On April 28 2011 21:58 iPlaY.NettleS wrote: First thing i thought when i saw the long form pdf birth certificate was the numbers do not appear to be written by a typewriter but seem to be written on a computer with a typewriter type font.This is proven when moving the pdf into adobe illustrator , the text layers can be freely moved around yet the certificate is masquerading as an original scanned document from 1961.This story just gets weirder and weirder.
Honestly, if Obama was going to make a forgery of his birth certificate, would he really make it so bad that an idiot with Adobe Illustrator would be able to identify it as a fake?
I am sure the conspirators from the 60s would be smart enough and technologically savvy enough to do a much better job.
On April 28 2011 21:58 iPlaY.NettleS wrote: First thing i thought when i saw the long form pdf birth certificate was the numbers do not appear to be written by a typewriter but seem to be written on a computer with a typewriter type font.This is proven when moving the pdf into adobe illustrator , the text layers can be freely moved around yet the certificate is masquerading as an original scanned document from 1961.This story just gets weirder and weirder.
Typical , dismiss it before even watching the video. You really think those letters are written by a 1960 typewriter? they look computer generated , far too crisp to be a 50 year old typewritten document that has been scanned in.
This is obviously the most important issue in the United States. Good job conspiracy theorists for bringing to light the real problems plaguing the US currently and making our government focus on them rather than less important issues such as the economy.
On April 28 2011 21:58 iPlaY.NettleS wrote: First thing i thought when i saw the long form pdf birth certificate was the numbers do not appear to be written by a typewriter but seem to be written on a computer with a typewriter type font.This is proven when moving the pdf into adobe illustrator , the text layers can be freely moved around yet the certificate is masquerading as an original scanned document from 1961.This story just gets weirder and weirder.
Typical , dismiss it before even watching the video. You really think those letters are written by a 1960 typewriter? they look computer generated , far too crisp to be a 50 year old typewritten document that has been scanned in.
I want the original file from the white house, myself, before judging anything. I know my way around illustrator. Just because some dude in a video is turning a layer on and off doesn't mean that this person didn't falsify it, themselves, by potentially re-creating the birth certificate to show "anomalies" that they may have invented themselves for an agenda they have.
On the contrary, it is not dismissing before even watching the video (even though you were talking to another guy). I watched the video. It is not proof of anything. It would take me an hour to re-make someones birth certificate and hide numbers and little things inside of it, and I'm not even a "PHOTOSHOP EXPERT!!!!!"
Even if some of the anomalies are true, having the certificate end in 1 instead of 0 and having a few things missing/added here and there doesn't really prove foul-play, all it proves is that it was touched up. "Touched up" could mean many things. Maybe it was in poor condition and they decided to clean it up. In regards to changing numbers, maybe the system was streamlined when they switched from paper to digital, and they discovered a missing document and reduced everyones numbers by 1. It could even be foul play- the fact is that nobody knows.
Frankly the fact that anyone cares about where someone is born is funny to me. He's no better/worse a president whether he was born in Hawaii or Iraq. People are just looking for something to complain about and government conspiracy theories are a popular trend.
On April 28 2011 22:26 Angra wrote: This is obviously the most important issue in the United States. Good job conspiracy theorists for bringing to light the real problems plaguing the US currently and making our government focus on them rather than less important issues such as the economy.
You just ignore anyone that brings anything important to light.
On April 28 2011 21:58 iPlaY.NettleS wrote: First thing i thought when i saw the long form pdf birth certificate was the numbers do not appear to be written by a typewriter but seem to be written on a computer with a typewriter type font.This is proven when moving the pdf into adobe illustrator , the text layers can be freely moved around yet the certificate is masquerading as an original scanned document from 1961.This story just gets weirder and weirder.
"Theres no mention of religion" so how did he get his hussein surname? i read the whole article and if im not mistaken he said he was a muslim(not in the article) but then he said he is a christian, oh well it's not like i care about his religion but im just curious about his surname etc. Sounds pretty awesome Barrack obama Hussein
So it seems people think this is fake = Conspiracy Government is corrupted they can fake his birth cert etc Probably more things about this whole " OMFG he aint born in hawaii he born in kenya"
Damn that is just sad just let it go..
i still think its a shame he had to prove it that he was born there but oh well rather have the people know the truth instead of going around showing people their conspiracy.
