It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

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

page: 69
182
<< 66  67  68    70  71  72 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 12:14 AM
link   
reply to post by TrainDispatcher
 


Dont chose random, this is a original doc likely, that has been altered so there will be some letters creased yes. can some one zoonm on the ones i have listed? If so, if there is even 1 then we have a fake.


[edit on 4-8-2009 by zazzafrazz]




posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 12:17 AM
link   
First, I think the image is too poorly scanned and too heavily compressed to know for certain. Also, you focused exclusively on the darkest/boldest text, which will hold up the best on cheap scanners. However...


Originally posted by zazzafrazz
The G on the crease of the title is in no way creased, its on top


There is clearly a lightening of the left-side of the "G" along the crease.



The H on the last sentence is also clearly on top of the crease


The left-side of the "H" is right in-line with the dark portion of the vertical crease. If you eye-droper the colors in a image editing app, you can confirm the left-side is darker than the right-side.



The R on the "Entered at the Regitsry of the Disct office" also clearl black with no creases.


Once you zoom-in, you can see that the crease is not so significant in that area of the document... so there's not much effect "R," which would be expected.



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 12:22 AM
link   
reply to post by Mikey84
 


Is that it? Just the shield?

Nothing around the edge?


The one I got was from the South Australia Coroner document circa 1977. Why would they use the UK coat of arms?



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 12:23 AM
link   
reply to post by SkepticOverlord
 


I cant see jack from that.....but i will be a spider monkey if required...
Actually the next BC posted by drmatmadix shows the same blackness on creases which kinda disproves my theory....your zooms just gave me a eye ache.....
It still makes no sence how a scan keeps it black, where paper is damaged, the ink would be affected also....and i cant see any changes...u can , but i cant......i can still see the paper change slighlty in shade etc, but not the ink.....jury still out for me...actually i cant see ink changes you have listed...there i said it!



[edit on 4-8-2009 by zazzafrazz]



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 12:25 AM
link   
is this what you wanted?





posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 12:27 AM
link   
The typed letters on this are well done but I don't believe that this is real.

The overall quality is much to bright and 'fabricated' looking. I scan hundreds of docs a month. I do minimal processing but one can get an optimal scan for a series of docs and the run with it. This almost looks like toooooo much processing for a simple BC when the very next scan was sooo sloppy. Just my opinion.

Almost as if someone tried to hard? Like, when a woman is going on a date and tries to hard with her makeup... oops sorry gals.

Making friends here I'm sure...


Here's the back link to another BC from same site ... same scan sequence.
Alaric's BC for more comparison

[edit on 8·4·09 by DrMattMaddix]

[edit on 8·4·09 by DrMattMaddix]



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 12:28 AM
link   
reply to post by SkepticOverlord
 


You're Right SO. Last night I looked over the document too because I thought that if the lettering was somehow edited-in it might be abnormal along the creases of the sheet. But when you really look closely at the text nothing is really that abnormal. All the text seems to adhere to the creases in the sheet and nothing is really where it shouldn't be.

So either it was a really good editing job or it was actually typewrited in over a cleaned-up, blank version of the birth certificate. Second part probably being the most likely, at least IMHO..

-ChriS



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 12:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lemon.Fresh
reply to post by Mikey84
 


Is that it? Just the shield?

Nothing around the edge?


The one I got was from the South Australia Coroner document circa 1977. Why would they use the UK coat of arms?


Yep it’s just that, nothing on the sides (which the Aussie Birth Cert has), that’s why I say it’s similar but different.

While we have been independent from the UK since 1901, we are now a Commonwealth Realm (not yet a republic) and the Queen Elizabeth is still our Queen and holds the title of Queen of Australia, You can see the British Coat of Arms on some things and buildings here, but it’s usually old places for when it was used, but Australia has had its own coat of arms since 1908 and the South Australian one was granted in 1936 and lasted until 1984 when they got their current on.

Mikey



[edit on 4/8/2009 by Mikey84]



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 12:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by DrMattMaddix
The typed letters on this are well done but I don't believe that this is real.

The overall quality is much to bright and 'fabricated' looking. I scan hundreds of docs a month. I do minimal processing but one can get an optimal scan for a series of docs and the run with it. This almost looks like toooooo much processing for a simple BC when the very next scan was sooo sloppy. Just my opinion.

Almost as if someone tried to hard? Like, when a woman is going on a date and tries to hard with her makeup... oops sorry gals.

Making friends here I'm sure...


