OBAMA’S FAKE BIRTH CERTIFICATE: why I’m right, and they’re wrong!

Townhall ^ | 7/15/08 | Polarik

[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.

[Polarik]

Apology accepted.

Here’s something to examine that might answer your question. It is something I discussed in my blog post.

BTW, my blog post has been significantly updated since this version appeared here. Pls check it out.

Take a look at the double “S’s” in Obama’s “HUSSEIN” to that of Daddy’s “HUSSEIN.” The “S’s” are slightly different fonts. In fact, Daddy’s HUSSEIN looks more like my added HUSSEIN.

Also, look at the size difference between the race AFRICAN, versus, CAUCASIAN,” on Michele’s COLB. AFRICAN is a lot bigger.

If they are using a PDF file with fillable fields, then that might explain the difference.

If not, then I’m at a loss for the difference in size.

[Polarik]

Have you considered the possibility of a form-fillable PDF file, which has the COLB template, complete with borders, field headers, and Seal of Hawaii?

What would you call a PDF whose entire page was a graphic, but that became a template, with form fillable fields on it?

Is that so hard to imagine?

It’s not because I’ve worked for the Health Department of Florida and we converted a numbder of certificates to form-fillable PDF files.

[Polarik]

Actually, I agree with you. I don’t think that the whole thing is a graphic, but AJ does, so I thought I’d play Devil’s Advocate.