Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

EXCLUSIVE! OBAMA'S FAKE BIRTH CERTIFICATE: How the forgery was made.
The Greater Evil ^ | 07/23/08 | Polarik

Posted on 07/23/2008 12:40:56 PM PDT by Polarik

There are three facts about Internet blog stories that you need to know:

  1. Plagiarism is rampant on the Internet.
  2. You cannot always believe what you see and read.
  3. When you see the word, "EXCLUSIVE," in the title, it does not mean that the story was the first one or even the only one.
You can imagine my chagrin when I read the following headline in the Atlasshruggs blog:

ATLAS EXCLUSIVE: FINAL REPORT ON OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE FORGERY CHANGE YOU CAN BELIEVE IN

What this headline, and the story it trumpets, confirm is that all three of the "facts" listed above are validated by this story.

Actually, my first reaction to it was, "Yawn." Here is an article proclaiming to have the exclusive findings that Obama's Birth Certificate image is a forgery -- or, using the acronym that I alone coined, Obama's "COLB ("Certificate of Live Birth") is a forgery.

The only problems with that statement are as follows:

In light of the above, my second reaction to it was, "What chutzpah!" (Which is the Yiddish word for "WTF.")

How can an article, posted
on July 20, or a full month after my original proclamation that Obama's COLB image was graphically altered, be labeled as exclusive? I will admit that the techniques used by the author, TechDude, were not the ones I used to discover the forgery, and that he was the only one, to my knowledge, to have used them.

For that, I'd like to offer a pat on the back to TechDude for the work that he did, but also a slap on the wrist, to both Techdude and Pam Geller for misleading the public by implying that they were the first ones to present evidence of a graphic forgery.

Now, that they've basked in the glory of their nonexclusive, "Exclusive," it's time to set the record straight.

On June 19, I wrote the following on my TownHall blog, The Greater Evil:

"The Daily Kos blog has posted a JPG that allegedly is Barack Obama's "Certificate of Birth." From a detailed analysis of the image and the text, it looks like it was created by a graphics program, and is not a true copy of an original, certified document."

So, which part of that statement did they miss? It also appeared on The Free Republic about the same time, and afterwards, on TexasDarlin's blog.

So, which part of these blog stories did they miss?

In my first post, I did make some wrong assumptions, for which I replied, Mea Culpa, and made the necessary changes.

For example,
I also made mention of the odd-looking border back then, but that finding turned out to be irrelevant to my research.

However, my essential thesis was then, and has always been, that the Kos image, and all of its relatives, including the FactCheck image, were graphic forgeries, even though I focused on different aspects of it than TechDude did. For him, the border was a crucial part of the puzzle.

For me, that border could have been red hearts and purple flowers for all that it mattered.

I focused on the anomalies of the text, which were many and not explained away by the reasons cited by my critics.

Now, this is not to take away any of the work that TechDude has done, which is notable in its own right, and if you read my blog, you will see proper attributions made to him and his work.

HOWEVER, I do take exception to the lack of any attribution to my work, and is a very egregious oversight, at best.

At worst, it smacks of plagiarism, and there are more than one instance of that, such as the upper left-hand border comparison which was originally mine and emailed to him.

Also egregious is the fact that TechDude, myself, and TexasDarlin had agreed to publish a joint document, and, as you have now seen, one of us renegged on that agreement and stole the spotlight.

I don't mean to rain on anyone's parade here, but I would like to point out that there never
was an "uncropped Kos image" posted online. A scan of the entire COLB was never posted to the Kos or the Smears. It was always a cropped image, and I was the one who confirmed the true "birth order" of the images -- especially those of OpenDNA (who was initially "charged" with making the Kos image forgery.

Now, the FactCheck image was, indeed, posted as an uncropped version of the Kos image, although one cannot escape the likelihood that the extra border was added, post-hoc.

What I did confirm is that all of the online images came from one source file.


I also confirmed that my critics and detractors, coincidentally, are also the same to TechDude and his research. It is safe to say that there will always be
people who are antagonistic to others who reveal unpleasant truths.

But, now is the time to separate the men from the boys, so to speak. The critics and detractors who claim that the Kos image is NOT a forgery, demand to see someone actually create one from scratch.

I couldn't agree more. it is one thing to postulate that a forgery has been created, but it is entirely a different matter to actually create one that is a clone of the Kos image.

What may surprise these critics and detractors to learn is that beginning about two to three weeks ago, a clone of the Kos I created was posted to my latest blog post.

You see, the image that I referenced as the original Kos imageis actually the clone I created more from Michele's 2008 COLB image.

Here's the Daily Kos image from their website:



Here's my clone of the Kos image:



Keep in mind that this is not a point-for-point clone of the Kos image, since I did not proceed from an original, scanned image (a bitmap that has never been seen by the public), but it's darn close, and nobody was the wiser.

How do you tell my clone from Kos?

The "Time of Birth" on my clone is 7:25 AM; on the Kos it's 7:24 PM.

I replaced everything, EXCEPT the funky border. Like I said, the "security" border is not very secure when it can be reproduced by a scanner.

Making an exact "forgery" in terms of the Kos image dimensions, file size, JPG compression and resolution was not an easy job, although I spent less about an hour to make it. I'm still feeling the effects of a flu bug.

In the next few days, when I feel a little better, I will post a real "exclusive" --  a step by step guide showing exactly how I produced this clone, as well as posting a sampling of all of the dead ends I reached using the explanations professed by the nonbelievers.

I have about 320 images in all, but I'll post a sufficient number of them to satisfy anyone's doubts.

Like I've said in previous posts and in comments made on other blogs, if someone can make a Kos clone just by scanning, reducing the size, changing the compression, or any combination of these ways, they are more than encouraged to try.

Until then, I stand by my conclusion that I made over a month ago: that the Kos image looks the way it does because the original text on a previous image was graphically altered or replaced.

"Why" it was done is still open for debate, but the discovery that I made over a month ago still holds true. The image is not a "horrible" forgery, IMHO, because it fooled a lot of people...and that's the sole purpose for making a forgery.

Hopefully, the critics and detractors will come up with their own clones made in the ways that they claimed. In the meantime, the evidence provided in my posts and in TechDude's posts far outweigh any evidence that the images are are genuine, accurate reproductions of a paper COLB document.


It may look like a duck, but it walks, talks, and flies like a Dodo bird.



PREVIEW:

When I received a true copy of a recent COLB from a person named, Michele, I promised my readers that I would manufacture a clone of the Kos image to demonstrate how it was created. In doing so, I would validate my theory that someone's actual COLB, or a scanned copy of it, was used as the basis or template for creating a forgery.

I had theorized that the pixel patterns between the letters on the Kos image I was viewing were not JPG artifacts, or scanner artifacts, as the critics claimed they were.

These pixel patterns were characteristic of text added to an existing image while the image was an 8-bit, 256-color bitmapped image, and not while it was a 24-bit, 16.7 million color JPG.

Before I reached that conclusion, I had tried every other way possible to duplicate the Kos image.

People may say that OpenDNA, aka Jay McKinnon, already tried to do that -- that he produced two images that were also graphically altered.

However, both of these images were 800 x 781 pixels  @ 96 DPI, which is a far cry from the larger, 2427 x 2369 pixels @ 300 DPI Kos image. Basically, OpenDNA's "forgeries" were easy to do given how small was the area that needed to be modified.

"Cloning" the Kos took a little, more work than that.


I ask that all of you to be patient as I recover, and that you will soon be rewarded with the recipe for forgery.


TOPICS: Conspiracy; Politics; Reference; Weird Stuff
KEYWORDS: birth; birthcertificate; certificate; certifigate; colbaquiddic; forgery; kos; newbie; obama; obamatruthfile; pl
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 221-240241-260261-280 ... 381-384 next last
To: Conspiracy Guy


241 posted on 07/25/2008 7:57:00 AM PDT by MeekOneGOP (McRINO needs reach across the aisle to Conservatives for a CHANGE! Dang him!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 228 | View Replies]

To: MeekOneGOP

Racist!


242 posted on 07/25/2008 8:02:19 AM PDT by Conspiracy Guy (I voted Republican because no Conservatives were running.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 241 | View Replies]

To: Arthur Wildfire! March; potlatch; y'all

I know that when Lord Obama objected to use of his middle
name (”Hussein”), Mark Levin reviewed recent Presidents
and named them off using their FULL names. The media has
used candidates full names for YEARS.

When he came to Richard “Milhous” Nixon, Levin declared
that from that moment forward he would dub Obama as
Barack “Milhous” Obama.

And he has stuck by that, too!


243 posted on 07/25/2008 8:05:57 AM PDT by MeekOneGOP (McRINO needs reach across the aisle to Conservatives for a CHANGE! Dang him!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 217 | View Replies]

To: Arthur Wildfire! March; potlatch; y'all


244 posted on 07/25/2008 8:06:37 AM PDT by MeekOneGOP (McRINO needs reach across the aisle to Conservatives for a CHANGE! Dang him!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 217 | View Replies]

To: bvw
Polarik can learn a lot from Tech Dude. As Tech Dude said some days ago -- image forensics is an interesting field and there's aplenty of work in it. Tech Dude has his stuff down pretty well -- extraordinarily well. (Compare his work to that of the professor whose paper he referenced, for one thing.) Still -- presentation skills are all important when making great tech work viable in the big world. Tech Dude and polarik both need some work in that regard. THAT is a very hard skill to master.

I find your comment a bit condescending. What exactly can I learn from TechDude? Humility? When he goes on record as saying that "nobody else found what he found," when he knows that I preempted him on more than one occasion.

Should I learn "How to stab a colleague in the back?" "How to plagiarize someone's work?" "How to break commitments?"

Please enlighten me.

I have almost 40 years of computer experience and 20 years of computer graphics experience. That trumps his experience.I was a professor of Research for 15 years,

and if you read all twelve of my posts, you'd know that I followed the scientific method throughout, sand explained terms in ways that people could understand.

245 posted on 07/25/2008 8:20:41 AM PDT by Polarik ("The Greater Evil")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 234 | View Replies]

To: bvw

Very interesting theory.

Do you suppose passenger manifest on those flights could be dug up by any chance?


246 posted on 07/25/2008 8:42:12 AM PDT by m4629
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 225 | View Replies]

To: Polarik
Is it still the season for soft-shell crabs? Pioneers take arrows in their backs -- are you a pioneer or a sad-sack? Yep, it was condescending, my comment, sure, yep, sure.

So what?

247 posted on 07/25/2008 8:54:41 AM PDT by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 245 | View Replies]

To: bvw

Now I have a question on travel document.

If Obama was indeed born in Kenya and came back to the States with Ann shortly, what travel document did he use?

Or did Ann register Obama’s foreign birth at the closest American Consulate to get his own passport?

Was it possible for baby Obama to travel on Ann’s passport alone without any documentation? Mind you they had to travel through a few countries.


248 posted on 07/25/2008 8:55:29 AM PDT by m4629
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 225 | View Replies]

To: bvw

The part about Anna Toot comes from Obama’s relatives in Africa that is the name his mother told them and by which they refer to her as per an article written there.

Obama’s family tree lists an Anna Toot as a direct ancestor on his mother’s side, so it is not a name taken from thin air.

Without a copy of the Original marriage certificate, the Original divorce decree and of course the first Birth certificate it is all reasoned speculation based upon the written words of Obama and his family in books and articles.


249 posted on 07/25/2008 8:56:58 AM PDT by usmcobra (I sing Karaoke the way it was meant to be sung, drunk, badly and in Japanese)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 224 | View Replies]

To: m4629

Don’t know.


250 posted on 07/25/2008 8:58:06 AM PDT by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 246 | View Replies]

To: Calpernia

OK, now I see it. Sorry about that. Sometimes, I have trouble separating out the quote from the quoter as I tend to read things from the last to the first.


251 posted on 07/25/2008 8:59:10 AM PDT by Polarik ("The Greater Evil")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 226 | View Replies]

To: m4629
Was it possible for baby Obama to travel on Ann’s passport alone without any documentation? Mind you they had to travel through a few countries.

As best I understand as a babe in arms, he wouldn't have needed a passport or even other documentation. Different ethos then.

Don't know regarding the other questions.

252 posted on 07/25/2008 9:01:51 AM PDT by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 248 | View Replies]

To: MeekOneGOP

Thanks for the tip. It sure would be nice to have an editing function, though.


253 posted on 07/25/2008 9:02:08 AM PDT by Polarik ("The Greater Evil")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 213 | View Replies]

To: usmcobra

Thanks for clarifying.


254 posted on 07/25/2008 9:02:33 AM PDT by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 249 | View Replies]

To: m4629; bvw; usmcobra

I saw this on Israeli Insider. If usmcobra’s theory is correct, this comment fits it and also shows how Obama could have gotten a US Passport without a B.C.:

http://web.israelinsider.com/Articles/Politics/12993.htm

In the comments by a poster named muzhik:

Obama may never have had to produce his birth certificate to get a passport. As a baby, he would have been included in his mother’s passport as a “family passport”. Whoever took her application may not have required her baby’s BC — it’s the ‘60s, she’s white, the daddy’s black, and it’s not like the kid will ever run for president. Sloppy by today’s standards, but not necessarily by the standards of the time.

After that, it’s just a matter of keeping the passport renewed. When he turned 14, Obama would have gotten his own passport, using the “family” passport as proof of citizenship. If he kept his passport renewed, he never would have needed to produce a certified birth certificate.


255 posted on 07/25/2008 9:04:55 AM PDT by Calpernia (Hunters Rangers - Raising the Bar of Integrity http://www.barofintegrity.us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 248 | View Replies]

To: bvw

Most of the links to the stories I got the info from are on this thread somewhere.


256 posted on 07/25/2008 9:06:33 AM PDT by usmcobra (I sing Karaoke the way it was meant to be sung, drunk, badly and in Japanese)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 254 | View Replies]

To: bvw
>so what?

Exactly.

257 posted on 07/25/2008 9:11:43 AM PDT by Polarik ("The Greater Evil")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 247 | View Replies]

To: Calpernia
Well, that's a reason folks might have particularly interested in his passport file at State.
258 posted on 07/25/2008 9:11:45 AM PDT by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 255 | View Replies]

To: Calpernia

Thank you.

It is possible and makes sense. Rules were a bit more lax in the old days.


259 posted on 07/25/2008 9:12:18 AM PDT by m4629
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 255 | View Replies]

To: Polarik

Right-o. Be like a Timex watch.


260 posted on 07/25/2008 9:12:24 AM PDT by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 257 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 221-240241-260261-280 ... 381-384 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson