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.

[BossLady]

Excellent!!!! I left an open mind from the beginning on this one however, the COLB never quite looked ‘right’ to me graphically. Sometimes, it’s what you don’t see that you end up seeing.... ;)

[supercat]

I see a halo around all the letters. The space between the two n's in his mother's name, ANN appears all white. Why? I'm guessing the halos are a result of the scanning of the certificate. I don't see proof in your argument.

Proving that the certificate could have been forged a certain way does not prove, nor even particularly imply, that it was, unless things fall into place exceptionally naturally. If reproducing the Killian memos required lots of tricky tinkering, such reproduction would have proved nothing. What proved the Killian memos a forgery was the fact that its spacing and layout design precisely matched the font and behavior of software that was designed years after the memos were supposedly produced, but was created completely independent of them.

The $50,000 question in this case, IMHO, would be whether any graphics program would exhibit the white haloing behavior when dealing with a scan of black text on a green decorated background. If the 8x8 JPEG block boundaries were strongly visible in the haloing, I might believe it to be JPEG artifacting. The curved contour of the haloing seems too smooth for that, though. There are many types of artifacts I would expect to see around high-contrast text on a low-contrast background. The haloing matches no type of artifacting with which I'm familiar.

[Red Steel]

You are welcome. :-)

[Miss Didi]

More here, thanks to rodguy911:

Honolulu-Seattle, Roundtrip in ‘61?

[HawaiianGecko]

"Polarik clearly makes the case here. Some of these guys are not following his reasoning very closely."

The problem isn't his logic. His logic is clear and accurate.  The problem is that he has proven a jpeg image posted on the Daily Kos is a phony.  So what?  Most everything out there is phony. 

Think of it this way.  If I create a bad image of Obama's BC and post it in FR, and the folks at DU or D.Kos proved it to be false, just how does that mischievous behavior transfer to Obama?

[supercat]

Or you generate the entire image in the computer, database output, green pattern, black border and all, and laser-print that on plain paper. Of course, to do the latter, you need a color printer and much fancier software. But you get out of having to keep the preprinted forms in inventory.

Color laser prints are not cheap. Using preprinted forms would be cheaper and more secure. If jobs are done in batches, switching forms is really not an issue.

Further, it would be strange to have the green design extend past the border if it wasn't going to go to the paper edge; most printers would have a hard time doing the latter.

[JohnInSoCal]

actually this doesn’t really prove anything

>There is only ONE way for the lack of any green-shaded >pixels to occur on the image.

There are so many variables you haven’t mentioned including how the original was scanned, under what settings the scanner was at, the condition of the CCD, was it sent through an ADF, was it skewed, was it deskewed with software, was it scanned in a non lossy format and then converted later to JPG, if so how many times, what software did that conversion, and not to mention the original document and it’s condition.

You also talk about converting JPG to 8 bit using an editor and this is the reason for the green missing. The green could be missing for many reasons including the scanner and it’s settings, the settings when the document was originally converted into JPG and how many times that was done. Just converting to 8 bit doesn’t mean you lose green anyways. That process is called color quantization where you are going from say 24 bit to some more limited palette, 16 or 8 bit or whatever. If green is a predominant color in the image it would not be lost when going to 8 bit if the color quantization software is any good, that’s the whole idea behind color quantization. You generate a histogram of colors and use the most prevelant along with a small subset of general paleete colors. Sure doing this step is not as good as staying in 24 bit but certainly can’t be construed as the ONLY reason green was lost in this JPG scanned image.

JPG is a lossy algorithm in the first place and once the image was scanned it was converted from spatial domian into the frequency domain and the compression process was done. Not all JPG compression/decompression software is exactly the same and can produce different results. This was not mentioned. Do they have a non lossy format for the scanned document ? That would still be subject to limitations of the scanning device but certainly WAY better than lossy JPG that may have been scaled and compressed several times before hitting the website.

I worked in the document scanning industry as a software developer and have written JPG compression/decompression software and image viewing software and also worked on hardware for scanners. There are simply WAY too many variables you have not mentioned to draw any conclusions from these images. For all anybody knows these JPG images could have gone through several compression steps, and even some scaling. You would need to look at the original document because what we have here is not compelling evidence.

