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 marcsnothere
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.
Originally posted by bumpufirst
reply to post by allprowolfy
and since this one is already exposed as original.there is no need to break it down,no stamp equals not legal document.question to all,is your birth certificate stamped?
Originally posted by bfire09
1. The birth certificate that the White House released lists Obama's birth as August 4, 1961. At the time of Obama's birth, it also shows that his father is aged 25 years old, and that Obama's father was born in "Kenya, East Africa". This wouldn't seem like anything of concern, except the fact that Kenya did not even exist until 1963, two whole years after Obama's birth, and 27 years after his father's birth. How could have Obama's father have been born in a country that did not yet exist? Up and until Kenya was formed in 1963, it was known as the "British East Africa Protectorate".
The Colony and Protectorate of Kenya was part of the British Empire in Africa. It was established when the former East Africa Protectorate was transformed into a British crown colony in 1920. Technically, the "Colony of Kenya" referred to the interior lands, while a ten-mile coastal strip (ostensibly on lease from the Sultan of Zanzibar) was the "Protectorate of Kenya" but the two were controlled as a single administrative unit. Mombasa, the largest city in 1921, had a population of 32,000 at that time. Indians in Kenya objected to the reservation of the Highlands for Europeans and bitterness grew between the Indians and the Europeans. The population in 1921 was estimated at 2,376,000, of whom 9651 were Europeans, 22,822 Indians, and 10,102 Arabs. The colony came to an end in 1963 when independence was agreed with the British. After independence the former colony became known as Kenya.
Feel free to research and verify if you really need to. We all know the TRUTH, (except for the ones that are still lying to themselves...)
Originally posted by Digital_Reality
Sadly the only thing that will convince the birthers will be going back in time and sitting in the hospital waiting room. Its just embarrassing and retarded at this point.
Originally posted by jefwane
I personally am a hundred times more interested in the birther argument than I was yesterday. I always figured if there was something that would make the Obammesssiah ineligible to hold office it would have been released by Hillary in the primaries. That document on the Whitehouse.gov site has honestly has me wondering about something I thought was a non-issue.
The "Signature of the Attendant" was taken care of nicely: a local ob-gyn named David A. Sinclair who conveniently died in 2003 and whose widow happens to be a Democratic party operative and, as Aaron Klein reports today in World Net Daily, an advisor to none other than the Hawaii Health Department.