Obama's NEW Birth Certificate proven to be fake hours after release

reply to post by grahag


ARTIFACTS ARE INCONSISTENCIES BY DEFINITION IN THIS DOMAIN - NOT KNOWN WAYS THAT DIFFERENT CODE CAN HANDLE DIFFEREN TYPES OF OBJECTS..

I'm not speaking about birthplace nor hosptial name or a bacground, only

In all cases all suggestions are affected by the fact that whatever rule or reason you wish to apply, the artifacts and characteristics being analyzed - ARE NOT CONSISTENT ACROSS THE PAGE EVEN ON THE SAME SINGLE LINE MUCH LESS TOP TO BOTTOM

– EVEN IN ONE SINGLE CHARACTER IN THE SET OF THE DATE 1961…

> Why is the 1961 date separated into 196 and then 1??

I WOULD LOVE AN EXPLANATION SMART GUY..

None of the factors above can explain this only human manipulation can..
I don’t think you get the reality that if ALL DATA IS %100 ACCURATE, IT IS STILL A MANIPULATED DIGITAL FILE AND A BIG PROBLEM..

Originally posted by Vickie3021
None of the factors above can explain this only human manipulation can..
I don’t think you get the reality that if ALL DATA IS %100 ACCURATE, IT IS STILL A MANIPULATED DIGITAL FILE AND A BIG PROBLEM..

Exactly my feelings. Well said

Originally posted by Vickie3021
reply to post by grahag

 

All the DIGITAL DENIER explanations, do not work with this since whatever software, scanner, ocr, hardware, software, is not going to give a different effect for example one 1961 date at one place on the page, and another 1961 on the same line 4 inches away..

In all cases all suggestions are affected by the fact that whatever rule or reason you wish to apply, the artifacts and characteristics being analyzed - ARE NOT CONSISTENT ACROSS THE PAGE EVEN ON THE SAME SINGLE LINE MUCH LESS TOP TO BOTTOM

– EVEN IN ONE SINGLE CHARACTER IN THE SET OF THE DATE 1961…

> Why is the 1961 date separated into 196 and then 1??

I WOULD LOVE AN EXPLANATION SMART GUY..

None of the factors above can explain this only human manipulation can..

I don’t think you get the reality that if ALL DATA IS %100 ACCURATE, IT IS STILL A MANIPULATED DIGITAL FILE AND A BIG PROBLEM..

LETS SAY THEY ARE SO SMART..

That it was released in this form to discredit "Republicans" and “Truthers”..
OK, this means they know what we see, what all can see in a zoomed pdf copy %300 or greater, just moving around..

They release it, looking this bad, so many artifacts that are not consistent..

THEIR FAKE, FAKE DOCUMENT, IS SUCH A REALISTIC LOOKING FAKE, THAT IT PROVIDES REAL EVIDENCE OF MANIPULATION, SHADY/FRAUDULENT BEHAVIOR..

EVEN IF EVERY SINGLE FIELD ON THIS PAGE WAS %100 TRUE AND ACCURATE

- ALL PARTIES INVOLVED IN THE RELEASE OF THIS DOCUMENT WOULD BE ASSOCIATED WITH FRAUD, MANIPULATION, DISHONESTY, AND DEEP IN THE MIDDLE OF PERPETUTING SOME TYPE OF POLITICAL SCAM AT THE PRESIDENTIAL AND NATIONALLEVELS..

- THE CHARACTER IMPLICATIONS OF DOING SO ALONE WILL LOSE THE ELECTION

Hey, um... Your Caps-lock appears to be stuck. You might wanna tap on it a few times to see if it turns off. If not, you might want to try another keyboard. Just saying, because on the internet if you're in caps, you're either emphasizing a word (like a poor man's bold) , or you're yelling. And I KNOW you couldn't be yelling at little ol' me.

OCR uses algorithms (mathematical logic) to determine what constitutes a character. 1 looks similar to lower case L or upper case i. It could have been separated out due to the OCR being unable to determine exactly what it was and so it went into a higher detailed layer to be looked at separately. Computers don't recognize character patterns very well, which is why when it messes up, it's very obvious because we can see the difference.

I have a feeling I'm giving you information which you really don't care about though.I could tell with all the misspellings and grammar issues that you're gonna believe what you believe regardless of what kind of information is brought to bear.

Sorry about that. You seemed nice... until you started yelling... I'm rocking myself to sleep in the fetal position now...

Originally posted by JR MacBeth
From what I have been reading, there was only one registrar in Hawaii at that time, one person.

There was one “Registrar General” or “State Registrar” yes, but local registrar is clearly something else. This is also evident if you look at the first 1962 certificate, where you can see that box 20 is for “Date Accepted by Local Reg.” and box 22 is for “Date Accepted by Reg. General.” It wouldn’t make sense to have these two boxes if there was only one registrar.

You can see the name and signature of the Registrar General on the Nordykes certificates, or this other 1962 certificate, or the State Registrar on this 1971 certificate.

On that 1971 certificate you can see the (local) registrar signature, prefaced with ‘Deputy,’ and it’s clearly not the State Registrar.

