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.

 

Obama's NEW Birth Certificate proven to be fake hours after release

page: 23
299
<< 20  21  22    24  25  26 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 05:12 PM
link   
Why I consider this a fake was because of the layering that just so happened to occur in this "OCR SCANNING PROCESS". This scanner apparently decided to layer all of the text with Obama's info and typefont that the rest of the document does not contain. The signatures of the doctor and registrar are in one layer as all of his info in another. I considered it a fake, because I could literally remove Obama's info from this certificate and make it my own, another reason why I considered this a forgery. If something so simple like this document was released the way it was, just opens the doors to alot of questions. I will admit, I jumped the gun and said it was PROVEN to be a fake. But the reality is, if I can take this document and fake it to be my own, I considered that evidence in itself that it was fake. I mean really, the presidents birth certificate on the internet completely editable by any average joe. That in itself sounds like bull#, but its not. We can sit here and argue all day, but the fact remains this didn't sit right when I woke up and saw the news, hence why I investigated it.
edit on 27-4-2011 by Bonified Ween because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 05:13 PM
link   
Hi Guys, I posted here a long time ago under the account kingkruiser and cannot recover my password...

Anyways I have been following the Obama issue before he was elected and have been an avid skeptic on his authenticity.

Using photoshop, I began searching online for other Long form Bc's from the same time period in Hawaii and superimposing one on top of the new Obama one using opacity settings.

As I was searching I came across an MSNBC image using google's image search engine, that has the exact Obama certificate with NO GREEN BACKGROUND dated April 27th, 2011. I'm not sure what this means, but here it is.

msnbcmedia.msn.com...

The article:

photoblog.msnbc.msn.com...

You can also find it here:

www.telegraph.co.uk...[editb y]edit on 27-4-2011 by Justice2012 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 05:14 PM
link   
Not sure if I should make light of this all things given, but being as most that use this site are totally anti corporation, think of this maybe Illustrator sales have been dying off lately and ADOBE paid for it to be there just to boost sales



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 05:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Blaine91555
 


Do you even know what OCR software does? It analyses the page for all recognisable characters and converts that to TEXT that can be edited etc. The text on this image is NOT editable it is an image, therefore has NOT been inserted by OCR software, OCR software does NOT insert text as an image

NEXT


edit on 27-4-2011 by PrinceDreamer because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 05:16 PM
link   
What I find interesting is that the birth certificate of Susan Nordyke, born one day after Obama's alleged birth, shows a different address for that hospital. How was that possible??? Not to mention, her box 7C says, Honolulu, Ohau and Obama's box 7C says Honolulu, Hawaii. Check out page 2 of this link to see a copy of her certificate:
www.dailypaul.com...

No matter I'm sure at least part of this is a big distraction...is not the Fed having their first ever press conference today?? END THE FED!

For my part, I have no desire to see his birth certificate. He is not natural born, his father was Kenyan, under British jurisdiction. His father NEVER became a U.S. citizen of any type. He may or may not be a citizen, but he's definitely not a "natural born" one...



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 05:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Justice2012
As I was searching I came across an MSNBC image using google's image search engine, that has the exact Obama certificate with NO GREEN BACKGROUND dated April 27th, 2011. I'm not sure what this means, but here it is.

The original image was from a microfiche, and then that microfiche was scanned into digital storage. When they produced an "official" document, it was then placed over the new official background. Standard practice - nothing odd about it.



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 05:17 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 05:20 PM
link   
reply to post by atlguy
 


How do we know that now? Why did it come from microfiche and not the actual long form hard copy?

Why do the news media have unofficial microfiche?



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 05:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by thegasface
my question is why didnt they just flatten the image??!!?


Because it's a PDF generated from a scanned document and then the OCR in Acrobat Pro was used to read the text and make it searchable. All that's being found in AI and Photoshop are the layers generated in Acrobat Pro. I see zero evidence of anything other than the OCR being used and yes I am qualified. I have ten years or more using the mentioned software and in particular using this workflow for old documents to make them searchable without altering their appearance.

Just because a person uses these software's does not mean they are familiar with all aspects, nor does it mean they correctly understand what they are looking at. In this case the OP may not be familiar with Acrobat or OCR programs and how they work or what the scan would look like in AI or PS after the fact.

It's a common workflow with old documents that are scanned. It leaves it to appear as is, but adds text over the characters so you can search it. I do the same with all my old documents, except whoever did this did not take the time to go in and deal with the characters the OCR could not read.

They could have removed the layers, but then it would no longer be a searchable document which would negate the whole point. Most people won't notice unless they know how to use PS, AI and Acrobat Pro correctly.



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 05:21 PM
link   
reply to post by atlguy
 


That I get, but why does the copy of the green form look like it was scanned from a book like the white form?
Why add that photo effect if it was just a tranfer onto grren offical paper.