Here's the back link to another BC from same site ... same scan sequence.
Alaric's BC for more comparison

[edit on 8·4·09 by DrMattMaddix]

[edit on 8·4·09 by DrMattMaddix]


One thing I find interesting is that when the Kenyan BC was posted one of the main knocks on it was (even by a mod) "oh, there's no way a document that old could be that well preserved! Fake!". Here we have an Aussie BC that is supposed to equally as old and nobody has said that about this one.

Why is that?



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 12:36 AM
link   
no expert on this but one thing i noticed and correct me if I'm wrong. Would old typewriters leave gaps?

and if you look under Hubert (the H / ub / ert) dont line up

for example...




[edit on 4-8-2009 by TrainDispatcher]

[edit on 4-8-2009 by TrainDispatcher]



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 12:36 AM
link   
reply to post by TrainDispatcher
 


The resolution here certainly doesn't do the text justice when zoomed-in. The pixelation around the lettering doesn't help either (but it is completely normal from what analysis I was able to do lastnight). I tried doing everything I could think of to pull out some kind of evidence of image tampering but couldn't find squat.

Nothing in the H part of the word, along the crease, really points to anything abnormal or odd though. If you look closely elsewhere at the sheet along the creases (there are lots of them), you will see where it is evident that the letters are displayed correctly as they would be if they were really on the sheet.

That's why I think it's probably more likely someone used another person's certificate, spent some time cleaning it up and making a blank one, and then using an old typewriter to add-in the names, dates, etc..

Especially considering the signatures of Obama's father and the registar aren't anywhere to be found when the document clearly states it requires them. It's harder to falsify someone's signature than it is to recreate a rough certificate without them.

Of coarse, a less readable certificate would also be easier to hoax.

Gotta consider that too.

-ChriS



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 12:38 AM
link   
reply to post by SkepticOverlord
 


Yuu know looking again...sorry to be a pain, but i cant help myself....
The pixelation is awful, but I do see paper transformations, and none on the ink.
It isnt consistent, If ink is ON the paper it would have the same inconsistencies....
Im an aussie
now that i think about it, i dont care about this debate.......lol
laterz......

[edit on 4-8-2009 by zazzafrazz]



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 12:38 AM
link   
I would say the one from Graphic Design guy is fake ,give me a break isn't that what they do more less.
And if you look at print it's just not right with the folds in the paper.

Where it says FATHER is a really big fold but the FATHER looks like it's laying on top of everything

Nothing is proven yet, execpt Graphi cGuy really likes Obama.

[edit on 4-8-2009 by googolplex]



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 12:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by zazzafrazz
reply to post by SkepticOverlord
 


An original document may have been scanned.
But the typing is clearly added later.
The G on the crease of the title is in no way creased, its on top
The H on the last sentence is also clearly on top of the crease
The R on the "Entered at the Regitsry of the Disct office" also clearl black with no creases.
There is no way these are real.
Totally bodge.


I'm also tending to think both the Kenyan and Australian docs could be fakes.

But the only possible evidence I could find for distortion of a letter on a crease was this narrow "o" in "above" compared to the "o" in "copy", that does seem consistent with the crease on the Kenya document.



I didn't find any such distortion on the Australian document but maybe the Kenyan document is just a more skillful fake? I don't know. That "o" in above is a pretty good detail on the crease for a fake, but it can certainly be faked.



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 12:42 AM
link   
Am I the only one who noticed the Obama FAKE number is 5733, while the Aussie REAL number is... 5733.



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 12:44 AM
link   
reply to post by TrainDispatcher
 
That's kind of norm for old typewritter, mechanical, get knock around, but could be faked to make look old, a bored Graphic Guy could do it easy.



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 12:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by GingerR
Am I the only one who noticed the Obama FAKE number is 5733, while the Aussie REAL number is... 5733.


LOL

Uh no.

That's just one of several "coincidences" that resulted in this being classified as a "LIKELY FORGERY".

Keep looking! You might find even more!



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 12:48 AM
link   
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 
I agree they both could be fake at this point, but the Kenya one looks more real in reguard to the folds.



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 12:48 AM
link   
reply to post by GLDNGUN
 


Like how they just changed one letter of a couple of the names?

It's right up there with the Canadian SS card that was signed by Dudley Dooright.



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 12:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by GingerR
reply to post by GLDNGUN
 


Like how they just changed one letter of a couple of the names?

It's right up there with the Canadian SS card that was signed by Dudley Dooright.


Yes, and some other numbers are the same as well.

Oddly enough, however, is that nobody can find another BC form like the Kenyan OR the Aussie BCs in question.



new topics

top topics



 
182
<< 66  67  68    70  71  72 >>

log in

join