They're saying he's an illegitimate president because he's the son of a ******, presumably to rile up one of the birther's significant constituents: the closet redneck.
Last edited:
They're saying he's an illegitimate president because he's the son of a ******, presumably to rile up one of the birther's significant constituents: the closet redneck.
Finally this fucking stupid ass topic, this BS thread and that retarded Stump can STFU and get on with some REAL issues facing this country.
soundforbjt
Lifer
- Feb 15, 2002
- 17,788
- 6,041
- 136
UberNeuman
Lifer
- Nov 4, 1999
- 16,937
- 3,087
- 126
Well, hell - thanks a lot Obama for ruining the of epic lulz from the whining little birthers...
\does this mean now that birthers are now after-birthers?
\does this mean now that birthers are now after-birthers?
werepossum
Elite Member
- Jul 10, 2006
- 29,873
- 463
- 126
Videos popping up all over the web:
If you download the official release:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/birth-certificate-long-form.pdf
and bring it into adobe illustrator and release layers. you can see how this is not a scanned document. This is clearly digitally altered. clearly. No lie look yourself.
look at the youtube vids than try for yourself.
1) why would this have any layers
2) WTF??!!
If you download the official release:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/birth-certificate-long-form.pdf
and bring it into adobe illustrator and release layers. you can see how this is not a scanned document. This is clearly digitally altered. clearly. No lie look yourself.
look at the youtube vids than try for yourself.
1) why would this have any layers
2) WTF??!!
Thump553
Lifer
- Jun 2, 2000
- 12,839
- 2,625
- 136
They aren't like 9/11 truthers, they are the exact same people (for the most part).
I suppose that's an interesting question.
The simplest and therefore most reasonable answer is that the document is electronically created from a computer database. Clerk puts in the name, the database finds it, export to PDF, done deal.
When I make PDF files from AutoCAD, the files have literally dozens of layers. Every single layer that was used to draw the thing in CAD is also a layer in PDF. Every "block" is a layer as well. Having a bunch of layers doesn't mean my drawing is any less valid than one I print then scan to PDF. It would actually be more valid because it's absolute 100% perfect; no jpeg artifacts or scan errors or anything.
And here it is. Proof Positive!!! Well, that Birthers will never give up, that they can't- their world would shatter...
theeedude
Lifer
- Feb 5, 2006
- 35,787
- 6,198
- 126
I know he is a citizen there would be extensive paper trail of his immigration otherwise. However please explain why this is a layered and clearly altered image? try it yourself open it in Adobe illustrate and release the layers.
I know what your trying to say but this isn't the same kind of layering you are talking about. Look at it yourself.
Only thing I can think of is some sort of OCR algorithm when it was scanned but that doesnt make sense because it impacts the signatures. OCR doesn't know about signatures. You are probably right though the simplest explanation is probably the correct one. I'm not an expert in adobe and OCR so what else can I say.
Last edited:
CallMeJoe
Diamond Member
- Jul 30, 2004
- 6,938
- 5
- 81
Perhaps it was layered intentionally to give the Birther industry another ghost to chase...
Stunningly lame. Modern photocopiers are computers, and automagically create enhanced images using a variety of pre-programmed techniques.
That doesn't mean there's a conspiracy.
You're being manipulated, distracted from real issues.
How's that Neocon foreign policy working out?
The Ownership Society?
When are those much ballyhooed "job creators" going to, you know, actually create jobs?
What about the Ryan budget, the one that cuts taxes at the top and cuts everybody else's throat?
wuliheron
Diamond Member
- Feb 8, 2011
- 3,536
- 0
- 0
Even if you tried there is no way to prevent these people from making fools of themselves like so many lemmings marching off a cliff. You can even try pointing out the error of their ways when they fall down, and they'll just get up and do it again. It might be good for a laugh the first few times, but it gets old fast and I'm sure Obama has seen enough of it to last a lifetime.
I see what you are saying when it comes to weird layers. All I can say is that his birth certificate looks a lot like the copies of old engineering drawings we have on file. Back before computers, all engineering drawings were done on big sheets of paper. When computers became practical, they started to scan these drawings as high resolution raster images. They then make a new drafting file with the raster as a background. As we changed or added things to the plan, we would clip out the raster portion and draw in vector graphics. The result is a weird combination of both vector and raster. The raster part looks just like a scanned document; it's a bit fuzzy. The vector stuff looks perfect.
Obama's birth certificate has obviously been passed through an OCR because you can see portions of a word will be recognized as text and redrawn and other portions in that same word are part of the background which is not redrawn. Go to the part where it says birth place of mother. The K in Kansas is original raster and it looks genuinely terrible. The "ansas" part was picked up by the OCR and drawn to look terrible just so it matches the rest of the word. Adobe Acrobat does that if you set it to OCR then downsample. The other options available are to OCR but don't change anything (I use this on official scanned pdf documents) or OCR then redraw as proper text.
I think only one of the signatures looks strange. The local registrar is almost entirely raster as it should be, and attendant is raster as well. Signature of parent seems to be part of the OCR recognized text even though it doesn't look like the type of text that can be read with OCR. “Ann D” appears to be part of the background raster, but “unham Obama” is drawn in separately when zooming.
You asked why it would have so many layers. That's just part of how Acrobat optimizes things. If you scan something, it will try to pick apart objects and save them independently. When I use software to convert a scanned PDF document to a rough approximation for AutoCAD, the software will spit out multiple files. Each of those files it created for AutoCAD was an image layer in the scanned document. Sometimes it doesn't even make sense how it would split up the drawings. Something like a title block around a page will be split up into multiple files because it was recognized as multiple independent images.
Those multiple image layer PDF files I mentioned are generated by the office Xerox copier. I don't make them on my computer. If the people scanning that page have the same copier I have at my work, then that's why it isn't flat. Something about having multiple images makes it easier to compress somehow, or the compression is more effective.
Last edited:
The person who took one of the two paper copies that made the trip from Hawai'i to Washington didn't know how to operate the White House scanner and saved the document in a suboptimal format.
lol. This. When I first got the office scanner I fucked around the OCR stuff for a couple hours to see how it works. Just changing 1 or 2 things can completely ruin a document. There was also an option in one of the menus to "reduce file size" which works really really well in vector based PDF stuff I make, but it will downsample the hell out of raster and make it look like shit.
I am not a birther and frankly think the entire argument is retarded at this point in time BUT I read something rather interesting...
The image is a color scan. Don't the laws of physics concerning light passing through a lens make some sort of chromatic artifacts necessary? They are present in the one scanned by the AP because they scanned it with a color scanner. The original released by the WH, OTOH, has no chromatic artifacts whatsoever. Isn't that impossible if it is indeed a color scan? Isn't it impossible for it NOT to be a color scan if it is indeed legit? If it is NOT a color scan, which would explain the lack of chromatic artifacts, wouldn't that mean it was created digitally?
The image is a color scan. Don't the laws of physics concerning light passing through a lens make some sort of chromatic artifacts necessary? They are present in the one scanned by the AP because they scanned it with a color scanner. The original released by the WH, OTOH, has no chromatic artifacts whatsoever. Isn't that impossible if it is indeed a color scan? Isn't it impossible for it NOT to be a color scan if it is indeed legit? If it is NOT a color scan, which would explain the lack of chromatic artifacts, wouldn't that mean it was created digitally?
How did that person manage to make a color scan that has ZERO chromatic artifacts?
This is way outside the realm of my expertise so I would really appreciate an actual answer from someone who knows about the subject but as I understand it they should be present if it is indeed a color scan.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter