Anyone find any "layers" in 0dumba's tax returns?
Posted on 07/20/2012 2:06:28 PM PDT by Seizethecarp
The layers have been the most damning and problematic evidence of file-manipulation, and the defenders of Obama are quick to respond with a plethora of explanations to justify the presence of layers. The excuses range from OCR (Optical Character Recognition) software to the more predominant excuse of optimization -- both of which have been debunked in my previous report for the Cold Case Posse press conference.
Many Obama defenders have conceded that OCR is not a factor and admit that OCR was never applied to the PDF file. However, arguments for optimization still persist. Optimization refers to a file-saving process in which the goal is to reduce the file size while maintaining (or optimizing) the quality of the image (as best as possible depending on the settings applied).
Those who insist on the optimization argument either do not understand what attributes need to be present for this argument to hold water -- or they are hoping the general public does not understand. It's probably a little of both. The defenders certainly count on the ignorance of the average citizen when it comes to understanding the differences in layers produced from an automated process (such as optimization) compared to a manual choice to manipulate the file. One goal of the report is to offer a deeper understanding for recognizing the two patterns of layering (and to avoid being deceived or bamboozled). The report adds additional proof along the way that the optimization excuse fails miserably and can be completely ruled out as a justification for layers.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
ping to Mara Zebest layer analysis update...
bttt
This is a clear indication that someone in Photoshop or Illustrator dragged or copied only the black area of the form and entries onto a 'green security paper image' background. This is the only possible explanation for the white halos. The black content (form and entries) was originally on a white or light blue background. The green security paper background was used to trick America into thinking the birth certificate was authentic.
And the Missing National Archives records Aug. 1 through Aug. 7, 1961 could be in Sandy Berger’s socks!!
Who has a pieced together BC???
Felons committing ID theft!
Frog march his highness to the hoosegows pronto!
Ricky and Janet Murdered around 80 US citizens Men, Women, and Children at Waco.
GW did nothing.
Are you noticing a pattern here?
It isn't R vs D.
It's US vs the instilled aristocracy.
.
.
.
As for OCR, what does that have to do with a supposedly type written document supposedly created in 1961? The technology did not even exist then.
Layers of Bull S when Odumba and Cow-Odumba signed them.
It’s called security paper for a reason....SO why didn’t they just create a file and print it directly on the paper? Did they also create virtual paper?
It is to some people. They prefer to believe conventional wisdom than to think for themselves. Not sure why? Perhaps they believe Obama and his evil minions are surely smarter than to offer up such a shoddy forgery.
Or perhaps Obama and his evil minions really are smarter than those who continue to believe Obama wouldn't cheat and lie and pull every rotten trick in the book to hold onto power.
The reason is because there is a very limited number of high level people in on this conspiracy. Do you really expect a "David Axelrod" level person to know details about digital document manipulation?
Back in the late 1980s and early 1990s, “document automation” became viable for the first time. There was enough processing power and storage to - barely - convert warehouses of documents from paper to digital form. The key problem was “barely”. Document scanning, as we know it today, requires far more storage space than was affordable back then.
I remember being amazed, at that time when I worked for a large insurance company handling large volumes of documents, at the brilliant insight of Xerox et al in solving this storage problem. The workable solution was to scan the image as a whole, then identify various components of the image and process them as different sections at different resolutions, color depths, and even duplication or elimination of sections.
Consider a standard pre-printed form, partially typed in (for those of you who remember typewriters), and partially marked up & signed by hand. Most of the document can in fact be thrown away: the bulk of the paper is just empty space with a little random visual noise (dust, dots, etc.). Much of the document is unimportant, and may be rendered at low resolution with color depth as low as 1 bit; for large volumes of near-identical forms, some of the pre-printed content can even be duplicated across documents or copied from a standard template. Some of the content can be recognized with OCR software, reducing a relatively high pixel count down to just a few bytes of text, font, size, and position. Some of the content is more important, or unusable at extremely low resolutions or color depths, so it is rendered at medium resolutions with more bits per pixel. Part of the image is deemed of high legal importance and is thus stored at high quality (and high data count). Result is a mix of discarded, converted, low, medium, and high quality image data - all which take up an absolute minimum of space and still capable of being assembled into a legally viable copy of the original document.
This was a big thing at the time. Most people didn’t know this, and don’t know it today, because it was a complex process involving lots of expensive equipment stored in limited-access computer rooms. LOTS of documents were converted with this process, often coupled with outright destruction of the original documents as the digital renderings were deemed legal equivalents. Among IT and data warehousing departments, such “document automation” became fashionable and huge amounts of paper forms were subjected thereto at great cost and effort. Government agencies led the way, having vast piles of stagnant paper and near-endless funds to “automate” them.
I remember at the time thinking “wow, that’s all really cool...but someday, what’s considered a legal equivalent now won’t cut it.” Someday the various layers, scanned and compressed and converted based on assumptions, would be assembled into an equivalent of the original - and be deemed inadequate, if not an outright forgery. Someday has arrived.
By now it is more likely that they’re stored in Hillary Clinton’s jockstrap and only Huma can access them.
I know Mara and am trying to get her to post on here.....she has the link and is monitoring this post....
I always look at both sides and want to see what the Libs are posting..... Does anyone have a comment on this site debunking the Sheriff?
http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/valleyfever/2012/07/joe_arpaios_new_birther_eviden.php
It’s based on the Dr. Conspiracy site which itself is based on misinformation from the so-called Dr. Conspiracy, plus a document he claimed to obtain that can’t be independently corroborated as authentic. IOW, nothing has been debunked.
With all due respect to your expertise, what does this have to do with two certified paper copies of Obama's original birth certificate being flown from Hawaii to Washington D.C. in a lawyer's hands and then being presented in PDF format to the world as the real thing?
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.