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.

 

Birthers: We Were Right. The BC is a FRAUD!!! Obama Lovers: Debunk THIS!

page: 37
141
<< 34  35  36    38  39  40 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 19 2011 @ 08:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
reply to post by ArJunaBug
 


Hey, WE appreciate your input, and don't be distracted by posters just trying to question your credibility man.


Yeah do not let something like that get in the way. Here, you are whoever you say you are. Unless you are Obama for some reason. Now if someone could just explain that reason to me.




posted on May, 19 2011 @ 08:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Runaway1977

Originally posted by yadboy
Don't bother my man, you could produce proof that you are the God of all imaging tech and the "anti-birthers" still would not accept that the document is a fake (and a poor one at that). It's my opinion that they released such an obvious fake because they knew pro-Obama people would not question it no matter how bad it is, they don't live in reality or deny ignorance.


So this person should not bother posting even one bit of evidence that he is who he says he is because you assume we would not believe that anyway? Am I reading your post correctly? We should just assume that this poster on ATS is who they claim to be just because? Well because why?

How do you guys apply these double standards with a straight face?


He's free to post whatever he wants, you'll just find some reason to say it doesn't pass your sniff test. par for the course on these forums. That's the reason I told him not to bother.



posted on May, 19 2011 @ 08:59 AM
link   
Moderators, I got a warning over something I said in this thread. You did NOT tell me what it was I said that generated the warning, making the warning absolutely, completely meaningless.

Please tell me how I offended you. However, given the extreme views on threads like these it's very hard to see how just about anything reasonable that's said on ATS could be deemed offensive.

Seriously considering bailing on this site for about a year now, this will probably push me over the top on that decision.

Many forums on this site talk about freedoms of speech and Government intrusion without just cause, but you feel that it is justified to give someone a warning without explaining yourself?

You want to take off points from me? Burden of proof is on you to explain why.



posted on May, 19 2011 @ 09:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Runaway1977

Originally posted by yadboy

Originally posted by Runaway1977
Considering the white house explained the black and white text document was transferred to a green safety background already, let's just say I have my doubts about your qualifications. Congratulations. You proved they did something they said they did.
edit on 19-5-2011 by Runaway1977 because: (no reason given)


So how exactly did they end up with text that is two different color depths? Some is grayscale while some is 1-bit black only. That implies a minimum of 2 different text documents on top of the security background.


No, that is clear evidence of more than one layer and the obvious difference between an enhanced ASCII character picked up by the OCR and what is perceived as an image being converted to a bitmap layer apart from the recognized characters. This is basic document achival 101.


This is not an issue with OCR, any OCR software worth anything has you walk through the characters it cannot identify so you can tell it what the character should be. There's no reason in the world they would digitally achive a document in the kind of shape this one was/is in. It's beyond pathetic.



posted on May, 19 2011 @ 09:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by yadboy
He's free to post whatever he wants, you'll just find some reason to say it doesn't pass your sniff test. par for the course on these forums. That's the reason I told him not to bother.


He sure is free to post whatever he wants. If you guys really want to sit there and say you just believe some poster that he is who he says he is then you can kiss your credibility goodbye. I really hope that is not to deep a concept for you. You cannot honestly pretend you are concerned about proof of who anyone is when you just read one post and decide this guy must be telling the truth because he says he is.



posted on May, 19 2011 @ 09:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by yadboy
This is not an issue with OCR, any OCR software worth anything has you walk through the characters it cannot identify so you can tell it what the character should be. There's no reason in the world they would digitally achive a document in the kind of shape this one was/is in. It's beyond pathetic.


You are assuming you know what software was used and whether or not the operator bothered to engage those options or go with a default. This is not a digital archive, it is just a .PDF file so you all can look at it and sniff it and pretend to touch it and tell each other you have actually looked over the document and declared it a fake. Your reasoning relies on assumptions. My reasoning relies on what I know to be fact.

How is your method working out so far?



posted on May, 19 2011 @ 09:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by alphabetaone

Originally posted by yadboy

Well, they wouldn't respond obviously. The question is about as basic as you can get when it comes to graphics/document editing. I'm not even questioning the validity of the information on the document at this point. It's just really sad that people can disregard these obvious, basic problems with the document.


They have to respond, even if it's a negative response, they are obligated to respond.

The only thing that is important IS the validity of the information on the document, thats the ONLY thing you should be questioning. If the information is valid, it doesn't matter if it's written on a friggin napkin with a crayon.


Let me rephrase that, they wouldn't respond with the truth. I say I'm not concerned with the validity of the information because I feel like if we set that aside and just spimly look at the makeup of the document itself people may be able to slip out of their partisan masks and agree on something. The fighting I see on this and other forums has me really woried about the next election. People are ready to start tearing at each other and the pitch is only going to get more fevered as the election approaches.

2012 is not going to be a pretty election. It's going to be dirty, hateful and contested for years. You thought Gore/Bush got ugly? You ain't seen nothing yet. This country is going to tear itself apart.



posted on May, 19 2011 @ 09:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Runaway1977

Originally posted by yadboy
This is not an issue with OCR, any OCR software worth anything has you walk through the characters it cannot identify so you can tell it what the character should be. There's no reason in the world they would digitally achive a document in the kind of shape this one was/is in. It's beyond pathetic.


You are assuming you know what software was used and whether or not the operator bothered to engage those options or go with a default. This is not a digital archive, it is just a .PDF file so you all can look at it and sniff it and pretend to touch it and tell each other you have actually looked over the document and declared it a fake. Your reasoning relies on assumptions. My reasoning relies on what I know to be fact.

How is your method working out so far?


Well post your credentials that show you know everything there is to know about these facts that I'm so uninformed on. See what I did there, yeah "you show me yours" goes both ways, doesn't it.



posted on May, 19 2011 @ 09:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by ArJunaBug
My point is I am very qualified to have an opinion on this topic.


You are no more or less qualified to have an opinion on this topic than anyone else. I'm amazed at how many "professionals" in graphics, scanning, documentation and so on have come out to claim this BC fake.

Here's why you're seeing the anomalies you're seeing. I suggest you watch this video and then take the same steps on your birth certificate to see what you get.


www.abovetopsecret.com...

Member AshleyD took these steps and repeated all the anomalies on a simple document. Here are her posts on her findings:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

And as a professional, I would think you would realize that when you're looking at a PDF of Obama's BC, you're NOT looking at a document, you're looking at ones and zeroes on a computer screen. As a professional, you should know that a document cannot be verified as TRUE or FALSE by looking at a digital representation of it.
You know that, right?

I can't believe that a "professional" would be so utterly lacking in facts... But most of the graphics, scanning, documentation 'professionals" showing up to claim that this is a "fake", don't really seem to have any...



posted on May, 19 2011 @ 09:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by yadboy
Well post your credentials that show you know everything there is to know about these facts that I'm so uninformed on. See what I did there, yeah "you show me yours" goes both ways, doesn't it.




When did I post a long rambling pile of junk about what my expertise is? That was ArJunaBug. He claimed he is some kind of expert and went into detail about why his opinion should hold any weight so I asked him to prove he is who he says he is. I never claimed to be anyone.

I also do not need to post anything to show you that you are just assuming things. You are assuming things. I can tell you are assuming things because in your post you assumed a bunch of things. See what I did there?



posted on May, 19 2011 @ 09:33 AM
link   
reply to post by yadboy
 


112 page thread

Looking for the truth or just looking to spread mud? The questions you have are explained multiple times in great detail in the above thread. The best step forward if you have remaining questions would be to add them there as you have a vast amount of work done on this topic already. There is no good reason to ignore all that and just start the same issue over again somewhere else. There are only bad reasons to do something like that.



posted on May, 19 2011 @ 09:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus

Originally posted by Runaway1977
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus
 

What does any of that have to do with the birth certificate? Before you rant off with some defensive retort, I am actually asking you since you brought it up in this thread. All this stuff about people Obama knew as an adult. Let's say it proves he is some super Marxist. What does it have to do with the birth certificate? Why would you want to confuse the issue? Are you secretly trying to be a distraction for Obama? Keep in mind that these are questions.


It has everything to do with opposition to him as POTUS of this great nation. Instead people like you are filling up the Internet with putrid nonsense about how people are just racist. If you do not understand what is at stake now with it being in your face, you never will.
Not only is he a Super Marxist, he is in league with other Super Marxists. This is why I have brought up his connections to Ayers. If you check out those sites, you will see the shady dealings and the scummy people who have helped him along the way. And yes, it does matter, and yes these people around him are helping him. It looks like Ayers may have taught him how to lift SS#'s from that link on Daniels that I was replying to another posters message. If you really want to know what drives birthers, there is your answer. If you choose not to see the reality there is no more I can do. If you insist on going on with the ridiculous Alinkyite tactic of DailyKos and Huffpo then do what you will. Just carry on. And please, I am not into "distractions". It gets really silly to come to a place like this and just get called a "shill", a "distractor", a "partisan", and gee I'd love to get paid by the post, but I don't sorry to disappoint. This is not a game sir/madame, this is our Liberty and our Freedom at stake and no less.
edit on 19-5-2011 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

edit on 19-5-2011 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

edit on 19-5-2011 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)




Exactly what "marxist" change have you seen Obama commit, because I haven't seen any. I keep hearing about "obamacare", but it hasn't affected my life in the least. Other than the health reform...what marxist thing has he done?

Many of you at this site claim to be beyond being a sheeple. If this is so, why do you even worry about Obama or any other President? If you truly are aware, you should know that the President doesn't matter in the least. With minor differences, the stat quo remains, which tells us that the President is merely a talking head.

So this is what pulls the white sheet off of birthers and exposes you for being racist, especially at this site. You all are here to deny ignorance, you all know that the President isn't calling the shots. So why are you up in Arms, even IF Obama is a Kenyan...he isn't calling any shots!



posted on May, 19 2011 @ 09:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by fleabit
This is so incredibly stupid.

I don't care how idiotic the Obama administration may or may not be. NO one who was savvy enough to become our President, no matter how dumb YOU think they are.. with the FBI, CIA, NSA and who knows what other agencies at their disposal.. would make such a pathetic fake certificate. If they wanted to fake a stupid birth certificate, you would.. NEVER.. EVER.. KNOW.

They could probably remove your identity, remove your family, steal your identity, and use it for whatever they wanted. And they can't forge a single piece of paper?

They supposedly masterminded the 9/11 tragedy.. many of you claim they managed to destroy multiple major buildings, and get away with it. But they can't.. forge a single document?! Are you effing kidding me?


There are people who are on the fence and think that maybe it is intentionally manipulated for agenda, which holds absolutely no bearing on his actual status. Weather or not he was born in hawaii, we will never know beyond a doubt. I happen to belong to the group of people who the only fact they believe about this whole thing is that someone manipulated the BC on the white house's website. I came to this conclusion on my own and before ATS threads brought it about, as i have the experience and my knowledge of how file handling works with the methods they said the BC came about.

For all we know, someone had a graphic artist make these manipulations before they posted it up on the white house website. There is obvious digital manipulation, especially for a file said to be a scanned version of the original document.

I said before that I would conduct a experiment for those who do not believe its been forged or manipulated, however I do not want my work (that I have to stop doing real work to do) to fall on deaf ears. I figure i can take a solid or patterned piece of paper. Do some type setting on Illustrator, sign it, scan it, perform whatever PDF action requested (OCR and PDF Optimization) and provide the links here. BUT i highly doubt this will be accepted as proof by the people who dont understand the way digital file design works.



posted on May, 19 2011 @ 09:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Runaway1977
When did I post a long rambling pile of junk about what my expertise is? That was ArJunaBug. He claimed he is some kind of expert and went into detail about why his opinion should hold any weight so I asked him to prove he is who he says he is. I never claimed to be anyone.

I also do not need to post anything to show you that you are just assuming things. You are assuming things. I can tell you are assuming things because in your post you assumed a bunch of things. See what I did there?


You assume, I assume, we all assume. I think I can safely assume that you have no more access to the original document than I, so where are the facts you spoke of that make you so confident. You keep pointing to the other thread; you are assuming that this "proof" there is irrefutable. The very nature of a forum makes everything posted there debunkable to some degree. You won't change my mind and I won't change yours, which is the only thing that this thread/exchange proves to be a fact.

As I said a few pages back, I'm done with this debate, it's useless. I harbor no ill will toward you or the others in the thread I disagree with, but I don't enjoy wasting my time either. This not an issue we can resolve in this forum to anyone’s satisfaction.

I have formed my opinion on this issue, arguing the point back and forth with internet trolls is a poor use of my time.



posted on May, 19 2011 @ 09:59 AM
link   
reply to post by yadboy
 


No, you assumed. I have not assumed anything. I know misery loves company but you cannot drag me down with you just by stating things as if they were true when in fact they are not. You had a question. I answered it. Then you assumed a bunch of things. Then I pointed out you were just assuming lots of things. It was not that hard to follow really. I am pointing to that other thread because the things you are saying have been much more thoroughly dissected in that thread. You do not have to believe any of it but you should address your questions in a place full of answers instead of starting that discussion all over again in a different thread. I am just trying to help you actually get answers when it seems you are just trying to make noise. Here is a fantastic example of that noise.

Originally posted by yadboy
As I said a few pages back, I'm done with this debate, it's useless.


