Texas, is this evidence that the document was copied on a scanner and not on an optical character rcognition (OCR) device?
I am puzzled where all this talk about OCR came from. I think it is pure BS!
First, the quality of the characters on the document is terrible.
Second, except for the form itself, it was produced on a typewriter. You remember those things they used in the 1960’s.
Now, whether or not the final .pdf was created from a scanner that is another issue. There is software to do that directly, but I have never used it. The Quartz software that is imbedded in the MAC may allow that, but I am not a MAC user so I cannot tell you whether or not it does.
When I create a .pdf I do it by inserting an image in a word processor or in a desktop publishing program and exporting it as a .pdf. There are other programs that will batch process .txt or html documents and create a .pdf directly but I have not used them. I think Imagemagick will do that, but if I have ever used it to create a .pdf from an image file it was a very simple single image document.
The issue I see that is significant about the COLB is the multiple pixel size issues. That indicates a pieced together document. There are people here on FR who try to make all kinds of explanations for this, but I have not seen one that I believe is reasonable.
I am not a document expert, but this is how I view the latest Forgery.