Obama Gets Schooled!

Im not here to guess motivations. Im simply showing you what anybody who has owned a computer or ever written with a pen can plainly see for themselves.

Take off the red white and blue shades and look at the picture. Its clear as day

Originally posted by readytorevolt
Im not here to guess motivations. Im simply showing you what anybody who has owned a computer or ever written with a pen can plainly see for themselves.

You’re assuming we haven’t looked at. You are assuming the only conclusion one can reach, having looked at it, is that it is a forgery. If you read through this thread you might find out that many of us have done everything, and more, that you have and reached a different conclusion.

I understand you might not want to wade through 110 pages of what is mostly nonsense and ignorance, though.

Take off the red white and blue shades and look at the picture.

I see the result of automatic character recognition, anti-aliasing, or perhaps even digital manipulation to make something more legible.

All the images and videos you posted don’t prove the information on the certificate was altered to something that’s not on his physical original birth certificate. Until you do, you can’t claim this is forgery.

Especially when the Department of Health stands by the information on the PDF posted on the White House website.

Originally posted by Forevever
.... if they were going to fake a birth certificate why would they use 3 different type-writers..... just sayin...

Because there were no typewriters used except the typewriters that made the three documents these letters were cropped and pasted from.

Its is a composite image done by some teeny bopper that's never even seen a typewriter, much less prepared a criminal case from one.

Originally posted by readytorevolt
Im not here to guess motivations. Im simply showing you what anybody who has owned a computer or ever written with a pen can plainly see for themselves.

Take off the red white and blue shades and look at the picture. Its clear as day

Ohh yeahhh I see it now... not really.

What don't you understand about what I already told you regarding programs like OmniPage.

It is not abnormal to have color/shade etc descrepancies.

You obviously didn't use google like I told you to and continue to spread disinformation because you want to believe something sooo badly.

Originally posted by Shadowalker

Originally posted by Forevever
.... if they were going to fake a birth certificate why would they use 3 different type-writers..... just sayin...

Because there were no typewriters used except the typewriters that made the three documents these letters were cropped and pasted from.

Its is a composite image done by some teeny bopper that's never even seen a typewriter, much less prepared a criminal case from one.

ok but you ignored everything else I said
don't you just hate that? when you make some good points and a person only responds to the ONE they can answer?

for the record I have seen a typewriter - the ribbon itself with flaws could make a lot of those marks - an inkpen that is running out of ink might make someone decide after writing their first letter to switch pens... most of these things can logically be explained away - and again I say if it was perfect, people would be screaming 'ITS TOO PERFECT IT HAS TO BE FAKE'

someone address my real point - aren't you more worried about the people who get into office legitimately? I mean Obama didn't screw up this country, its been a long time building up and took many generations to do it - as far as I know they were all America born and raised.

Originally posted by Schkeptick
Everyone who says it is a fake for these reasons is ignorant.

They don't understand how their fancy software works

AND

They don't understand how birth certificates are printed out onto special paper to make them more difficult to forge.

See my previous posts on this subject. I'm tired of pointing out the idiocy.

DENY IGNORANCE: whether you like the outcome or not.

edit on 13-5-2011 by Schkeptick because: (no reason given)

Cool and the original wasn't used so the forgery question is out the window.....they photocopied the orginal and then posted that. Which would be easier to photo shop and fake.

Why shouldn't we listen to the ideas in the op ? Tell us why? Dont' just make a statement but explain in detail why all of the things they said in the article is false? TEACH US WHY WE ARE WRONG ! ??? please .....

O yea you can't..

Originally posted by aptness

Originally posted by readytorevolt
Im not here to guess motivations. Im simply showing you what anybody who has owned a computer or ever written with a pen can plainly see for themselves.

You’re assuming we haven’t looked at. You are assuming the only conclusion one can reach, having looked at it, is that it is a forgery. If you read through this thread you might find out that many of us have done everything, and more, that you have and reached a different conclusion.

I understand you might not want to wade through 110 pages of what is mostly nonsense and ignorance, though.

Take off the red white and blue shades and look at the picture.

I see the result of automatic character recognition, anti-aliasing, or perhaps even digital manipulation to make something more legible.

All the images and videos you posted don’t prove the information on the certificate was altered to something that’s not on his physical original birth certificate. Until you do, you can’t claim this is forgery.

Especially when the Department of Health stands by the information on the PDF posted on the White House website.

edit on 13-5-2011 by aptness because: (no reason given)

love this post. so indicative of how you people think. "I see the result of automatic character recognition, anti-aliasing, or perhaps even digital manipulation to make something more legible."

all this while attempting to prove that this was an untouched scanned document like the White House claims. might not want to contradict yourself when attempting to correct somebody

Originally posted by LucidDreamer85
Cool and the original wasn't used so the forgery question is out the window.....they photocopied the orginal and then posted that. Which would be easier to photo shop and fake.

Why shouldn't we listen to the ideas in the op ? Tell us why? Dont' just make a statement but explain in detail why all of the things they said in the article is false? TEACH US WHY WE ARE WRONG ! ??? please .....

O yea you can't..

Actually anyone could BUT IT HAS BEEN DONE OVER AND OVER HERE!

That is why..Why can't you use the search functionality should be the question...

Since you just registered to comment on the issue then comment on the facts I presented.

Comment on a case by case, item by item basis. There is not a single flaw that isn't public record available to anyone that will look. Rock solid proof the 'layer of text' is a poor quality manipulated composite from several documents. By someone with zero experience with preparing criminal cases based on typewriter fingerprint evidence.

Now when the someone can prove there is no such thing as a unique typewriter fingerprint.....and there are not three conflicting typewriter fingerprints on the WH document......

But it will never happen. You can confuse the masses with software layers, but the damning evidence is in plain sight, and available to anyone who can read.

