Photo - Obama's Kenyan Birth Certificate (political fraud)

reply to post by Jenna


Nope. Here's what I get:

The webpage cannot be found
HTTP 404
Most likely causes:
•There might be a typing error in the address.
•If you clicked on a link, it may be out of date.

What you can try:
Retype the address.

Go back to the previous page.

Go to and look for the information you want.

More information

Their is a possiblity that websites hosting this image is getting high volumes of traffic.

reply to post by GLDNGUN


Hmm.. That's odd. I tried clicking my own link after I posted and it went right to it. Can't be your internet connection since you were able to read my post and respond. Could be that it's saved in my cookies or something and that's why I can get to it and you can't. It's a thought anyway.

Originally posted by Uniceft17
I know we have plenty of image analysyst(sp?) on ATS. I'm surprised one hasn't came to this thread.

I've been too busy to follow along other than to notice the major points of discovery (thanks to help from staff). What digital image needs some analysis?

reply to post by SkepticOverlord


We're trying to figure out a reason why the Australian version has rainbow colored lines separating the sections. I've never seen that before on a scanned document.

Originally posted by Uniceft17
Their is a possiblity that websites hosting this image is getting high volumes of traffic.

I've upload an unaltered version to our image hosting server:

DavidJeffreyBomfordBirthCertDoc65.jpg

Just to ensure we still have access.

reply to post by SkepticOverlord


This Image

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/48a8fc7c6a4b.jpg[/atsimg]

PROVEN FORGERY?

How So? Can someone please explain what proved this? Is it the Australian Document which was discovered by a graphic design artist?

Technically speaking this can not be proven a forgery unless the court proves it to be a forgery. Isn't that supposedly taking place soon?

Has that been officially discounted by a court?

And no one has an age on the document. Only on the site registration. Can any find when this document was edited or uploaded?

Thanks.

Check it out, here's another South Australia one for reference (it's smaller though)



From here: source

Searched "Birth Cert 1960" in Google Images - page 2 as per Squid Boy
Could also just search Birth Cert South Australia.

Clearly this one is older though - with the dates 1884 and 1948?

[edit on August 3rd, 2009 by Thaumaturgus]

reply to post by Thaumaturgus


Well now that doesn't match the other Australian version at all. You would think two copies from Australia would match better than one from Australia and one from Kenya.

reply to post by DrMattMaddix


Paper creases will disturb a letter on the crease, none of these letters are.
They sit on top of the crease, suggesting they were graphicaly loaded.
I can see at least 10 letters that should not be visible with this type of crease, or distortored like the paper its on.

The seal at the top, the paper is quite damaged and faded down to white yet its perfect?


The same goes for the Kenyan one.

Zazz


The line of the border of the seal isnt broken or distrubed

Last line "Given under my Hand" the 'H' is ontop of the crease. The ink deosnt have any ageing characteristeics as the paper its printed on,

They are all like that on all the creases.

The aussie one isnt conculsive....sorry (and Birthers drive me nutts)



[edit on 3-8-2009 by zazzafrazz]

Originally posted by DrMattMaddix
This Image

Understood... but what about the image is in doubt?

From what I can tell, it appears to be a somewhat heavily-compressed JPEG of a document scan... scanned on a low-end, or pre-1998 mid-range scanner.

Originally posted by squidboy
And no one has an age on the document. Only on the site registration. Can any find when this document was edited or uploaded?

Very interesting. The site where the Australian document appeared is still up.

www.bomford.net...

but the link to the image you asked about a date on

www.bomford.net...

is giving a 404 error (on IE, the page still loads from cache for me on Firefox). I wonder why it was removed? Possibly because of the e-mail the ATS user on the previous page of this thread reported sending to the website?

It seems clear one or the other is fake, or both are fake, but with no date on the document which just went missing from the original location, it's hard to say.

[edit on 3-8-2009 by Arbitrageur]

Originally posted by Thaumaturgus
Check it out, here's another South Australia one for reference (it's smaller though)



From here: source

Searched "Birth Cert 1960" in Google Images - page 2 as per Squid Boy

[edit on August 3rd, 2009 by Thaumaturgus]

That BC is from the 1800s but great find.

I'm very interested about the rainbowing effect on the AU doc.

Does it only occur on the black lines And not over any of the typed in info? Why would this occur?

Wouldn't some of the typed in info , suffer the same rainbow effect that happens with the lines?

If it was a bad scan, would only the lines be effected?

reply to post by SkepticOverlord


Like I already said when you asked the first time, we're wondering why the lines are rainbow colored.

Here is a link to an OFFICIAL Australian Birth Certificate (though it is Queensland).



1901 South Australia Birth Certificate:



1888 South Australia Birth Certificate (Certified copy made in 1948) :






I do not know if those help or muddle things up

[edit on 8/3/2009 by Lemon.Fresh]

Originally posted by Jenna
reply to post by SkepticOverlord

 

Like I already said when you asked the first time, we're wondering why the lines are rainbow colored.

Yes, this needs to be pointed out.

Why would it only effect the lines, and not the type?

If it's a scan issue, it would effect both right? Unless the original text was removed and replaced, thus no rainbow coloring on letters that were "typed."

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord

Originally posted by DrMattMaddix
This Image

Understood... but what about the image is in doubt?

From what I can tell, it appears to be a somewhat heavily-compressed JPEG of a document scan... scanned on a low-end, or pre-1998 mid-range scanner.

Well, as a previous poster stated, the "typewritten" text doesn't seem to follow the creases in the paper. I've looked at it very hard and can't decide if that's the case or not.

Secondly, the "coat of arms" or whatever is at the top seems to rather unique.

Thirdly, the entire Aussie BC seems to be rather unique as a search of Aussie BC's doesn't seem to find any other images that match that form, and I can't find a match for that "coat of arms".

Good grief. I was pretty sure the Kenyan BC was exposed when I came across this Aussie BC, but now I'm not so sure. Still leaning strongly against the KBC.

mods will like this one...

just making a point that its easy to do

The more i look at these creases and the ink
the more i am convinced both are fake
The ink doesnt not behave the same way it should on a creased document. It sits on top and isnt following the changes in consistency to paper.


[edit on 3-8-2009 by zazzafrazz]