Also if they were going to fake it why not just fake the entire certificate rather than try photoshop trickery ? That’s a very simple looking certificate that could be easily duplicated.

[Joyell]

Isn’t a birth certificate a public record? Couldn’t anyone request a copy, or ask to see it at the courthouse?

[m4629]

I do believe only the first party could request a copy of BC, in this case Obama himself, either parent and/or legal guardian.

But I’m just wondering and surely someone must have raise this question somewhere which is, did someone subpoena a ceritified copy of the BC through a court of competence and jurisdiction?

[cynwoody]

There are simply WAY too many variables you have not mentioned to draw any conclusions from these images. For all anybody knows these JPG images could have gone through several compression steps, and even some scaling. You would need to look at the original document because what we have here is not compelling evidence.

Exactly.

Thanks for your post, and welcome to FR!

[Spunky]

"We have other samples to verify against. He used Decostas."

"I don't know what that means and doesn't answer my question."

DeCosta is the deceased mother (born in Hawaii), of I believe someone who is a Freeper. They posted the deceased mom's birth certificate online. Actually on a Geneology site, so a REAL birth certificate can be compared. So when you see the DeCosta Birth Certificate you know it is a real one.

[Red Steel]

That’s right Obama is not responsible. /sarc

[Spunky]

"Further, it would be strange to have the green design extend past the border if it wasn't going to go to the paper edge; most printers would have a hard time doing the latter."

That green basket weave paper is a stock paper without any boarders. I recently sent for a Certified copy of my BC from Idaho. It came on that same green basket weave as the FAKE Obama COLB and the same green basket weave as the REAL DeCosta COLB. The difference between mine and their's though, is mine had the original ledger card in my mothers writing with all the pertinate info, and the doctors signature. I was born at home. This was then COPIED onto that green basket weave paper. Stamped with an embossed seal and dated and signed. Saying it was a Certified copy of the original.

[PhilDragoo]

It has been brought to my attention that Kenneth Lamb states Obama's ethnicity as 50% Caucasian, 43.5% Arab, 6.5% African Negro [Lamb notes "Negro" is a scientific term in this genealogical context, not a racist one].

I posit a continuation of the Obama lie of being the first African-American [fill in the blank] as yet one more motive behind the forged certificate of birth.

Only one of Obama's sixteen great-great-grandparents (in the maternal line of his father) is African Negro, hence Obama falls below the U.S. requirement of one-eighth of the descriptor minority (12.5%).

When I came on this thread I found a series of Bandwidth Exceeded boxes selling upgrades to Photobucket Pro.

I have a few extra bytes; here's what I found:

[GOPJ]

Buckhead broke it here...

[supercat]

That green basket weave paper is a stock paper without any boarders.

Is the basket-weave pattern visible behind the words "CERTIFICATE OF LIVE BIRTH" on the DeCosta COLB? It's hard to tell in any of the scans I can see. It is conspicuously absent from the Obama cert, in a fashion which would not make any sense if the top heading were not preprinted on the form.

[pissant]

Sure ace, create one like it via scanning. Welcome to FR, troll.

[freespirited]

Which branch of government certifies that B. Hussein Obama, or McCain, is eligible to run for President? This seems like a simple question but I can't find a simple answer.

I believe the answer is "no branch."

When a candidate files to be on the ticket in a state, there should be a section where the candidate affirms his eligibility. The state takes his word for it.

This is how govt "works." It doesn't investigate much of anything unless the powers that be are convinced by outsiders (that would be us) to get off their butts.

[freespirited]

P.S. The Federal Election Commission doesnt do anything but stick its nose into the money flow.

[Kevmo]

This is how govt “works.” It doesn’t investigate much of anything unless the powers that be are convinced by outsiders (that would be us) to get off their butts.
***Basically, we are the 4th branch of guvmint. We’re holding it accountable to the truth, right here, right now, as part of the freedom of the press — for as long as that lasts.