.
.
.
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!
.
.
.
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.
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
I’m convinced.
Now how does anyone proceed further with this? The Congress, and the Courts simply are scared to touch it because of the scandal that will ensue.
From Mara:
“Jay —
I’m waiting on an email to authorize my register info before I can post but in the mean time... you need to tell ctdonath2 that all of his posts are irrelevant to the topic... all the misdirection information he posted would not apply to a microfiche storage of birth certificate information... so I’m having a WTF moment on why he’s even going down the road he travels. He clearly has no understanding of the pertinent points to the discussion and should start by reading my article and report... and to also check out the link to my first report (released for the Cold Case Posse)... that report explains why OCR is not a factor...
Mara”
Here she comes!!!!
If the internet document presented is an exact copy of the original, then what would be the rationale for keeping the original hidden?
Republican establishment doesn’t care since they have two anchor babies up for consideration for VP and they would rather run against Obama than Hillary.
This is the link to an article on American Thinker by Mara Zebest, who is identified as an expert in various software and computer areas: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/07/new_obama_birth_certificate_forgery_proof_in_the_layers.html
After I sent this article to numerous people, I received comments from two of those people. I sent those comments to Ms. Zbest without identifying the people who made the comments. Below I reproduce those two comments and the relevant portion of her response to the comments.
Hopefully, those who made the comments will comment on her response by telling me whether they agree or disagree, and the reasons why.
Comment #1:
Scanners make layers, often whether you want them to or not.
Zebest Respone:
Scanners do NOT make layers... but some software such as Adobe Acrobat or OCR software can create layers during the saving process after the scanner finishes the task. For example the computer system could be configured to use Acrobat to optimize as a PDF as the scanner finishes the scanning process... then yes the scan results will ultimately have layers (but not from the scanning itself but rather the software used in combination with the scanner). And these type of layers will fall into the “automated layer” pattern I described in my report. The layers in Obama’s document FAIL to meet the pattern of an automated layering process.... but Obama’s document shows EVERY POSSIBLE INDICATION of image manipulation.
My recent report goes beyond proving the image manipulation on a visual level... but proves it on an object code level. The layers in Obama’s file CANNOT be produced by any normal document handling process. Additionally, the white halos and lack of chromatic aberration in Obama’s file proves that NO SCANNING PROCESS OCCURRED.
Simply copy and paste my challenge at the end of the article to this person or persons and ask them to send the resulting file (that contains layers) and provide the software specs and settings that produced the file (the entire digital chain recipe). Let’s match the object code and see if they have anything close to Obama’s file.
I will bet anything that the layer object code they will see from optimizing will contain only a SINGLE 1-bit ImageMask true layer... and ALL REMAINING LAYERS WILL BE 8-bit. This is simply a matter of how the optimizing algorithm works... no getting around it. This pattern is not in Obama’s file. Plain and simple.
Comment #2:
When you import a scanned bitmap into Adobe Illustrator (or other vector-based drawing tools) the software automatically breaks the elements it traces out into individual layers.
Zebest Response:
False... and again... present the challenge to have this person send the file for examination along with a list of all software involved and how the scanner is configured to use the software during the scan and the settings when saving the file. Essentially the entire digital chain recipe for all to verify. Give them the screen capture of the object code (from my article) and ask if the layers contain the same attributes... multiple 1-bit layers that contain colors other than black?
I guarantee you’ll hear crickets chirping while waiting for the proof... it doesn’t exist.
########