Skip to comments.Genuine, World-Class Computer Expert Evaluates Obama’s Birth Certificate PDF
Posted on 09/27/2012 9:45:53 PM PDT by Tex-Con-Man
click here to read article
I am a software developer, and I understand what the article is saying and agree with it. I never thought that analyzing PDFs was a good way to investigate anything.
The fact that Obama’s own publicist said for years in Obama’s bio that he was born in Kenya speaks volumes. I really don’t understand why people aren’t hammering Obama on these bios every signle day.
“That observation is not helping your argument at all. The Green Background hash pattern is known not to be normal on Hawaiian birth certificates of that era. It shouldn’t be in the background at all, let alone have a typewritten “R” on top of it.”
If they scan the paper copy of the BC into a computer at the DOH and print that onto green security paper, or if they just put the book containing the BC on top of the copier and print that on to green security paper, won’t the security paper’s pattern appear to have an “R” on it?
Add atty Larry Klayman to your list...his case is still alive in the State of Florida.
Which was my point. The dots per inch (and degree of color resolution. AKA bit depth ) is fixed, and it is a characteristic of the display device.
But as I'm sure you know, with a vector graphic the computer "knows" what shape it's drawing. (Can I say "knows" metaphorically without an objection that a computer doesn't really know anything?)
Vector graphics are merely a series of lines, curves, etc between points with various support instructions such as fill, etc. They are first drawn in computer memory, and then before they are rendered, they are converted to a pixel pattern, i.e. an "image" for the display device.
Similarly, software trying to do OCR "knows" where the text is and in some circumstances creates a different image for it, aka renders it differently.
It "knows" where is text that it has decoded. It doesn't "know" where text is that it has not or cannot decode. Your argument is that it can decode a "B" an "A", miss an "R" , but then get the next "A","C,"and "K" without any problem. This sounds like a Deus ex machina sort of claim if you ask me. (Literally)
Pardon me if I find it dubious. It is odd that such a mistake just happens to be on a name which is virtually guaranteed to not be findable in a complete form anywhere else in their database.
Did the “R” mess up on both the father’s name and the son’s?
That is a very good point. Not it is not. It is all in the same resolution. That tends to indicate the name was not pasted together. If it were, you would expect both names to have the same sort of flaw.
Upon examining it though, it brings another point to mind. The Checkbox with an "X" in it is in the same resolution as most of the other letters, yet if OCR is going to fail, it will most assuredly be on that "X" that is crookedly on the checkbox. (Just under the Child's name "Barack")
I also notice that the letters making up the fathers names are not exact copies of the letters making up the son's name. What that means is that the process treated those letters as images, not as Ascii characters. One of the compression methods is to substitute a specific token image for all representations of the same letter (Takes one byte instead of several hundred.) That is obviously not occurring here. The letters are being treated exactly as if they were images.
It still makes no sense why the pixel resolution and bit depth change from one letter to another. Even if you assume it was some sort of error, it makes no sense. The "X" not quite aligned up on the checkbox should have been an OCR error, and it wasn't handled the same way as was that "R".
What about the very top of the “l” in “male”, the “g” in “Single”, the “p” in “Triplet”, the comma in the DOB (compared to the comma in box 7c after “Honolulu”), the “M” in “P.M.”. Aren’t they all at the same resolution as the green background and the “R” in “BARACK”?
Look at box 6c “Name of Hospital or Institution” are all the letters at the same resolution?
Look at the “K” in Kenya versus the “K”s in “Kapiolani” or “Kalanianaola”. Notice when a letter is very close to or touching a graphic element its resolution is the same as the graphic element.
So since we are unwilling to admit there are unexplained anomolies here, then we must conclude therefore that all is well? OK, your work here is done Dr. Queiroz, you may pick up your check at the desk before you leave Obama headquarters.