It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by LikeDuhObviously
reply to post by derst1988
His father ... got a American girl knocked up .. in the USA ... Believe it or not it could happen.
If his father was a white Canadian no one would ever question if Obama was Canadian. Birthers and Fox news would then only have "Barack Hussein Obama hates Jesus and is a Muslim" left.
Have you actually listened to a Birther IRL ? Were you a birther, I guess would be a better question.
Racist may not be the best word .. Bigoted rejects fits a bit better.edit on 28-4-2011 by LikeDuhObviously because: (no reason given)
Explain why anyone would think he is anything but American ? Keep in mind we never heard anyone ask for Clinton's or Bush's bc ?
Originally posted by zaintdead
There is a very good chance that the file in question will be removed from the whitehouse website and replaced with a non-suspicious one that isn't layered. Therefore, here are some checksums of the file so that we can tell if they try to change the file for another. md5 and sha256 for good measure:
[root@15557 ~]# md5sum birth-certificate-long-form.pdf
[root@15557 ~]# sha256sum birth-certificate-long-form.pdf
Please check the checksums of the file in a few days from the government website and compare with these hashes.edit on 28-4-2011 by zaintdead because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by meeneecat
Originally posted by iamaperson
Hang on, why is a signature in the layer supposedly made by OCR. Signatures shouldn't be picked up, at least on the same layer, should they?edit on 28.4.11 by iamaperson because: (no reason given)
Actually, no...and here it is...the signature wasn't picked up by the OCR.
Again, exactly what you would expect from OCR.
Originally posted by zerohistory
Originally posted by Rukas
Originally posted by zerohistory
Second, just because the document has layers is not evidence of forgery. Just because you can take any layer and do with it what you want, as you have said, doesn't mean that that is evidence of forgery, nor tampering, nor alterations of any kind. Just because the opportunity and means to do something - anything at all - exists, does not mean that something - any action at all - was actually done.
You've completely missed the point. No one is saying that because there are layers there must be forgery, they are saying that it is a forgery because there are layers. And the difference is this; if a document is scanned, it is ONE layer, in effect just a photo. If a document has layers it means it was CREATED. I think you need to understand that concept a little better. Only created images have layers.
I think people who dont understand how photoshop or illustrator work just need to understand this concept and take it for what it is. Scanned images are only ever ONE layer. Thus multiple layers means that the image is not a scanned image, but a created image, created from multiple layers.edit on 28-4-2011 by Rukas because: (no reason given)
No, I did get the point. But I also understood that the point the OP made was invalid. The OP actually did explain why he thought the document was a forgery/fraud. You have already quoted my response to it.
Here is the link to OP's full explanation.
Originally posted by Bonified Ween
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.
The other point about understanding how Photoshop or Illustrator work is not really important. Not in this case, because the document was not produced with either of those programs. It was produced with Mac OS X 10.6.7 Quartz PDFContext. This is verifiable within the document's metadata. It is important to know how that program handles documents that are either scanned into it, or imported into it.
Whether or not I understand how to use Photoshop or Illustrator is irrelevant. But for the record, I have been using Photoshop for at least 8 years. The concept of layering, in that program, is very familiar to me. Though, I do confess that Illustrator is foreign to me. I have to say it again: Anybody who claims to be investigating Obama's long-form birth certificate, in PDF format, should at the very least have a basic understanding of how Mac OS X 10.6.7 Quartz PDFContext works. After all, the PDF was produced with that program. It was not produced with either Photoshop or Illustrator.
The last point I want to make is that there is a major difference between scanning a document directly into Photoshop and importing a scanned document into Photoshop. However, what we need to know is which method was used in the case of Obama's PDF-formatted, long-form birth certificate with regards to Mac OS X 10.6.7 Quartz PDFContext, the program that was used to create the PDF document?
Finally, I just like to add the following for your consideration:
Originally posted by Perplexity
Open ANY scanned image with text on a colored background in Adobe Acrobat Pro; e.g., via “File,” “Create PDF,” “From File.”
Then click “Document,” “Optimize Scanned PDF” under default settings.
You will have produced a layered PDF document, the layers of which you can separate with “TouchUp Object Tool” under “Tools,” “Advanced Editing.”
Acrobat is not the only software that processes images in this way. Many document management systems default or are configured to execute comparable and additional optimizations for human legibility and OCR parsing.
Even without Acrobat software or technical expertise, anyone can examine the PDF posted by the White House and perceive artifacts of PDF “optimization” that would not be present in a plain image “copy.”
The area around nearly every letter of text clearly reveals a systematic outlined white erasure of the green background, not by accident but by design, to enhance contrast and, thus, legibility for the black text.
To pretend these artifacts are evidence of forgery is simply ignorant or, worse, deliberately deceptive.
Couple of more tidbits from Michael Rivero at www.whatreallyhappened.com to share:
Kenya (listed as Obama's father's nation of birth) wasn't called Kenya in 1961. It was the British East Africa Protectorate. It was not known as "Kenya" until 1963.
In 1961, the hospital Obama was born in was NOT named the Kapiolani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital , as shown on the above certificate. In 1961, the hospital Obama was born in was named the Kauaikeolani Children's Hospital. It did not change its name to the Kapiolani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital until it merged with the Kapiolani hospital system in 1978.