• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Birth Certificate Is An Obvious Forgery

BirtherDeac

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 21, 2011
Messages
465
Reaction score
49
It's not even a good forgery. At least now everyone will have to admit that they know he's lying.

http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=185094

This document has been altered; it is not simply a photograph of the registrar's book that was dropped into a background, and it also is not simply an agglomeration of two images (the background they constructed, the "certification" and then the actual certificate.)

Now this does not prove that the alterations were actual changes in content. They might not be.

But..... what other reason is there to alter an alleged high-resolution photograph?

akcs-www
 
Wow, I've never cared about this issue, I find it extremely odd that Obama would release his b/c now. Something about this smells funny. Hey ZZZZZZZZZ the author of this article is your boy! You posted links of his alot on the old ds board.
 
Makes sense. An incumbent president facing a weak field would definitely release a fake document, publicly and unnecessarily, on an issue that doesn't hurt him, the act of which, if the deceit was uncovered, would cost his an election he's likely to win.

Good work by the internet detectives.
 
Last edited:
Someone clearly doesn't understand what happens when you scan an image or document into a digital format.
 
If I burn down all 50 state repositories does this go way? Might be worth it.
 
I've seen a lot of birth certificates in my life. I've seen originals and copies. There's nothing odd about the stuff he is pointing out. By his logic, the K in Kansas has been altered as well, meaning, I suppose, that Obama must have been born in Kenyansas.

The Birthers will never be happy.
 
Which is why these clowns should be ignored.

Our government can create nearly uncounterfeitable money, passports, drivers' licenses, etc. and "after 2 years", they put out a document (without reason) that these sleuths of the internet have dissected and exposed in a day.....Occam's Razor at work!

Damn it, this parody got me again.
 
Told you it looked fake to me.
 
Obama is a GENIUS

He lets out the doc which will satisfy 95% of the pop...

Yet HE PURPOSEFULLY LEAVES WEIRD EDITS IN IT SO the issue will live on as now an even deeper conspiracy theory!

Facts or not, I still say the issue is a LOSER in a national election and the doctoring of the image will provoke a festering within the right which will keep them focused here rather than on winning national issues.

MY BET IS THIS AMATEUR JOB WAS DONE INTENTIONALLY ---it was meant to be found
 
Can we go ahead and get a list of the people who think this thing is fake because someone opened it up and found layers?

I just want all the fucktards on record in one convenient place.
 
Can we go ahead and get a list of the people who think this thing is fake because someone opened it up and found layers?

I just want all the fucktards on record in one convenient place.

I think its the same crew that thinks Building 7 was bombed on September 11th.

I have met people like this before...you can't do anything to persuade them. They cancel out all of our votes. :plos:
 
When you scan a document and the scanner software doesn't recognize the font it shows the different layers that we see when we take the pdf into illustrator. This was a built on the fly document and saved to a pdf and uploaded to the whitehouse.gov website.

If you take a color photograph there is always chromatic aberration present in the image.
A scanner is just a camera.

This document was assembled. The black and white portions were inserted onto a color background. The distortion of that background is visible where the overlay was performed, and the overlay has no chromatic aberration.*

The document on the White House server was not imaged from a book or page.
 
I think its the same crew that thinks Building 7 was bombed on September 11th.

I have met people like this before...you can't do anything to persuade them. They cancel out all of our votes. :plos:

um, there was never a plurality in the Democratic party who thinks 9/11 was a bombing or inside job. It was never more than a very tiny fringe.

The birther nutjobs are much, much more numerous.
 
When you scan a document and the scanner software doesn't recognize the font it shows the different layers that we see when we take the pdf into illustrator. This was a built on the fly document and saved to a pdf and uploaded to the whitehouse.gov website.

If you take a color photograph there is always chromatic aberration present in the image.
A scanner is just a camera.

This document was assembled. The black and white portions were inserted onto a color background. The distortion of that background is visible where the overlay was performed, and the overlay has no chromatic aberration.*

The document on the White House server was not imaged from a book or page.

:jfk:
 
Here's my analysis of the PDF hosted on whitehouse.gov.This is truly an interesting mystery! I am hosting the images in this post on ImageShack, so apologies if they reach a bandwidth limit.

