Posted on 05/06/2011 10:39:58 AM PDT by Red Steel
GRAND JUNCTION, Colo. -- Even after the White House offered up President Obama's birth certificate, there are still those who are questioning it's legitimacy.
One Grand Junction man who works as a graphic artist says he has discovered something strange about the certificate. "There's no doubt that it has been edited and quite significantly," James Colby said.
He's been involved in graphic arts since 2004 and has never had a reason to doubt our president's birthplace. In fact, he says he is politically independent. Yet, Colby says he can't ignore the obvious.
After downloading the birth certificate straight off of the White House's website, he started noticing the apparent flaws in a computer program called Adobe Illustrator.
"Legitimate digitized, scanned documents will always have [a] faded appearance... There are too many jagged features, here." he said as the scoured the certificate. "So, it's not a single document, it's actually 'compositive' layers."
Colby says scanned images should only have one digitized layer. He says President Obama's birth certificate has almost 50 layers. "You can see the layers flash yourself just by rapidly zooming in and out in your web browser. That means that the browser is rendering different layers."
Colby concedes that there are some instances where scanned images produce multiple layers. "It's a program called OCR that converts text in the images into computer readable text," he said. "But, it would never work on signatures. So, the fact that the signatures have been edited discounts the possibility of it being OCR."
Colby continued pointing out the apparent problems. "You'll notice the white background behind these letters, which is also super-imposed, actually covers up a little bit of the 'D' in this word," he explained. "Even his name has been edited, all except for the 'R' in 'Barack.'"
But, Colby can not figure out why the White House would release something so obvious. "The question is why is it so obvious," he said. "Maybe the original certificate was damaged, maybe it was faded, maybe someone was just trying to clean it up. [But,] you'd think if that was the case, they would supply the original certificate just so there would be no suspicions."
Colby says as strange as the edits are, they don't prove a thing. But, he believes that they do point in one direction. "It's definitely been edited in its entirety, so the indication would point to the probability of it being fake," he said. "But, nobody can really make that claim."
Colby isn't alone in believing the birth certificate has been altered. Other graphic artists and various conservative groups from across the country are saying the same thing.
We have a criminal and a total defrauder in the White House. Somebody slipped up and forgot to flatten the phony BC document before releasing it to the public.
I believe the Ben Laden thing is a scheme to take the attention off of the phony BC document and raise Obumba’s ratings. Call me a kook, but there it is. When all is said and done truth will come out. God will win.
This video (the first of 4) shows the same thing in much greater detail with a much more thorough explanation: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7s9StxsFllY&feature=youtu.be
Oh, and the issue of OCR came up and was thoroughly debunked.
Butter and several others looked into what happened to the records after they reached a certain age. But you seem to imply that you know how it was done:
“Since the first thread on this topic I’ve suspected most of the folks looking into it have absolutely no idea how advanced data storage and retrieval has become, nor even how advanced it was even back in 1961. “
Fill us in please.
BTW, I personally know two people that have visited the Dept. of Health in Honolulu - both have said how very run down and out of date the place is.
They are so broke there that they have unpaid furlough days.
In July ‘09, Janice Okubo acting as spokesperson for the Dept. of Health stated; “We don’t destroy vital records, that’s our whole job, to maintain and retain vital records.”
Original records are rarely destroyed even after being put on microfilm, or digitally copied. HI has not confirmed that the originals have indeed been destroyed - not that I have heard. Butter may know something different.
Want a quick peek inside the DOH?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BCyfCHTD0Ps
You don’t see much of it, but you can get a sense that it’s not a nice, modern updated place at all. This is only a tiny piece of the whole film - one day I’ll put a bit more up if anyone wants to see it.
The notice on one clerks window states they don’t take credit or debit cards. OMG!! They don’t even have that capability.
The layers are not the thing. The Actions and backgrounds show that it is a composite; but not certain evidence of fraud.
You should post this everywhere. I don’t think many people are aware of this controversy.
Hey this was settled a couple weeks ago, it is magic, plain and simple. Now I am off to have some free BubbleUp and Rainbow Stew.
Hawaii just recently passed legislation that prohibits the production of long form birth certificates, I can’t imagine why they would have done that?
ML/NJ
What do you think of the Nordyke twins' documents? Were they original enough for you?
ML/NJ
Don't you think it might be a good idea to at least Google Kenya and look at the first reference?
Suggesting that no one referred to Kenya as Keyna before 1963 makes us look like a bunch of fools here.
ML/NJ
One important clue as to the document’s authenticity (or lack thereof) is the difference the two date stamp marks. Given the way these stamps work (e.g., the Month is a single wheel unit of 3 letters: JAN, FEB, MAR,....,AUG,), the day is of 2 separate wheels that rotate, the first being composed of “-, 1, 2, 3” and the second of “1, 2, 3,...,30,31”, the year is either of one wheel unit of four numbers, “1960, 1961, 1962,...,1969” or the first 3 numbers are one wheel unit and the second is one number: “196” “1, 2, 3, 5, 6”.
This must be true of the two date stamps on the BC:
The Month letters of “AUG” MUST have the same pitch and attitude on both stamps. The Year numbers “19” MUST have the same pitch and attitude on both stamps.
Yet, the two stamps are markedly different. That is, the same stamp was not used in both places on the document. Other Hawaiin COLB that I have reviewed have the two stamps perfectly matching. Not only was the same stamp not used — but the pitch and attitude of the letters and numbers are *IMPOSSIBLE* to have the alignment that they have - unless they were digitally created. Ahhh, that is the case: the Date stamps of “AUG -8 1961” are fake. Given they are fake, the entire birth certificate is FAKE!
Hawaii has stated they have the original birth certificates and kept them when they went digital..try and keep up...
Second. Both processes (optimaztion and MRC) retain the pixels comprising this "halo" portion of the scanned image because it's part of the "useful image" area. Where they place them is different. Example. Adobe's optimization will leave the soft edge (halo) pixels on the background, while -according to your link- MRC combines them with the "mask" layer. They don't vanish.
More importantly, neither process has been proven to be involved in this documents creation, and neither will cause this.
first it was arlen spector and the magic bullet now its Obama and the magic birth certificate....now you don’t see it now you do....
Don't hold your breath.
God bless Nate's little heart. He really has tried. But so far he's only shown which way it can't be done.
I'm still waiting for some OBot/OCR camper to show us unequivocally and exactly how this was not intentional graphic manipulation. The NRO guy doesn't come close. For them to show us "txe" step-by-step process that innocently created txe layers and other anomalies in Obama's "new" birth certificate. If it was just a simple scan and saved to a PDF document, then txe OBots should be able to show us easily how in detail. Sofar nothing but crickets and BS.
You'll find they don't say something like "Oh, in the Hawaii state records depository".
I think they are telling a lie. You think they are telling the truth. Which side are you on?
That's been going on since 2008 ~ not before that.
Review what you said ~ they didn't offer to show the repository.
It's possible they only keep the old microfiche, but that's in a deep salt mine in Kansas ~ along with everybody else's old records.
I think you've been pwned by the Hawaii BOH.
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.