Where's the REAL Birth Certificate?

Okay, first off, this thread is about the birth certificate, not selective service nor social security numbers nor any of that stuff. Let’s not threadjack.

Secondly, Sheriff Arpaio’s Cold Case Posse are not the experts they think they are. A real forensic document digital analysis expert should be able to answer the following questions off the top of his or her head, with no more than five seconds’ thought (three is actually pushing it, but I’m being generous here) before beginning to answer, without reference to any printed nor online nor any other reference, and no hints:

• What does the abbreviation “MRC” stand for in relation to documents scanned directly as .PDFs? (That’s the easy one, but I doubt that any of Arpaio’s Posse has any clue to the correct answer, or even that the question exists and is very, very relevant to the Obama birth certificate .PDF on whitehouse.gov, let alone why it’s relevant.)

• Name and describe the functions, parameters, and parameter types (including any return types) of at least three functions, methods, and/or classes from the Adobe Acrobat Developer’s API and/or DOM. Heck, I doubt that any of Arpaio’s posse even knows what the specific difference is between a function and a method, let alone what a class is, nor even the difference between an API and a DOM, or what those abbreviations stand for.

At the very least, one who claims expertise in using Acrobat should be able to do the following easily:

• Scan a pre-printed form, and make it interactive and intelligent, so that a person with Adobe Acrobat Reader can open it and fill it out on-screen, complete with any checkboxes, etc. behaving as they should, any calculations automatically completed, any data validations correct (e.g. if a field is asking for a phone number, it won’t accept anything that isn’t at least in the form of a real phone number; also, if a group of checkboxes is of the type that says, “Check Only One,” if the user checks one of them when another is already checked, the one already checked must be automatically un checked, without affecting any other checkboxes on the form that are not part of that particular “Check Only One” group), and be able to return or store just the filled-in form data by some means, and do all of this without using something like Adobe LiveCycle Designer. Just using Adobe Acrobat Pro.

A real analytical expert in Photoshop should be able to do this with ease:

• Load an image, then call up the “Custom” Filter that comes with Photoshop. It will display a dialog box full of empty boxes. First, describe in advance the specific effect you want to produce (it should be an effect that could not easily be done with any of the other standard Photoshop filters). Secondly, enter the correct information into those boxes to produce precisely that specific effect and no other. You only get one try. No second chances.

Heck, how about this question?

• How many filters, acquire or export handlers, or other add-ons have you personally programmed and developed for any Adobe product, and from where can we download and/or purchase them?

Oh, and for the record, Sheriff Arpaio is acting waaay outside his jurisdiction. He is, as you stated, the Sheriff of Maricopa County, Arizona. His authority begins and ends at the borders of said county. He has legal authority only therein. Perhaps he should stick with doing the job that the voters of Maricopa elected him to do, rather than wasting their money and resources on stuff that has nothing to do with keeping law and order in Maricopa County. I’ve communicated with several people who live there who have been victims of serious crimes, who cannot get any response from the Sheriff because he’s too busy doing other stuff like this that’s frankly none of his official business.

If Obama’s birth certificate is indeed forged, that would be a matter for the Feds.

Whether a law enforcment official is elected or not does not change the hierarchy. Federal Law trumps State Law (Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution), State Law trumps County Law, County Law trumps City / Town / whatever Law.

Any county sheriff has the authority only to enforce the county law in the county.

Here’s another reason why Arpaio’s Cold Case Posse and the other Birther “experts” are incompetent: any real forensic analyst knows that only the best available version of a document or other evidence shouldbe the one analyzed. One never wastes time analyzing a lower resolution .PDF image if a higher resolution one is available. The lower resolution one would never be accepted into court.

This goes for any sort of evidence. If film photos are taken of a crime scene, and negatives are available, the negatives, not any prints thereof, must be the actual submitted and analyzed evidence. If a digital audio recording is made of a conversation, the digitial audio in its original format is the preferred form, as opposed to, say, a copy someone recorded onto an old hissy cassette tape from the digital recording.

When Obama released the long form, he released two certified copies on paper to the AP and UPI. High resolution flat images of those are available on the Internet (you can tell them because they’re not on the green security patterened background).

A third copy was printed on the green security paper, scanned directly into Adobe Acrobat Pro (or maybe Standard) at low resolution and heavily optimized by the MRC algorithms that come with Acrobat (this is done to make the files much smaller, to save download bandwidth), and uploaded to the White House website for public viewing. That public-viewing image was never meant to be actual evidence, and would not be accepted in court even if it’s legit, because higher quality versions are available (including the physical paper copies given to the AP and UPI)!

The very fact that all of these so-called “experts” have been wasting their time on the low resolution WhiteHouse.gov .PDF when higher resolution flat images have been available all along proves how incompetent they are. No real forensic analyst would do that.

Ah, found where I refuted it. It’s the last post in this very thread, in direct Reply to you, so it should’ve appeared in your “My Happenings” page.