The PDF contains several layers, as Karl has pointed out. Using Adobe Illustrator, I hid all layers except for one that contains what appears to be a monochrome document scan.

http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/9420/monochromescan.png



Using Adobe Photoshop, I attempted to convert the image to indexed color. The indexed color converter tells me how many unique colors exist in the document. It reports 5 unique colors. This monochrome layer is not monochrome, but close.

A much more interesting feature about the layer is that some characters are completely missing. I've highlighted some of them with red below (there are several more that I did not highlight).

http://img31.imageshack.us/img31/4331/monochromescanhighlight.png

This scan raises very interesting questions:

- What was the original medium used to generate this image? Was it a paper photocopy (unlikely for reasons Karl mentioned; there would be far more colors and artifacting present in the layer)? Was it some pre-existing digital image, simply pasted into the PDF?
- Why are so many characters completely missing from the layer? Note that the missing characters are completely missing, not partially. The '1' in 10641, The 'R' in BARACK, the 'S' in STANLEY, etc.

This image appears to me to be a pre-existing digital scan of the original paper document, rather than a new, high-quality scan of the original paper document. The missing characters could be missing simply because the original digital scan did not detect enough blackness to consider a particular pixel as being black. Seeing as how the original paper document was probably composed with a typewriter, it's possible that the typist simply didn't strike the keys hard enough to cause a black-enough glyph to appear on the paper.

Imagine you are the person in charge of presenting Obama's long-form certificate of live birth to the public. You are presented with what is a seemingly incomplete scan of the original document. Several key pieces of information are missing, including very important dates and signatures. You could choose to release just this image, knowing it's authentic, or you could decide to spruce it up a bit by re-scanning the paper document using newer scanning technology and further adding in missing content by hand in an image editor. Enter another layer in the PDF.

http://img15.imageshack.us/img15/5913/scanz.png

This layer is very interesting indeed! Most of the text present in the monochrome layer has been partially erased. What's interesting to me is that the letters weren't completely erased. There may be some technique I'm not aware of for partially erasing ink from paper that would leave these markings. The big question is, how or why would this be done? This image appears to be a real scan of something. Why would the scan have so much content apparently erased? Theorizing, perhaps what happened was the ink somehow evaporated from the paper, leaving the white strike mark from the typewriter and ink traces behind. Why certain information remains clearly legible, like the signatures, scattered characters and some check boxes, remains a mystery however.

Now, let's lay the monochrome layer on top of the apparently scanned layer.

http://img829.imageshack.us/img829/6385/monochromeoverlay.png

The interesting thing to note here is that several pieces of information are missing from both the monochrome layer and the scanned layer. Note the missing 'Non' of None and the missing dates. Why this information is missing is a mystery.

The other layers contain the information necessary to fill in the remaining missing information.

http://img138.imageshack.us/img138/6997/missinginformation.png

This information was probably drawn by-hand in an image editor such as Photoshop, using the partially erased whitespace on the scanned layer as a guide. The tool used was probably the Photoshop pencil tool, which draws aliased pixels (non-blurry, hard-edged) by default. This would explain why this information looks different from the scanned layer.

Speculating: perhaps the reason Obama did not want these images released is because they were in such bad condition. If the paper document has degraded over time, leaving almost no legible information, it could raise questions about why the document looked this way. Perhaps the reason was as others have speculated: that Obama's mother was underaged at the time of Obama's inception -- perhaps statutory ****. I'll leave it to others to get closer to the truth on the matter of "why."

What troubles me is that Obama's crew would attempt to pass this off as the "real" certificate of live birth, when in fact it is apparently three things: an almost-monochrome scan, a scan with most information mostly missing and hand-edited content. I guess they thought they could get away with it. After analyzing this information, I believe the real certificate of live birth is the layer that contains the strange almost-erased ink.
 
I wonder how many black helicopters underrated sees each day.
 
um, there was never a plurality in the Democratic party who thinks 9/11 was a bombing or inside job. It was never more than a very tiny fringe.

The birther nutjobs are much, much more numerous.

I think it was around 28 percent.
 
Back
Top