You can also see on that 1962 certificate that, even though it is censored, someone else’s other than the General Registrar’s signature is on certificate because it’s prefaced with ‘(Deputy)’ and is apparently a military person, as next to the signature you can read “Lt Col MSC.”

So we have examples of at least 2 [1, 2] 1962 birth certificates signed by two different local registrars. I think it’s reasonable to assume there’s more than one local registrar.

Does this prove the person on Obama’s signature is a real person? No. But it sure doesn’t prove it’s someone playing a prank on birthers.

But like I said, if you truly are intrigued by this then do some work and contact them and ask about local and state registrars and whose signature is on Obama’s certificate.

Originally posted by Vickie3021
.
I don’t think you get the reality that if ALL DATA IS %100 ACCURATE, IT IS STILL A MANIPULATED DIGITAL FILE AND A BIG PROBLEM..

I thought the reality was to try and determine if the data is accurate........but now you are saying it's not the content......it's the delivery of said data?

This video does a pretty good job proving it was not OCR that caused the layers. You may have to watch the whole video to get the point he is making, he starts off pretty slow just to make sure everybody knows what he is talking about.

so much time and energy that people put into wanting to see this, and yet there still not happy...

Originally posted by vinunleaded
Apparently 90% of the 'experts' on this website never heard of OCR or worked on a highly advanced scanner

I never claim to be an expert, but I can certainly scan an image, with OCR enabled, and I did NOT get the layers Explain this...

In my opinion no one has really explained the digital anomallies on this birth certificate.
People say it is caused by using OCR software, but I would say it would be illegal to make a copy of an official birth certificate using OCR software - because it can then be edited by anyone.
I am from Australia and not from the USA so I don't know your laws, but in Australia it is against the law to do this, not only that, a digital copy of a birth certificate is not regarded as a true form of identification.
So even without all the anomallies this birth certificate would be worth less than a piece of a toilet paper in its digital format (in Australia at least).

Originally posted by ZeroPointEnergy

Originally posted by grahag


Someone in the know correct me if I'm wrong, but when the OCR pass looks at the document and then renders into layers of similarity, it picks out things it knows and things it's not sure about and renders those using different quality. These LOOK like artifacts, but are probably just varying degrees of detail. The PDF is just a container, like a zip file with all the info required to render the document as whole. Anything that it doesn't "know" will probably get rendered at a higher quality until either it gives up or finds a character match.

Keep in mind that even if OCR is turned off, there is usually an OCR pass done although not used. I can't say what did the scan, but it looks like a Mac copy of adobe rendered it. I couldn't tell you what processed the image on the back end though. It's reasonable enough to consider that being the reason for the "artifacts" they're talking about.

What about the other anomalies. eg Different coloured font, as well as font style, and that the background watermark was clearly added to the document?

I'm not sure about that. Again, OCR does funny things to a PDF that can be explained by the aforementioned algorithms. It does all kinds of things like histogram equalization, or color adjustment/removal all to try to make the characters readable. When you say that the background watermark was CLEARLY added, do you mean the green pattern? These things are typically printed on green security paper. If the background is a digital creation, the compression artifacts don't show that. The artifacts that I'm looking at show a varying degree of difference, which indicates that it's a scan of a piece of security paper. It's also possible that it's a scan of paper which is then layered into the document, but that's also assuming that the entire thing is a hand created forgery, which I don't think it is. Too many things don't match up to make that the case.

ANYONE that uses Photoshop or Illustrator for a living has some sort of sense to the layers they use in a document. They wouldn't spread them all over the document into various random-seeming layers like I've seen.

It appears too random for there to be a person behind this.

Originally posted by ZeroPointEnergy
a digital copy of a birth certificate is not regarded as a true form of identification.
So even without all the anomallies this birth certificate would be worth less than a piece of a toilet paper in its digital format (in Australia at least).

But Obama isn't using it as a form of identification is he?

This is so obviously a fake, now that it has been pointed out......so fake that it makes me wonder if it was planted on purpose.... but I can't think of why....to make fools of all of us.... or?

Just one serious look at the OP's first image shows, to me, errors that appear to try to mix up typewriter and computer for "age"?

(some errors already mentioned, plus mine)
1.) Dept of Health No. 61 10641, has the 41 sliding down to the right.
2.) The 'R' in BARACK is fainter, but not upon repeat lower down for the father
3.) The curiosity of the 'pencilled 'Xs'over Twin and Triplet, as well as elsewhere on the document....like codes.
4.) The time 7:24 P.M. with the M as subscript
5.) Upper case 'O' stays in line when followed by other upper case letters but not when followed by lower case (Oahu)
6.) No mother's mailing address. Mothers are important!!!!
7.) Father listed as a student, but mother is NOT (She is a 'None' for Occupation.)
8.) The word 'None' for her occupation has N-o-n matching but the lower case 'e' is too small to match!
9.) All Capital Ks are in place except for Kansas. .....typewriter style......?
10) The date stamp of AUG -8 1961 has a larger '8' but that could be the stamp style. However the first stamp to the
left is even and the stamp on the right side is leaning downward except for the '1'


There are a lot of shady dealings in this family with talk of Obama Sr. being murdered, that there was a 'real father' who was a pedophile and Obama spent most of his time with him. (Darn! Where did I read that whole story?...anyone?)
the gossip about bath houses and Raul Emmanuel, the online photo of Michelle's 'extra' goodie package!

www.ihatethemedia.com...

