
This web site says
“The Vital Records office in Hawaii has confirmed the following with respect to requests for certified copies of birth certificates:
1. Certifications of live birth are always mailed from the VR office, and never transmitted electronically.
2. Certificate numbers are never blacked out.
AND
3. Certifications will always have an embossed seal.”
Polarik, I notice that you answered some of the contentions of those who are disagreeing with you, such as in this exchange below on the hackerfactor.
At this point, the evidence is heading into the realm where those who are experts argue with each other and what would be needed in order to force the issue out into the open is irrefutable, simple evidence.
Is it possible for you to post a simple recap? I’m getting lost in the back & forth.
The Birth of a Conspiracy
Secure Computing: Sec-C
http://www.hackerfactor.com/blog/index.php?/archives/202-The-Birth-of-a-Conspiracy.html
#6 polarik (Homepage) on 2008-07-15 17:00 (Reply)
You’re barking up the wrong tree.
First of all, PCA is a statistical analysis technique to identify common sources of variance among a set of continuous variables. It is similar to Factor analysis and Canonical correlation in that it calculates linear combinations of variables, called vectors, using least squares analysis, or some other optimizing function, to project a vector through multidimensional variable space that minimizes the total sum of squared deviations from the vector.
I don’t see how this is relevant to analyzing JPG data. It cannot identify whether the current JPG data was translated from a different a different image format.
Next, the “realistic noise pattern across the entire image,” is pure speculation. It assumes that all of the image data has remained constant, but there is no way to determine what was the origin. There is nothing realistic about it, given the alleged conditions under which AJStrata claims are the cause for the matrix of pixel diffusion.
Finding “Good blotches” is the most irrelevant because, again, you cannot say, with any certainty, from where the Kos image originated.
You cannot even tell if it is a copy of a scan, or a copy of a copy of a scan.
The scanner software, or rather the TWAIN-compliant source layer it employs, transfers the scanned image data directly or indirectly via buffers, computer memory, or virtual memory. Photoshop makes a temporary working file from this data in its own, native format. Actually, everything you do in Photoshop is recorded.
When the user wants to save the image in a common graphics file format like JPG, Photoshop will translate its native image data into JPG data, including “headers,” or information about the image file.
We know that the Kos image was modified by Photoshop. Not a great discovery since we know that the black bar was added to obscure the certificate number, and “black bars” are not original features of the COLB.
What we don’t know is the exact path taken by the original scanner data. None of your analyses can show that.
you cannot say, for sure, what was done to the original scan data, besides adding the black bar, cropping the image, resizing the image, and saving it as the Kos JPG image.
The actual size of the Kos image is 2427 x 2369 pixels, and indicates that it was cropped from an image that was actually 2546 x 2388 pixels.
Since the Kos image is NOT the originally scanned image, we can truthfully say that we have NEVER seen the actual copy of his COLB.
If a person wanted to post the originally scanned image, except for the Certificate Number, it would have been child’s play to place a small rectangle of paper over the number, and hold it in place with a smidgen of removable Scotch tape.
In this way, a true copy of the original paper document could have been made, but it wasn’t.
Here’s the deal-breaker I found:
There is one. and only one, way to produce the pattern of pixels found around the field data. Whoever wishes to try, can take all the time they want, but they are not going be able to recreate the Kos image by JPG file manipulation.
Not now. Not ever.
AJStrata claims that the Kos image is a direct copy of the COLB paper document, and that the pixel pattern is due to anti-aliasing of laser printed text.
I have done the research to prove that there’s no way on Earth that simply scanning laser-printed text into a JPG will reproduce the pixel patterns on the Kos image.
No way, Jose.
I guess that y’all will have to read my last post to find out why the Kos image is absolutely the farthest thing from being a true and accurate scan of ANYBODY’s COLB, let alone Obama’s.
It’s a graphic that has been altered — no question, without a doubt — and there is no way to prove that it is without some underhanded alterations.
The data tilts the scale in favor of a forgery, and away from being a true, unadulterated, original copy of a paper document containing accurate data from his birth record.
All that this unnecessary analyses doe is to obfuscate the fact that the text on the image was altered in between the time a COLB was placed on a scanner glass, and the time the Kos image was created
My challenge to you folks is to try and recreate the Kos image according to AJstrata’s protocol.
Good luck trying.
It’s gotten very frustrating reading all the evidence regarding this topic and not hearing how to bring the issue to light. I for one have written my senators and rep asking for them to pay some attention. I don’t know what else to do so I’ll just suggest all you readers do the same.
Keep up the fight. This is too important to leave to anyone else but YOU. Raise a fuss.
Thanks for making it clearer, but I would have preferred if you presented just the request for clarification without adding the condescending remark to it.
I think what you’re saying is that a JPG made directly from scanner output would “look better” (or have fewer pixel artifacts) than a JPG of a JPG.
Answering this question is a bit difficult without actually testing the scanner and software used to produce the new COLB scan.
As front-end users of scanning software, we usually do not know which algorithms the scanner software uses to go from a bitmap in memory (produced at the time of scanning and subsequently displayed in a preview) to a 25% reduction, and then to a JPG file.
For the moment, let’s assume that this process is “better” than doing a JPG to JPG reduction.
Actually, we can do an analogous test using the latest COLB. I will do a fourfold reduction in size as in your example, but with 5100 x 6600 instead of 4000*8000.
What I did was to take the original JPG image of the COLB, which was a full-sized, direct save from the scanner’s bitmapped image, and convert it to a full-size, 24-bit bitmap file (100MB in size).
It will not exactly be the same as the bitmap produced by the scanner (for the reasons cited above), but it gives us the same starting point for the test.
So, now we have a bitmap of 5100 x 6600 pixels that represents what the scanner might have initially produced.
From that 100% bitmap, I saved it as a JPG with a 25% reduction.
Also From that 100% bitmap, I saved it first as a full-size JPG, resized it to 1275 x 1650, a 25% reduction, and saved that as another JPG.
The results produced two JPGS from which I cropped two images, that were very close in size and dimensions, from the upper left corner of the COLB (where it reads STATE OF HAWAII & HONOLULU).
The full-size image files were too big to upload, and these clips provide enough info for comparison purposes.
I’m going to let you (and anyone else) be the judge here.
Here are the links:
http://i305.photobucket.com/albums/nn227/Polarik/hawaii-a.jpg
http://i305.photobucket.com/albums/nn227/Polarik/hawaii-b.jpg
OK, now which one is the direct, full-sized bitmap to a 25% JPG, and which one is the direct, full-sized bitmap to a full-sized JPG to a 25% JPG.
And, please explain your answers. This quiz will not affect your final grade in this course. :-)
BTW, people, I’m going offline until Monday evening, so please do not think I’m ignoring anyone’s comments made during this time period.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
