All it takes is one feature that both the scan and the photo have in common but are represented differently
***That’s enough for those of us who are familiar with the evidence. But there are thousands of lurkers who are trying to get a handle on this and if they only encounter one feature it might not be compelling enough. We need to find dozens, an overwhelming amount, so that the peanut gallery is quieted.
From a second look at all of the features I found on the photograph versus their matching features on the scan image, the conclusion I reached is that this "paper COLB" is not the same COLB depicted in the image allegedly made from it. What is a dead giveaway was the absence of a second fold -- a fold not visible at all, despite every image enhancement trick in the book. If this was the paper COLB used to make the scan, there is no way that its sharply creased, second fold would not have been picked up by the scanner.
The conclusion is that this "paper COLB" (we don't know what it is because FactCheck refuses to scan it) was never used to make the alleged scan image posted to the FactCheck.org, the Daily Kos.com, and the Fightthesmears.com websites.
Now, if the absence of the second fold is not enough to convince you, take a good look at the top fold in the allegedly photographed "paper COLB." That fold was made on a diagonal, while the fold on the FactCheck COLB is perfectly horizontal and parallel with the border. I measured at least a 20 pixel difference between the fold and border on the left side, and between the fold and border on the right side.
Now, don't let anyone tell you that it was folded "Twice," because each of the two folds appear in the photos as clean creases.
I removed the other differences I originally listed because it was too difficult to match the image to the photos, given that FactCheck did not take a shot of the entire back of the COLB. No, what they did post was cropped images of three small sections on the back.
The was not even one photo showing the entire Seal, date stamp and entire signature block.
FactCheck has shown itself to be dumb as well as deceitful. They did not get the significance of the Certification Number -- that it contained the birth year, which if it was not 1961, then Obama would have been nailed right away. They brushed aside my research on the lack of colored pixels between the letters, by calling them "pixel halos that were articfacts of the scanning process."
Can you say, "BALONEY?" no matter how hard you search, you will never find any image or photo of "scanner artifacts" on the Internet. Not on Google. Not on Photobucket. Not as of August 24, 2008. And, certainly not like anything I found on the bogus Obama COLB.
Those colorless pixels came from graphic alterations of an existing image, not "scanner artifacts." End of story.
I think it should be patently clear here that nothing presented by FactCheck or the Obama campaign represents reality. America still has never seen Obama's current birth record. Obama made a special trip to Hawaii. He absolutely should have gotten a current copy of his birth record while in Hawaii. That is, if he had nothing to hide. People who support him need to stop making excuses for his perfidy and deceit. Most importantly, as Frank Sinatra would sing, Start spreading the news.
PLEASE, tell the faithful that the COLB issue is not dead, but given new life. The COLB forgery really does have a life of its own, and it is up to you to let these lowlifes know that we are not going to let them get away with perfidy.