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.
I keep coming back to that book you get to write. You are the one who gets to make money off of this imbroglio, regardless of the outcome. You could self-publish and have something soon after the Democratic convention. You have done all the heavy lifting till now, the rest is just tidying up loose ends. Don’t let this opportunity pass you by — you will always regret it.
It wasn't folded twice. And it wasn't folded on any significant diagonal. And the fold in the photos is perfectly consistent with the fold in the scan.
Photo 2 makes it appear that the fold was made on an diagonal. But that's simply because the angle of the page above the fold on the "DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH" side was more extreme than the angle above the fold on the "STATE OF HAWAII" side.
Take a look at photo 5 and you'll see that the distance from the fold to the top inside edge of the border does not vary in any significant way.
But sticking to photo 2 for the moment, pull it up, make it full size, and then scroll to get to where the fold meets up with the left side of the border.
As you can see, the fold there is located just above the pair of horizontal (or vertical with respect to the photo itself but I'm going to reference them as they would appear with the document right reading) bars, and right at the ends of the pair of vertical bars above them.
Then scroll down, following the fold until you get to the point where it meets up with the right side of the border.
As you can see, it's moved further above the horizontal pairs to the point that nearly half of the vertical pair above them is now below the fold.
Now pull up the Kos or FactCheck scanned images and you will find the exact same thing.
k