O's birth certificate proven fake using illustrator

Are you going to listen to some 16 year old punk kid who probably torrented his copy of Adobe Creative Suite last week or a guy who's been doing design longer than this kid has been alive?

There's nothing fishy about this document. This is what happens when you scan directly into Acrobat Pro. It separates text and other elements from background and images and creates "layers" that, if you have OCR enabled, can then be saved as the OCR'd text which can be readable/searchable/editable or, in this case, compressed and turned into bitmap data (and for obvious reasons they wouldn't leave the text editable).

I encourage you to try it yourselves if you have Acrobat Pro and a scanner handy.

I couldn't give a shit about the whole birther movement or Obama. I can't stand technological ignorance paraded out as fact though. Fuck these assholes and their "oooh, it's got layers" bullshit. They don't know what the fuck they are talking about. Trust me.
 


Rexibit said:
Fox is not everything wrong with the media. They have their faults, just like every other news agency. They report better on certain issues than other agencies, just as other agencies report better than them on certain things.

You're just upset that the company that owns them tells their employees to report on an issue more than other agencies. That's the root cause of this, not the agency themselves.

Media is suppose to be free press where journalists spend their time hunting down the facts on issues that matter, and report on it all in a fair, unbiased way so that the consumer of that information can make their own decisions from it. That hasn't happened in decades.

Corportations that buy the news agencies want to push their own agenda, not cover certain news items, or not tell the full story. Journalists want a job, so they run with it. Also, politicians and other people will buy coverage to push their own agenda, and that gets thrown into the mix. When you have all that, you don't get fair, unbiased news reporting.

That is what's wrong with the media.

Get your head out of your ass and see that.
Click to expand...

Fox threatened to sue me about a year ago because I had an lp at ringtonekings.com and they said I was infringing on their copyright for "ringtone king." What a fucking joke of a company.

I really don't give a shit if it's fake or not, and this is coming from a straight up Republican who has almost no respect for Obama.
 
ly2 from WF said:
Is this real? I mean, I don't know jack shit about photoshop or illistrator, but the dude makes a pretty clear and legit sounding argument.

Anyone form the anti-birther group come up with an explanation?
Click to expand...

If you dont know jack shit....then read the posts made above by FatBat that have already explained this in detail.
 
29cvz0h.jpg



Let's not talk about last weeks news!:1bluewinky:
 
Fatbat said:
Are you going to listen to some 16 year old punk kid who probably torrented his copy of Adobe Creative Suite last week or a guy who's been doing design longer than this kid has been alive?

There's nothing fishy about this document. This is what happens when you scan directly into Acrobat Pro. It separates text and other elements from background and images and creates "layers" that, if you have OCR enabled, can then be saved as the OCR'd text which can be readable/searchable/editable or, in this case, compressed and turned into bitmap data (and for obvious reasons they wouldn't leave the text editable).

I encourage you to try it yourselves if you have Acrobat Pro and a scanner handy.

I couldn't give a shit about the whole birther movement or Obama. I can't stand technological ignorance paraded out as fact though. Fuck these assholes and their "oooh, it's got layers" bullshit. They don't know what the fuck they are talking about. Trust me.
Click to expand...

Serious question- when you scan images like you are saying, does the text/writing look like it was created on a computer after the fact like the kid in the video said and also what I and many others have been able to see. I do not ever scan docs so I cant answer this.
 
BlokBlok said:
Serious question- when you scan images like you are saying, does the text/writing look like it was created on a computer after the fact like the kid in the video said and also what I and many others have been able to see. I do not ever scan docs so I cant answer this.
Click to expand...

92936-2-date-accepted-by-reg-general-field-has-inconsistent-color-depth-on-t.jpg


^^^^ this is what I mean, the whole doc is like that when you zoom in, is that the scanner?
 
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5AlAFj9bnO8&feature=related]YouTube - Onion[/ame]
 
Fatbat said:
Are you going to listen to some 16 year old punk kid who probably torrented his copy of Adobe Creative Suite last week or a guy who's been doing design longer than this kid has been alive?

There's nothing fishy about this document. This is what happens when you scan directly into Acrobat Pro. It separates text and other elements from background and images and creates "layers" that, if you have OCR enabled, can then be saved as the OCR'd text which can be readable/searchable/editable or, in this case, compressed and turned into bitmap data (and for obvious reasons they wouldn't leave the text editable).

I encourage you to try it yourselves if you have Acrobat Pro and a scanner handy.

I couldn't give a shit about the whole birther movement or Obama. I can't stand technological ignorance paraded out as fact though. Fuck these assholes and their "oooh, it's got layers" bullshit. They don't know what the fuck they are talking about. Trust me.
Click to expand...
I totally get you on the layers thing, I'm with you on the youtube guy being wrong about that.

But what about the blackness of the handwriting? It does look very black in parts.
 
The document was saved at 72 dpi... ie, low resolution for viewing at regular magnification on your screen. This is the document at 100%...

osama-birth-cert.jpg


There is no more data available than the pixels you see on the screen right now. That's it. It's not particularly black but zooming in to 400%, or 800% or whatever causes the computer to interpolate the data and draw in black pixels that don't exist. Zooming in and claiming it looks pixelated like it was made on the computer is misleading. If you zoom in on any 72 dpi image it will look pixelated.
 
Fatbat said:
The document was saved at 72 dpi... ie, low resolution for viewing at regular magnification on your screen. This is the document at 100%...

osama-birth-cert.jpg


There is no more data available than the pixels you see on the screen right now. That's it. It's not particularly black but zooming in to 400%, or 800% or whatever causes the computer to interpolate the data and draw in black pixels that don't exist. Zooming in and claiming it looks pixelated like it was made on the computer is misleading. If you zoom in on any 72 dpi image it will look pixelated.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, now someone upload a similar looking doc with printed text and writing with a pen in 72dpi that we can zoom in and re-enforce your point.
 
Fatbat said:
Are you going to listen to some 16 year old punk kid who probably torrented his copy of Adobe Creative Suite last week or a guy who's been doing design longer than this kid has been alive?

There's nothing fishy about this document. This is what happens when you scan directly into Acrobat Pro. It separates text and other elements from background and images and creates "layers" that, if you have OCR enabled, can then be saved as the OCR'd text which can be readable/searchable/editable or, in this case, compressed and turned into bitmap data (and for obvious reasons they wouldn't leave the text editable).
Click to expand...

I'd love to see the debunk conspiracy video where someone scans in a similar document, and achieves a similar result. I searched youtube and there are 50 videos just like this one, but couldn't find a debunk one. I would do it, but I only use photoshop, no illustrator or acrobat pro.

Another thing that bugs me is that the White House claimed the short form certificate of birth was the only birth certificate in existence, so they are definitely back tracking on that. Also, from what I understand, when
Neil Abercrombie was elected as governor of Hawaii, he said he was going to get and release the birth certificate, only to later say he couldn't find it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom