The Definitive "Birth Certificate" Thread - Updated 8th August 2008

page: 2
3
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 8 2008 @ 08:31 AM
link   
With regards to the thread talking about the image being photoshopped because of "halos", they're a direct result of image compression for JPGS..

Short version of image compression, comparing 3 different common internet file types.

BMP = Completely uncompressed, BMPS are bitmaps, where every pixel is assigned a specific location and color value. These files are large, which is why we use the following two types frequently..

GIF - image has reduced color depth, limiting the number of colors used in the image, allowing there to simply be a color key, and then assigning each pixel in an image a value from the color key. Fewer colors, smaller file

JPG - Uses a funky algorithm to compare areas of documents - an area that's mostly one color will get chopped up into one big block of color, and more detailed areas use more of the file size. The artifacts mentioned are a direct result of JPG compression and smoothing, which is why you should never actually repeatedly save JPGs with an image editing program, because the artifacts will increase and the detail will decrease.

So yeah, artifacts are not a sign of being "photoshopped", if anything, it's harder to fake artifacts when you're photoshopping something, unless you're really aware of the basic details I just mentioned, you can make an image look too smooth, by only editing one particular area. The eye will notice this and your editing will be revealed.. (in a former life, I occasionally removed digital watermarks from video game screenshots for blog reviews, so I've had a bit of practice with this sort of thing)

Not to say it can't be done, but artifacts do not equal proof one way or the other. A talented forger with the right tools can do almost anything nowadays.




posted on Jul, 8 2008 @ 10:11 AM
link   
this is very intimidating.

/

[edit on 103131p://bTuesday2008 by Stormdancer777]



posted on Jul, 8 2008 @ 10:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Stormdancer777
 


What is?



posted on Jul, 8 2008 @ 05:55 PM
link   
For many people, Polarik's analysis is bit too convoluted, and not convincing. The following analysis by Techdude is more straightforward, he uses more conventional methods of detecting forgery:

Techdude analysis of Obama's birth certificate

Techdude's opinion of the BC:



I am convinced that the certificate is a fake (and not really a very good one) and I went into this with a completely open mind (something the Obamanationalists seem to have lost). I also have to say that everyone who has been looking into this federal crime (and it is a federal crime even if the certificates were never meant to be used for identification) have done a stupendous job and I wish they all worked for my lab.



posted on Jul, 8 2008 @ 07:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by coolieno99


I went into this with a completely open mind (something the Obamanationalists seem to have lost).


Sounds like an open mind, all right!


Anyway, I agree there are differences in the 2 documents. I have seen that since the beginning. But that does not prove that one is a FAKE and one is REAL. They are DIFFERENT for SOME reason. But to assume that that reason is that one is "faked" is... well... just an assumption.

I used to work at Intel and I have dealt with my share of documentation updates and errors. It's VERY possible that they updated the border design and didn't change the revision number of the document because the text on the document did not change. Who knows? Maybe the revision number only indicates the revision of the DATA that's on the document.

And it would seem to me that if they were going to make a fake, they had to have an original to "copy" it from. The DeCosta certificate was easy enough to find. Why would Obama's people (whoever made this "fake") make such an obvious difference?? If they had an original, why didn't they just make a copy of it and make their "fake"? It doesn't make sense that they would make it so different than the copy they were using as an original.



posted on Jul, 8 2008 @ 08:18 PM
link   
The other obvious anomalies were the missing registrar signature and the state embossed seal. It would've been very easy for the Obama people just flip over the BC, and scan the back side, and show it to the public. If the first copy is not too legible, they can plunk down $11.50 and order another one.
One other qualm I have with this BC, is that the state embossed seal doesn't show through. From what I've read, the embossing tool can imprint just about any kind of paper except cardboard(where the imprints would be visible on both sides). Unless Obama's BC was printed on cardboard, the embossed seal should show through the front face(like DeCosta's BC).



posted on Jul, 8 2008 @ 08:32 PM
link   
reply to post by coolieno99
 


Oh, i see, so because he "went into this with an open mind" makes him more qualified?

I'd like to demonstrate the effectiveness of someone who flaunts their so-called title by saying "hey look at me, i have a title that says _______"


Article to read


A leading scientist has dismissed suggestions that the human race has ever been visited by aliens from outer space.




Hey, did you know there isnt going to be ANY ice at the North Pole this summer ???

According to these scientists, I guess we'll all be living in floating cities, and running from "smokers" sooner than we think, eh? Got gills?



Oh yeah, black people are less intelligent than white people so says a guy who is a "scientist"





Yeah - this guy is so intelligent, credible, and respected in his field that he can't even give us his real name :shk:



Isnt it funny that when anything comes up - anything - someone comes forward and says "well, i am an expert in this field"

Please.


Anyone who knows anything will tell you that anybody who brags about their 'capabilities' is about as worthless as tits on a boar.



posted on Jul, 9 2008 @ 03:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
... Why would Obama's people (whoever made this "fake") make such an obvious difference?? If they had an original, why didn't they just make a copy of it and make their "fake"? It doesn't make sense that they would make it so different than the copy they were using as an original.

This "fake" is good enough to fool most of the 120 million registered voters. As long as it appears "official".
It is perplexing, the Obama and DeCosta BC both have the same Revision date. The layout and design should be the same. Who knows, maybe they based their template on DeCosta's BC, and changed the borders to make it look better. Maybe this explains why the borders have a slight mismatch on Obama's BC (from Techdude's analysis).



posted on Jul, 9 2008 @ 07:11 AM
link   
reply to post by coolieno99
 


Funny - that - after ... 13 (?) different threads, started roughly by the same exact people, and the same conclusion drawn in all of them, you continue this debate.

first we are given us reference from a guy who cant reveal his own name, who calls this a fake, and says its a "very bad one, at that"

then you say its a good fake, good enough to trick 120 million people

because "this" and "That" dont match up (admiting of course, that you nor myself are experts...or even amateurs at this sort of thing)

But i know an expert. I have read what she said about it. She knows her stuff, because she deals with it all of the time.

Janice Okumbo


she says it's legit.

In fact, if you don't believe me, i issue you this challenge

Here is a contact list for everything you should need to know to get in touch with her.

Why dont you contact her and ask for confirmation that its a legit CoB?

[edit on 7/9/2008 by Andrew E. Wiggin]



posted on Jul, 9 2008 @ 08:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by coolieno99
One other qualm I have with this BC, is that the state embossed seal doesn't show through.


But it does. This has been discussed in at least one of the other threads but to sum it up, most printers have lights from 2 directions that wipe out the shadows made by folds and other bumps, such as those made by an embossed seal. See the link in my signature and follow the links there for more information. They have used edge detection software to "find" the seal and it's there. I can even see it on the uncompressed KOS version.



posted on Jul, 9 2008 @ 09:41 AM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


Edge detection software!?
Thats the DEVIL!




You stay away from that Obama, ya here, you come along now, get inside before that wizard casts a SPELL on ya!



posted on Jul, 9 2008 @ 09:41 AM
link   
Obama birth certificate: Real or phony baloney?
Authenticity of crucial document staked on Daily Kos-derived image




Thus his citizenship comes down to proving he was born in the USA, and his campaign has staked its credibility on the authenticity of the Daily Kos-derived birth certificate image," the report said.


I don't know what is going on but he could end this whole controversy.



posted on Jul, 9 2008 @ 09:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Stormdancer777
 


But why would he want to end it?

Look how much support and publicity he's drawing from the internet detectives


you get so many people against you, that feel so passionately about your "fake" CoB
then, around October, you prove them all wrong and squash the thing once and for all, making them all feel REALLY dumb, and who knows, possibly even sway them to vote for you in the process



posted on Jul, 9 2008 @ 10:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by neformore

Not sure if I've got all of them yet - those are the ones from this forum. I'll look at the other poltical forums in a while.

Note - I haven't closed any yet.


I think it should also be noted that 4 of the threads mentioned were created by two members. Two threads each. So in regard to the ATS TOS they were spamming themselves (and FlyersFan, who created the first thread).

I personally think that one should look deeper into the members jamming the board with rehash spam type threads. One of the members who created two Obama Birth Cert. threads has created numerous (over 30) threads in the little over a month that they have been here, that push the limits of ATS TOS regarding this spam issue. I encourage you to look deeper into the matter, seriously. This goes farther than Obama's CoB.

Since this is now the definitive Birth Certificate thread, does it also apply to John McCain? I have not seen his Birth Certificate posted anywhere, and he was actually born in another country. Obama may or may not have dual citizenship because of his father not being a citizen of the United States, but he was actually born on US soil. Wouldn't McCain also have dual citizenship because of his Parents citizenship, in combination with his live birth in Panama? Where is the clamor for his CoB and questions of dual citizenship?

DocMoreau



posted on Jul, 9 2008 @ 10:24 AM
link   
reply to post by DocMoreau
 




I think it should also be noted that 4 of the threads mentioned were created by two members. Two threads each. So in regard to the ATS TOS they were spamming themselves (and FlyersFan, who created the first thread).

I personally think that one should look deeper into the members jamming the board with rehash spam type threads. One of the members who created two Obama Birth Cert. threads has created numerous (over 30) threads in the little over a month that they have been here, that push the limits of ATS TOS regarding this spam issue. I encourage you to look deeper into the matter, seriously. This goes farther than Obama's CoB.


I agree completely. I wonder if we can make ATS citizens arrests
(joke)



seriously though.

The reason no McCain thread has been made is because its not an issue.

If John McCain were not eligible for POTUS, it would have been discovered long before now.

Same thing applies to Barack Obama. You wait and see, Obama will dispel this come October, and ill be the first guy in here posting

NAH NAH NAH NAH NAH NAH NAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

Told ya so



posted on Jul, 9 2008 @ 02:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Andrew E. Wiggin

... Janice Okumbo

she says it's legit. ...

... Why dont you contact her and ask for confirmation that its a legit CoB?

[edit on 7/9/2008 by Andrew E. Wiggin]


Since then, Ms. Okubo has retracted from her earlier statement concerning the legitimacy of Obama's BC.




A senior official in the State of Hawaii's Department of Health, Director of Communications Janice Okubo, confirms that the image published and circulated by the Obama campaign as his "birth certificate" lacks the necessary embossed seal and signature. Backing away from a quote attributed to her that the image on the campaign site was "valid," she told the St. Petersburg (Florida) Times in an article published yesterday: "I don't know that it's possible for us to even say beyond a doubt what the image on the site represents."


Ms. Okubo retracting from an earlier statement on Obama's BC



posted on Jul, 9 2008 @ 03:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by coolieno99
Since then, Ms. Okubo has retracted from her earlier statement concerning the legitimacy of Obama's BC.


SHE did not "retract" her statement. The truth is she made several statements, some of them seemingly contradictory, but she has not (as far as I know) issued a retraction to anything she said.



posted on Jul, 9 2008 @ 03:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic


But it does. This has been discussed in at least one of the other threads but to sum it up, most printers have lights from 2 directions that wipe out the shadows made by folds and other bumps, such as those made by an embossed seal. See the link in my signature and follow the links there for more information. They have used edge detection software to "find" the seal and it's there. I can even see it on the uncompressed KOS version.

You're partially correct. By using the Edge detect feature of the GIMP software, an embossed seal can be seen in a later date Kos image. See Exhibit B.
But applying the exact same technique to Kos image downloaded at an earlier date revealed no embossed seal. See Exhibit A.
Looks like someone been "monkeying" around with the Kos image, and added an "embossed seal" to it

Exhibit A (downloaded June 12):



Exhibit B (downloaded some time after June 12):



Was Kos image been tampered with?



posted on Jul, 9 2008 @ 03:48 PM
link   
If the same software was applied to Exhibit A and Exhibit B, then they are CLEARLY different documents in some way (I suspect compression). I do not believe that Exhibit A is the original that was downloaded from the KOS site. It's the smaller (lower resolution) document.

Sorry.

Edit: As I suspected, Exhibit A (From Polarik's Post) is 1000 x 1024 px. (110 Kb)

Exhibit B (from the KOS site ) is 2427 x 2369 px. (507 Kb)

The guy at No Quarter, who claims KOS tampered with the BC says:



The first file I used is the one I was directed to by Greg, the one saved at Kos. The second file I tested is the high-resolution jpg image saved by the blogger Polarik in his June 20 post about the birth certificate. I confirmed that Polarik’s image was saved from Kos’s original story on June 12, Obama’s birth certificate, and that the image resolution of Polarik’s file is comparable to the resolution in the new file saved at Kos, the one which Greg referred me to.


Yeah, HE CONFIRMED it. How did he do that? He doesn't say. Also he says the "image resolution was comparable"... He doesn't give us the actual numbers, he just wants us to take his word for it that they're "comparable"...

Exhibit B is over twice the size of Exhibit A in pixel size and nearly 5 times more information. That is NOT "comparable". The guy at No Quarter is, respectfully, a complete idiot.

To see these numbers for yourself, go the the "June 20 Post" link in the excerpt above. Click on the picture of the BC. You will be taken to Polarik's photobucket copy of the picture. Click on it to magnify it. Then right click, Properties. You will see the pixel size and the file size.

Now, go the the "Obama's Birth Certificate" link in the excerpt above. Click on the picture of the BC. You will be taken to the KOS copy of the picture. Click on it to magnify it. Then right click, Properties. You will see the pixel size and the file size.

Photobucket automatically resizes larger (pixel) pictures.


[edit on 9-7-2008 by Benevolent Heretic]



posted on Jul, 9 2008 @ 04:32 PM
link   
By the way, put the purple copy above up on your screen and walk about 10 feet away and look at it! YOU CAN SEE THE SEAL!

My husband was just standing at the door and I was talking about this post and he said, "I can see it". So I got up and crossed the room and I can see it, too! Even in the purple one!






new topics
 
3
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join