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.
Computer experts have discovered strange anomalies in the Obama birth record released by the White House. They include a different birth registration number that shows up in "hidden text," remnants of the short-form certificate apparently bleeding through the long-form and a "smiley face" in the registrar's stamp that does not show up on other recently issued Hawaii birth records.
Curiously, in a simple process run by Optical Character Recognition software that reveals hidden text, the registration number 10611 turns up, instead of 10641, the number displayed on the two birth records authorized for publication by the White House. Application of the Adobe Acrobat's "Examine Document" function on the Obama long-form document produces the following hidden text: (see article for all related pics of documents undert the color review etc); The number 10611 would seem to be more plausible than 10641, which appears to be out of sequence with the numbers of the published birth certificates of twins born a day after Obama.
As WND reported, the numbers on the Hawaii birth certificates of twins Susan and Gretchen Nordyke are lower than the number given Obama, even though the president's birth certificate was accepted by the registrar general and stamped with a certificate number three days earlier. Further, as WND reported, an article by the man who was Hawaii's registrar general at the time Obama was born confirmed birth certificates were numbered immediately upon acceptance by the registrar general.
Within days, contributors demonstrated on AboveTopSecret.com that when the copy is run through a color filter process in Paintshop Pro, the text of Obama's short-form certification of live birth, oddly, appears to bleed through the page. The contributors speculated that the short-form birth certificate was placed behind the white, long-form birth certificate when it was copied for distribution to the White House press April 27. Here are two versions of the white birth certificate analyzed under color filters (reminder, go to article for pics review]:
User "boondock-saint" posted on AboveTopSecret.com an interactive version that flashes between the short-form and a brown version of the long-form birth certificate, demonstrating how text from the short-form appears to be bleeding through. The word "VOID" also appears behind the long-form:
Originally posted by drwizardphd
Look, I'm using a keyboard and typing something on the internet, I'm a computer expert!
In all seriousness, this has been covered.
The bleed-through is real, and verifiable. I would agree with the article in that it's a result of the short form being under it when it was being scanned. Explainable phenomenon - not evidence of anything nefarious.
The other stuff is ridiculous. These guys are going out of their way to mis-interpret image compression artifacts at the pixel-level.
The "Void" is just somebody seeing what they want to see in a few smudges of compression. Why would somebody hand write "Void" in tiny little letters over it? Certainly, they would use a stamp as apropos, and it would be larger than a tiny little speck on the page.
I literally laughed out loud when I saw the bit about the "A" in the signature being a smiley face...
Someone either has way too much imagination and way to much free time on their hands, or the WND is playing the entire birth certificate conspiracy for fools. Anyone taking this seriously needs to step back, take a deep breath, and do some serious self-evaluation.edit on 21-5-2011 by drwizardphd because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by micpsi
It cannot be bleedthrough from Obama's shortform because some of the bleedthrough text does not appear in this short form. It can only be bleedthrough from some other birth certificate. I suggest it's YOUR analysis that is faulty and which is leading you to drawing absurdly false conclusions.
It should be ridiculed because everything they post is misinformation and lies, and purposely so.
Originally posted by JiggyPotamus
I linked to wnd as a source the other day and was ridiculed.
Originally posted by Antiquated1
I seem to recall Boondock-Saint had a thread where he proved Obama had Alien DNA as well. Does he still get credit for that too? Do we get to take both factors into consideration? Is credibility and issue outside the story itself when so many facts are missing and assumptions are made? I just cannot help but notice how super credible people are on ATS when we go out of our way to avoid some stuff they say and yet other people lose credibility to ATS for anything and everything they have ever said. That standards have shifted.
Originally posted by anon72
Within days, contributors demonstrated on AboveTopSecret.com that when the copy is run through a color filter process in Paintshop Pro, the text of Obama's short-form certification of live birth, oddly, appears to bleed through the page. The contributors speculated that the short-form birth certificate was placed behind the white, long-form birth certificate
Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
reply to post by aptness
WND just lost any shred of credibility that they've ever had. Not that they had much to begin with. They (along with boondock saint and other birthers) are using a not uncommon process of having formed their conclusion FIRST, and then looking for any shred of 'evidence' (real or imagined) that feeds into their emotional belief, while summarily discarding any evidence that does not.
It's good to create a hypothesis and then look for evidence to support it. However, someone who is really interested in the truth (and that is what is sorely lacking here) will modify or discard their original hypothesis when the evidence, as in this case, does NOT support the hypothesis at all.
WND and birthers don't care about finding the truth, they care about proving their emotional beliefs.
I would address each of these issues one-by-one and knock them down, but it has been done so many times before and it has become clear that no amount of rational or critical thinking appeals to what amounts to religious zealots. The birther movement has become a religion, with its followers believing in a complete fantasy and proselytizing their bunk to a willing and ignorant audience.
To give credence to these silly suspicions is obviously (to some of us) completely insane.
Originally posted by Kitilani
Now the huge hole where a pile of "I guess I was wrong about that part" should be I just see moving on to a new argument.
Originally posted by Kitilani
Just reading in the article like "Hey, we never said these titles mattered just move on past this part" is really bugging me.