Replies

I am dealing with the facts. The facts are that there were two PDFs of the document released that day. One PDF (the one you are focused on) has a number of abnormalities, which could have been caused by a human forger or which could have been caused by scanning/OCR/optimization. The other PDF (which you have ignored as “deflect[ion]”) has none of the abnormalities of the first.

Assuming that your argument is correct and that the inconsistent pixel size and color gradation of Dunham’s signature is evidence that the signature was forged electronically, how is it possible that the other PDF (in which the pixel size and color gradation of the signature are consistent with other similar text in the document) even exists?

Jeesh. Computer generated and computer viewing are not the same. How far you guys will go to avoid the truth. Review all the Hawaii Department of Health descriptions of exactly what a computer generated ‘Certificate of Live Birth’ is. You can also read White House General Counsel Bob Bauer's description of what a computer generated birth certificate from Hawaii is. It is an abstract of an original birth certificate created in a computer and then printed out from the computer.
You do not need to get a ‘waiver’ from Hawaii in order to get a computer generated birth certificate. Obama says he asked for a ‘waiver’ to get a photocopy of his original birth certificate. Hawaii granted his request and say they gave him photocopies. What you see on the White House website is not a scanned photocopy. It's very simple. The minutia of all the different ways the document was forged are secondary.