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 05:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Habit4ming
What I find interesting is that the birth certificate of Susan Nordyke, born one day after Obama's alleged birth, shows a different address for that hospital. How was that possible??? Not to mention, her box 7C says, Honolulu, Ohau and Obama's box 7C says Honolulu, Hawaii.


Erm... That address (7d) is the address of the mother. Epic fail, bud. The 7c differences can probably be attributed to the fact that these were typed by hand, and probably by a worn-out intern.
edit on 4/27/2011 by atlguy because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 05:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by atlguy

The original image was from a microfiche, and then that microfiche was scanned into digital storage. When they produced an "official" document, it was then placed over the new official background. Standard practice - nothing odd about it.



So when can we see the original Birth Certificate???

A microfiche doesn't do the trick.....



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 05:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by mblahnikluver
reply to post by Bonified Ween
 


Who said I am spamming? I don't spam, people who post the same crap over and over are spamming.

You are obviously angry for no reason. I just pointed out a thread on it already...I do it all the time when I see duplicate topics, that is not spamming, it's helping out ATS.

If you see it as spamming that is your problem. I really dont care.

It becomes annoying when there are 10 plus threads all on the same thing and everyone is saying the same thing..Why not just have one and share it where all the information is in one place?

Oh well...enjoy your BC debate






To be fair, this thread is displaying evidence of forgery. The other thread is speculating. No offense to the OP of the other thread but this thread is displaying a theory and evidence to back up the theory.

In my honest opinion this thread deserves a place of it's own... With all due respect.



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 05:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Justice2012
 


The white copy is " A view of President Barack Obama's long form birth certificate in the Briefing Room of the White House April 27, 2011 in Washington, DC"

Also that is one of two copy's that were flown to the white house 2 days after the request letter was sent.

I think we all agree the green copy is an exact doctored version of his white ones. I just don't understand why he published the green altered one.



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 05:23 PM
link   
The Certificate number is systematically formed from this sequence as follows:

It should start in the numbers 151, which is federal code for Hawaii's birth certificates, a dash, then the year of birth, followed by the birth order number.

The Nordyke twins were assigned the following birth certificate numbers to their certificates: ( 151 – 61 – 10637 ) and ( 151 – 61 – 10638 ).

As can be see, the birth order is in sequence according to the time of birth. One Twin was born shortly after the other, resulting in the two birth order numbers sequentially.

Obama was born before both of the Nordyke twins (the day before), yet his birth cerificate number is ( 151 - 61 - 10641 ) -- 3 births later ( 10638 + 3 = 10641 ). Going by that number, Obama would have been born AFTER the Nordyke twins.



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 05:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Justice2012
reply to post by atlguy
 


How do we know that now? Why did it come from microfiche and not the actual long form hard copy?

Why do the news media have unofficial microfiche?

I believe the original records were destroyed by the Department of Health as they converted over to digital



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 05:23 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 05:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blaine91555

Originally posted by thegasface
my question is why didnt they just flatten the image??!!?


Because it's a PDF generated from a scanned document and then the OCR in Acrobat Pro was used to read the text and make it searchable. All that's being found in AI and Photoshop are the layers generated in Acrobat Pro. I see zero evidence of anything other than the OCR being used and yes I am qualified. I have ten years or more using the mentioned software and in particular using this workflow for old documents to make them searchable without altering their appearance.

Just because a person uses these software's does not mean they are familiar with all aspects, nor does it mean they correctly understand what they are looking at. In this case the OP may not be familiar with Acrobat or OCR programs and how they work or what the scan would look like in AI or PS after the fact.

It's a common workflow with old documents that are scanned. It leaves it to appear as is, but adds text over the characters so you can search it. I do the same with all my old documents, except whoever did this did not take the time to go in and deal with the characters the OCR could not read.

They could have removed the layers, but then it would no longer be a searchable document which would negate the whole point. Most people won't notice unless they know how to use PS, AI and Acrobat Pro correctly.


FYI these aren't searchable TEXT layers. They are groups containing IMAGES that are part of different groups. You cannot Search an image for TEXT

See below


edit on 27-4-2011 by Bonified Ween because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-4-2011 by Bonified Ween because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-4-2011 by Bonified Ween because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 05:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by sickofitall2012
reply to post by atlguy
 


That I get, but why does the copy of the green form look like it was scanned from a book like the white form?
Why add that photo effect if it was just a tranfer onto grren offical paper.


Good point... Looking at it now, I would guess that the original was scanned from a book of records - same as the Nordyke records



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 05:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by coppo808

I think we all agree the green copy is an exact doctored version of his white ones. I just don't understand why he published the green altered one.


So you can find it in the data base with a search. They can't keep hard copies as the whole of DC would be buried under thousands of feet of paper.



new topics

top topics


active topics

 
299
<< 20  21  22    24  25  26 >>

log in

join