BTW since its a 'TXE' copy no one has actually forged anything.

I can see it now "Those kids are just uh...racist...they don't know what they uh....are doing, they're only high school ...uh...kids"
Prepare to be destroyed by the MSM kiddies, they will dig through your lives with a fine tooth comb to destroy your life and discredit you for speaking against his most high excellency.

Originally posted by Shadowalker
Since you just registered to comment on the issue then comment on the facts I presented.

Comment on a case by case, item by item basis. There is not a single flaw that isn't public record available to anyone that will look. Rock solid proof the 'layer of text' is a poor quality manipulated composite from several documents. By someone with zero experience with preparing criminal cases based on typewriter fingerprint evidence.

Now when the someone can prove there is no such thing as a unique typewriter fingerprint.....and there are not three conflicting typewriter fingerprints on the WH document......

But it will never happen. You can confuse the masses with software layers, but the damning evidence is in plain sight, and available to anyone who can read.

BTW since its a 'TXE' copy no one has actually forged anything.

edit on 13-5-2011 by Shadowalker because: (no reason given)

Prove to us that you are a criminal case expert if you want us to listen to you.

Personally I read your 3 typewritter font theory and it is stupid.

The font is the same and when a doc is typed on the hammers are not the same height every time.

You can find that out yourself.

That isn't how type writer experts judge if it is written on the same typewriter, BTW.

There has to be actual font differences not height differences.

No. I am not going to look it up for you.

Originally posted by i am just saying
I can see it now "Those kids are just uh...racist...they don't know what they uh....are doing, they're only high school ...uh...kids"
Prepare to be destroyed by the MSM kiddies, they will dig through your lives with a fine tooth comb to destroy your life and discredit you for speaking against his most high excellency.

Wow your statement would actually be worth 2 cents had it been that you actually read this thread and found out that the OP is a Joke/Hoax article.

Yes... you heard me right. the Article the OP is referencing is a Joke article. It is fake, satire, funny. Look at the website.

May as well be commenting on an Onion Article.

You can try and discredit whoever you want buddy, Its not going to change the simple facts.




there is not a pen or a human in the world that could produce these solid colors. Have you ever in your life seen a signature that looked like that?

reply to post by mudbeed


I see no response is a good way to discredit hard facts.

No need to comment any further. I can see your either a detective or a typewriter manufacturer.

You can google typewriter fingerprint and verify every line of my post. To a collector, a typewriter with a proven fingerprint from a celeb is worth gold. And yes they can tell every single machine from one another.

Google Unibomber

Originally posted by readytorevolt
You can try and discredit whoever you want buddy, Its not going to change the simple facts.

there is not a pen or a human in the world that could produce these solid colors. Have you ever in your life seen a signature that looked like that?

What do you mean?

What part of scanning do you not understand. Just look up Omnipage.

This is a scanned doc, not a human one. It was originally written by a human, but over time things fade. Also it's all about how the scanning proggie picked up the color at the time of scanning and is NOT proof in the least of multiple writers.

Taking all of the technical aspect out of it (which you apparently like to do with oyur limited knowledge on the subject)

Think about how stupid it sounds that one person wrote unham and someone else wrote the D.

Your theory is not only lacking common sense, but is also lacking the understanding of scanning.

As I said before, I would be on your side if it made any sense whatsoever, but you haven't done the research and just want to keep believing regardless of who proves you wrong.

Originally posted by Shadowalker
reply to post by mudbeed

 

I see no response is a good way to discredit hard facts.

No need to comment any further. I can see your either a detective or a typewriter manufacturer.

You can google typewriter fingerprint and verify every line of my post. To a collector, a typewriter with a proven fingerprint from a celeb is worth gold. And yes they can tell every single machine from one another.

Google Unibomber

edit on 13-5-2011 by Shadowalker because: (no reason given)

No, I already know what is required when looking up typewritter differences. It's about the actual carving of the letters and font, not about how far high or low.

Highs and lows can be used to a certain degree but the only true form of use is the actual engraving of the letter itself since no two can be the same.

All your picture shows to me (from your other thread) is that the type did indeed come from the same typewritter.

EDIT: To give you the beneift of the doubt. Even though it proves it came from the same typewritter, it does not prove whether or not someone took the said C character and cut and pasted it to their liking.

mud you seem so sure that this is just the scanner causing this computer generated signature.

Could you find some more instances of this happening and link the pics here. Shouldn't be hard if this is standard

reply to post by mudbeed


You know absolutely nothing about typewriters.

books.google.com... ks4iB3o&hl=en&ei=CYDNTcmfKYL6swPwuY21Cw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CDUQ6AEwATgK#v=onepage&q&f=false

First maker, model and font are determined. Once the machine is known:

Vertical misalignment is the primary deciding factor, and most common form of finger print. Unique right and left angles of the pads comes next. After that comes typeface wear, chipping and cracking.


Next?

Originally posted by readytorevolt
mud you seem so sure that this is just the scanner causing this computer generated signature.

Could you find some more instances of this happening and link the pics here. Shouldn't be hard if this is standard

edit on 13-5-2011 by readytorevolt because: .

Maybe you misunderstand me.

Scanning can result in loss of blacks and greys.

Pens are not consistant to begin with.

Take a ball point pen (one's that is bleeding slightly) and you would see the same thing.

Upload it with a scanner using programs (not just the scanner)

A program like onmipage will turn anything not recog text into a picture. Whether it is bitmap or not. this does not mean it needs to be OCR format, either.

It's standard knowledge with programs like this and plenty of proof for you is all over ATS.

How do I know? I use OmniPage Pro Daily here at work...that's why.

reply to post by Shadowalker


You have no clue what I know

PopScience