Looking at it from a non-US citizen's perspective, I think it is pretty sad that some people would waste so much energy on such a stupid debate. I'm sorry but do you hear yourselves? Instead of talking about pressing matters like the economy or foreign policies, you get riled up over your president's birth certificate....Have you nothing else to do in your time? The amount of ridiculous is just funny at this point and starting to become very fucking sad for a nation to be divided on such a stupid and detail.
On April 29 2011 01:26 Kindred wrote: Looking at it from a non-US citizen's perspective, I think it is pretty sad that some people would waste so much energy on such a stupid debate. I'm sorry but do you hear yourselves? Instead of talking about pressing matters like the economy or foreign policies, you get riled up over your president's birth certificate....Have you nothing else to do in your time? The amount of ridiculous is just funny at this point and starting to become very fucking sad for a nation to be divided on such a stupid and detail.
You are talking about a country that almost shut down its government over planned parenthood.
This is something I saw that I wanted to bring to all your attention. You can all make your own judgments, I withhold mine. I only saw this else where. Thoughts?
On April 29 2011 01:57 CrimsnDragn wrote: This is something I saw that I wanted to bring to all your attention. You can all make your own judgments, I withhold mine. I only saw this else where. Thoughts?
Stopped paying attention when I read that a pixel was not the same "size" as another
The group on the left is actually 4 pixels, but when they are grouped like that it appears that they are not 4 times as large as a fully colored in single pixel.
So, optical illusion, nothing is wrong here.
It was also scanned, probably not on top of the line perfect equipment to get the detail of the wood fibers for you.
On April 29 2011 02:03 Body_Shield wrote: The group on the left is actually 4 pixels, but when they are grouped like that it appears that they are not 4 times as large as a fully colored in single pixel.
So, optical illusion, nothing is wrong here.
It was also scanned, probably not on top of the line perfect equipment to get the detail of the wood fibers for you.
Maybe, but the source noted that the rest of the document has consistent pixelation.
Many kinds of document scanners and document archiving software use MRC compression, which takes advantage of the PDF file format's capabilities. It pulls out high-contrast information (like text) and compresses it using a format like PNG which is good at that sort of information, and uses JPEG or some other lossy format for other parts of the image. It can also store different parts of the image at different resolutions depending on the level of detail. That's why some parts of the text are more pixelated than others, or has different compression artifacts, and why the file consists of multiple layers. When you're archiving many thousands (or millions) of documents, the space savings from techniques like this can be very large, which is why they do it. The software can also do OCR to make the documents searchable, and will attach the OCRed text to some of the image layers, or even replace the image layers with text layers, depending on how it's configured.
Well I made a comment in this thread yesterday and I thought that today the thread would already be dead. My bad. I'm honestly baffled with how much importance is given to this matter when there is more important matters to be solved.
I bet no one of the 77 million PSN clients are concerned about Obama right now. Just a guess.
On April 29 2011 02:03 Body_Shield wrote: The group on the left is actually 4 pixels, but when they are grouped like that it appears that they are not 4 times as large as a fully colored in single pixel.
So, optical illusion, nothing is wrong here.
It was also scanned, probably not on top of the line perfect equipment to get the detail of the wood fibers for you.
Maybe, but the source noted that the rest of the document has consistent pixelation.
"consistent pixelation" lol? wtf is that? You're not making sense, look up what a pixel is, it's always constant, the only explanation for the image you posted is that it's a bad photoshop aimed at laymen. A pixel will never have a different "size" lol.
On April 29 2011 02:15 VIB wrote: "consistent pixelation" lol? wtf is that? You're not making sense, look up what a pixel is, it's always constant, the only explanation for the image you posted is that it's a bad photoshop aimed at laymen. A pixel will never have a different "size" lol.
Read my post above. The pixelation is explained by the the types of compression used by document scanning and archiving software.
Can you guys explain why you think the US government is capable of things 1000x more sneaky than this, yet mess up with photoshop? Give me a break. What you guys are saying doesn't even make sense and you know it. You know that it seems weird that the US government would release a REALLY poorly done fake document when they didn't even need to. You don't think the president has the resources to make a fake absolutely fucking perfect?
I don't think its fake, and I realize that I'd never know if it was. The US government isn't some dumb kid on a forum who taught himself photoshop.
EPT![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/zhYyl.jpg)
