It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Bones of Contention on MJ-12 Truman Signature

page: 1

log in


posted on Apr, 24 2006 @ 09:20 PM
1.) The Majestic 12 documents are copies on film
2.) The level at which you take a picture can determine the exact size of the signature when your reproduce it. I know this from professional photographic experience, making Polaroid negatives on black and white for photo expansion.
3.) Autopens reproduce exact copies of a signature, except for the original pen which may vary on the ink intensity due to variables of pressure. Autopens reproduce signatures with constant mechanical pressure. Again an ordinary signature is variable within itself.
4.) Signatures can be identical without a cut and paste computer, or a xerox job for the photofilm duplicate.

Taking all these into account, once cannot prove conclusively that the MJ-12 documents are a "hoax," just for having an identical Truman signature, even if the signature is slightly larger, since it is on photofilm. There is no proof that a cut and paste job was used, only observations explainable by other means.

Please comment and prove this refutation of the refutation one way or another.

[edit on 24-4-2006 by SkipShipman]

posted on Apr, 25 2006 @ 12:48 PM
I agree!

When my mum used to sign my sick notes when I was at school they were always nearly completely identical, even down to the size and length. I know this from failed forgery attempts!

I'm fairly convinced the MJ12 docs are genuine, although they may be part of a disinformation push, but if they are a hoax it'll have to be on stronger evidence than similar signatures.


log in