Posted on 04/27/2011 4:09:51 PM PDT by Para-Ord.45
We have received several e-mails today calling into question the validity of the PDF that the White House released, namely that there are embedded layers in the document. There are now several other people on the case. We looked into it and dismissed it.
The PDF is composed of multiple images. That’s correct. Using a photo editor or PDF viewer of your choice, you can extract this image data, view it, hide it, etc. But these layers, as they’re being called, aren’t layers in the traditional photo-editing sense of the word. They are, quite literally, pieces of image data that have been positioned in a PDF container. They appear as text but also contain glyphs, dots, lines, boxes, squiggles, and random garbage. They’re not combined or merged in any way. Quite simply, they look like they were created programmatically, not by a human.
What’s plausible is that somewhere along the way — from the scanning device to the PDF-creation software, both of which can perform OCR (optical character recognition) — these partial/pseudo-text images were created and saved. What’s not plausible is that the government spent all this time manufacturing Obama’s birth certificate only to commit the laughably rookie mistake of exporting the layers from Photoshop, or whatever photo editing software they are meant to have used. It’s likely that whoever scanned the birth certificate in Hawaii forgot to turn off the OCR setting on the scanner. Let’s leave it at that.
UPDATE: I’ve confirmed that scanning an image, converting it to a PDF, optimizing that PDF, and then opening it up in Illustrator, does in fact create layers similar to what is seen in the birth certificate PDF. You can try it yourself at home.
Another UFO shot down I guess...
they’ve been against the birth issue since the get go just like some on the right and all the corrupt biased media.
The establishment elitist GOP are in attack mode against those who raise questions which they have not raised.
NR has been a worthless RINO rag since Buckley departed.
I don’t recall ever seeing scanned images in more than one layer.
Replicating this at home depends on the scanner and software used, but the results are typical of a scanner taking the text and saving it as a searchable layer. The reason random letters are left off a layer (which would make no sense if someone was creating this layer-by-layer) is because the scanner simply didn’t pick it up.
“NR has been a worthless RINO rag since Buckley departed.”
I let my NR subscription lapse after 30 years. They sicced collectors on me.
Every Saturday, the NR publisher and I have breakfast at the same diner. He asked me what’s up and I replied get back to me when NR is a conservative magazine again.
If you want to hide something, you’d probably hide everything. Otherwise, you signal what it is that you’re hiding. What’s the possibility that the “hidden” info is elsewhere, and this is just one of the things that got sequestered to provide cover?
Why would they sic collectors on you just for letting your subscription lapse? Doesn’t sound believable.
It happens when you clean up a scan with Adobe CS. I’ve had the same thing occur.
It’s just surprising that whoever did it didn’t flatten the image.
MuBarak is an idiot to have released this “Copy of Date Points” on a Wednesday!
What moron doesn’t know that if you want a story to die you release it over the weekend or on a holiday?
Further, it may have been enough to convince Lieutenant Lakin to continue following orders of deployment as he had done so many times, honorably, as a decorated veteran would do and does.
But no... He let an honorable man hang in the wind, under a cloud of doubt and ruin his career and life. For What?
This settles nothing and I want to see the one he found among his mother’s belongings when she passed in 1995, as well the one that is sealed in his admissions for kindergarten and preschool.
Barak, if this settles it for you then you screwed a fine man and you should be ashamed!
You have no honor.
What horse pucky is this?
In my line of work which involves a lot of document creation, archiving and document control, I have been using scanners, Acrobat, Illustrator, Photoshop and various other software and hardware for many years.
If you simply scan a document that is rendered as a PDF, there are no layers created. The entire document created is an image (no actual text content).
Now if OCR was used, Acrobat will try to render that text in the nearest font available on the system and will recreate the text in a layer using that font. But this doesn’t explain the signatures where no font can match.
Sorry, but I’m not buying this document as being authentic. It was clearly manipulated.
The green safety background has a color gradient similar to a JPEG image. This is clearly an overlay and not part of the original document. This is also supported by the information in the file header (numerous “mask” entries).
In contrast, most of the text is pixelated as a 2-color (B&W) bitmap. The black text also has a thin white border around it as though contrast was increased, after a bitmapped text layer was merged to the background.
FAKE!
I think you can be anti-Obama and not doubt that Obama was born in Hawaii. Or what am I missing?
“He’s dead, Jim”
the question raised about the hospital name has also been debunked. the people coming up with this nitpicky stuff are digging themselves into deeper and deeper holes full of crap
http://www.favstocks.com/layering-obamas-new-colb-raises-more-questions-than-it-answers/2750560/
Here is Mitchell Owens’ explanation:
“The website for the hospital you cite states merely that the Kapiolani Maternity Home was founded in 1890 and merged in 1978 with another hospital. However, according to the 1962 “American Directory of Obstetricians & Gynecologists” (pages 105, 132, and 202), the Kapiolani Maternity Home was indeed renamed the Kapiolani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital, certainly prior to 1962, when the book was published. That name change is also cited in a book published three years before the President’s birth: “Social Service in Hawaii” by Margaret Mary Louise Catton (Pacific Book Publishers, 1959), In it the hospital’s name change from Kapiolani Maternity Home to Kapiolani Maternity and Gynecological Hospital is cited on page 103. Two other books, “Social Process in Hawaii: Volume 32” (University of Hawaii at Manoa, 1989) and “The Health of Native Hawaiians” by Eldon L. Wegner (University of Hawaii at Manoa, 1989), both state that in the hospital’s “charter was amended to change the organization’s name to Kapiolani Maternity and Gynecological Hospital.” This name change took place prior to 1950, according to the “Hawaii Medical Journal,” Volume 10 (published 1950), which calls the hospital the Kapiolani Maternity and Gynecological Hospital on pages 53, 129, and 453. “
“Game over.”
Yep, it’s time to find a new horse to beat, this one’s dead.
Challenge each point. Prove that you are right.
How you can not think this is fake is beyond me?
Well, try telling that to your average birther.
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.