Say it again after your next post too. Sorry but saying you are saying again you are done is too funny. If you were done a few pages back....

well you get it.



posted on May, 19 2011 @ 10:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by derst1988
There are people who are on the fence and think that maybe it is intentionally manipulated for agenda, which holds absolutely no bearing on his actual status. Weather or not he was born in hawaii, we will never know beyond a doubt. I happen to belong to the group of people who the only fact they believe about this whole thing is that someone manipulated the BC on the white house's website. I came to this conclusion on my own and before ATS threads brought it about, as i have the experience and my knowledge of how file handling works with the methods they said the BC came about.


Did the White-house saying that it had been manipulated help you come to that conclusion all on your own or not? Because they kind of admitted that upfront and anyone following along knew it from the get go. How long did it take you to figure out on your own something they actually said when they put it out?



posted on May, 19 2011 @ 10:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by derst1988

Originally posted by fleabit
This is so incredibly stupid.

I don't care how idiotic the Obama administration may or may not be. NO one who was savvy enough to become our President, no matter how dumb YOU think they are.. with the FBI, CIA, NSA and who knows what other agencies at their disposal.. would make such a pathetic fake certificate. If they wanted to fake a stupid birth certificate, you would.. NEVER.. EVER.. KNOW.

They could probably remove your identity, remove your family, steal your identity, and use it for whatever they wanted. And they can't forge a single piece of paper?

They supposedly masterminded the 9/11 tragedy.. many of you claim they managed to destroy multiple major buildings, and get away with it. But they can't.. forge a single document?! Are you effing kidding me?


There are people who are on the fence and think that maybe it is intentionally manipulated for agenda, which holds absolutely no bearing on his actual status. Weather or not he was born in hawaii, we will never know beyond a doubt. I happen to belong to the group of people who the only fact they believe about this whole thing is that someone manipulated the BC on the white house's website. I came to this conclusion on my own and before ATS threads brought it about, as i have the experience and my knowledge of how file handling works with the methods they said the BC came about.

For all we know, someone had a graphic artist make these manipulations before they posted it up on the white house website. There is obvious digital manipulation, especially for a file said to be a scanned version of the original document.

I said before that I would conduct a experiment for those who do not believe its been forged or manipulated, however I do not want my work (that I have to stop doing real work to do) to fall on deaf ears. I figure i can take a solid or patterned piece of paper. Do some type setting on Illustrator, sign it, scan it, perform whatever PDF action requested (OCR and PDF Optimization) and provide the links here. BUT i highly doubt this will be accepted as proof by the people who dont understand the way digital file design works.




Please re-read what you replied too. You keep harping on the document is faked, the reply is, if it is, it has been done so on purpose. Why would they do something like this? Who knows...but I know I wouldn't post my original BC on the net either without some adjustments in case someone wanted to attempt some type of fraud.

Actually, come to think about it...of course NSA would require the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES to present a document that is incorrect on purpose for the reason of fraudulent persons and their conniving.



posted on May, 19 2011 @ 10:27 AM
link   
I say again...

Of course the NSA and other security persons for the WH and Presidency would require the President to not submit his actual unaltered BC. If he submitted the actual document for all to see and DUPLICATE he would open himself to fraud or identity theft.



posted on May, 19 2011 @ 10:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by Runaway1977

Originally posted by derst1988
There are people who are on the fence and think that maybe it is intentionally manipulated for agenda, which holds absolutely no bearing on his actual status. Weather or not he was born in hawaii, we will never know beyond a doubt. I happen to belong to the group of people who the only fact they believe about this whole thing is that someone manipulated the BC on the white house's website. I came to this conclusion on my own and before ATS threads brought it about, as i have the experience and my knowledge of how file handling works with the methods they said the BC came about.


Did the White-house saying that it had been manipulated help you come to that conclusion all on your own or not? Because they kind of admitted that upfront and anyone following along knew it from the get go. How long did it take you to figure out on your own something they actually said when they put it out?


Oh really? They did, did they? I have not read this anywhere. I have read that it is supposed to be a direct scan of the original, signed by the state registrar and sent to DC. Please provide links. google isnt helping your case.



posted on May, 19 2011 @ 10:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by DZAG Wright
I say again...

Of course the NSA and other security persons for the WH and Presidency would require the President to not submit his actual unaltered BC. If he submitted the actual document for all to see and DUPLICATE he would open himself to fraud or identity theft.


Solid logic here, hard to disagree.



new topics

top topics



 
141
<< 34  35  36    38  39  40 >>

log in

join