I know there is no one on this earth above reproach, no matter what, but there must be a line drawn somehwere as to who the 'leader' will be in as a parent, as a teacher, as a professer, as a Prime Minister and a President.

( I just learned a year ago that I have a bi-sexual child.... 47 years old, but even with the truth, I still love her and accept her. She was open and honest and told me.)

There is so much more hidden from the general public than we ever knew....far too many secrets!

Originally posted by Logical one

Originally posted by ZeroPointEnergy
a digital copy of a birth certificate is not regarded as a true form of identification.
So even without all the anomallies this birth certificate would be worth less than a piece of a toilet paper in its digital format (in Australia at least).

But Obama isn't using it as a form of identification is he?

Assuming this all legit
I would like to know whether the hospital issued the certificate as a digital document, or did they provide a hard copy, which the white house scanned themselves.

If the hospital sent this as a digital copy then surely they would have strict procedures on how it is to be done, in fact usually they have systems so that it is impossible to do it any other way. So why the hell would a hospital use OCR software to scan an official document? I find that just as unbelievable as the document is a fraud.

Regarding your comment about identification, he is using it to identify where he was born, so he is using it for identification purposes.

Since he is using it as a form of proving his I.D., would this not constitute Fraud?

It seem very well covered in the Office of the Inspector General.

www.oig.hhs.gov...

If this is the case, it would be a felony. Any President committing a felony, would be up for impeachment.

I truely do not understand why on earth they would put this out there. A fraud is a fraud is a fraud. I guess they really want to see how dumb people really have gotten. How many crap sandwitches they will eat.

reply to post by grahag

Yes I am refering to the green pattern underneath the document. I you look carefully at the pattern around the border of the printed information part of the document it doesn't match up very well with the outside part of the pattern. I hope that makes sense. What it looks like is there are two pieces of patterned paper put on top of each other ie a small square piece of paper put on top of a the larger piece of paterned paper.
Hard to explain hope you understand what I am saying. You can clearly see anomalies. but it is like a border effect.

Originally posted by ZeroPointEnergy

Regarding your comment about identification, he is using it to identify where he was born, so he is using it for identification purposes.

edit on 28-4-2011 by ZeroPointEnergy because: (no reason given)

Yes but there is a difference between offering the document up in order to get a passport or drivers licence for identification purposes.

Obama is not offering up this digital copy birth certificate to you for any official purpose is he?

In fact he is not legally obliged to show anyone his birth certificate digital or otherwise to anyone at this time.

Originally posted by canadiansenior70
There are a lot of shady dealings in this family with talk of Obama Sr. being murdered, that there was a 'real father' who was a pedophile and Obama spent most of his time with him. (Darn! Where did I read that whole story?...anyone?)

Orly Taitz’s dream diary?

Originally posted by ZeroPointEnergy
Regarding your comment about identification, he is using it to identify where he was born, so he is using it for identification purposes.

No, he’s not. The document he uses for identification purposes is either the certification of live birth the state issued, or his US passport.

Obama presented this document in hopes you would shut up with your silly demands. It’s quite apparent from this thread he should have never taken your demands seriously.

Regarding your ‘concerns’ about the document, they are, quite frankly, irrelevant. The Director of the Department of Health is on record saying she was present when the copies were made. The information you are looking at is the information contained on Obama’s original records in the Department of Health. If you’re looking at it on paper or pdf format is completely imaterial.

I don’t, of course, expect you will ever accept this fact.

Originally posted by j2000
Since he is using it as a form of proving his I.D., would this not constitute Fraud?

No, since he doesn't legally have to "prove" anything.........he's already done that to the relevant parties.

If he was offering up a tampered document to a court of law that required to see it, then that is different.

Originally posted by j2000
Since he is using it as a form of proving his I.D., would this not constitute Fraud?

No, he is not proving his ID. The US authorities and institutions, as well as the sane members of the American people, already know who he is and didn’t ask him for his ID.

I truely do not understand why on earth they would put this out there.

Could it be because what you think is happening here obviously isn’t? Nah.... there must be some conspiracy.

Originally posted by ZeroPointEnergy
If the hospital sent this as a digital copy then surely they would have strict procedures on how it is to be done, in fact usually they have systems so that it is impossible to do it any other way. So why the hell would a hospital use OCR software to scan an official document? I find that just as unbelievable as the document is a fraud.

I doubt that.

The reason we went to nurses aides and levels of nursing is because - not only is it cheaper - - there wasn't enough qualified RNs - - who now mostly are administrators.

And you think a clerk is gonna be "schooled" in scanning - etc. Not likely. Official document or not.