But just in case you missed it, here it is again, with me quoting and then soundly refuting in detail each and every one of the false claims from your oldest post in this thread:

---

“Obama has produced nothing but a "short form" of no discernible provenance, …”

Other than the certification of the State Government of Hawaii, including its governor, you mean, and also of people who have handled the physical document.

“…and a "long form" that exists only as a PDF file with multiple layers.”

Flatly not true. The physical certified copy of the document was presented to authorities, and two physical paper copies were given to the major media organizations, including the Associated Press. These were scanned at high resolution and have been available online at AP and UPI websites since very shortly after the release of the “long form” The .PDF file you refer to is a low-quality low-bandwidth image meant only for public use, hosted at whitehouse.gov., and is very highly compressed and low resolution to save bandwidth for people on dial-up, who have to pay for their Internet bandwidth (e.g. cell phone data plan overages, etc.), etc. It is not suitable for any sort of analysis.

“Somebody put that second file together from disparate elements, …”

Spoken like someone who has absolutely no idea, at all, of how the MRC algorithms (do you even know what that stands for?) that are part and parcel of the Adobe Acrobat Paper Capture subsystem built into Adobe Acrobat Pro v6 and later (and available as a free download add-on for v5 and perhaps earlier versions from Adobe.com) work in real life.

Wanna try it for yourself? Do you have Adobe Acrobat Pro v6 or later, a flatbed scanner, and a known genuine filled-out form-type document of your own? If you have those, I can show you how to demonstrate this in less than five minutes.

“…to produce something that "looks" like a birth certificate (except that a real one would have white text on a black background)…”

Did you mean black text on a white background? You mean like this (this is an image of the aforementioned high-res media version)?

Note that this is a quite high resolution (1669×3000 pixels, to be precise) version. Right-click and view it in its own tab, and make sure your browser isn’t shrinking it to fit. So, your earlier claim “…and a "long form" that exists only as a PDF file with multiple layers.” is again utterly disproven.

“… but is out-of-sequence, …”

Spoken like someone who has absolutely no idea, at all, of how documents were numbered back then, in the days before desktop computers. You’re talking about the Nordyke twins being born two days later at the same hospital but having a slightly lower number, right?

Birth certificates were processed in batches, once every few days. The number refers to the order that the document was processed, not the order that the child was born.

Birth certificates were placed in an “In Box” on the desk, face up. That means that they wound up in reverse order of birth. The clerk would remove a batch, then stamp each one with a Bates (most popular brand at the time) or other auto-incrementing counter stamp. This process is still known to this very day as “Bates numbering” or “Bates stamping” by attorneys, in reference to numbering every piece of evidence in a case with a unique, incrementing number.

“…misspelled,…”

You’re talking about this, right?


Spoken like someone who has absolutely no idea, at all, of how rubber stamps work. That does not say “TXE.”

First off, look at your keyboard. See where the [H] and [X] keys are? Nowhere near each other! They’d be typed with different hands by a touch-typist, and are on different rows of the keyboard even! There’s no conceivable typo means by which someone would’ve typed that by accident. “TGE” or “TJE” might be a believable typo, but not “TXE.”

Secondly, rubber stamps were made from a relatively small library of fonts, and only one font would generally be used for a given stamp. It’s difficult to be sure from a small stamp even on the high-res version, but the closest font I could find is Bitstream’s Gothic 720 (aka “Gothic 720 BT” which comes with some Corel software or clip art packages). That’s a sans-serif font, similar to the Arial that you’re almost certainly reading this post in now.

The letter “X” in Gothic 720 BT, or in any sans-serif Gothic-type font that I know of (and I know fonts pretty darn well — heck, I’ve made PostScript Type 3 computer fonts, from scratch, hand-coded in the PostScript programming language built into all PostScript printers, the .PDF file format, and Mac OS X!), looks nothing like that! It looks like it does here, in Arial, as two diagonal lines overlaid so that they cross over at or slightly above the vertical middle, like a “/” overlaid on top of a “\”.

Go back and look at the high-resolution version image I posted above of the whole birth certificate. Scroll down to the bottom and look at the stamp carefully. That is no “X.” That’s an “H” in which a speck of dust or an air bubble (quite common with rubber stamps, especially when over-inked) wound up at the point where the left vertical stroke and the horizontal cross-stroke meet, and, to a lesser extent, where the right vertical stroke and cross-stroke meet.

The other letters around the alleged “X” (from the “CT” in “ABSTRACT” through thfirst e “R” in “RECORD”) are also obviously over-inked. To a lesser extent, the rest of that whole middle line of text is over-inked. You can see similar smudging and dust-or-bubble-induced gaps in other places in the stamp, plus patterns from the Rayon® or Nylon® cloth stretched over the foam inkpad that the stamp is inked on. Indeed, a similar effect combined with some stray dust or a hair caught on the stamp is very likely what caused the infamous “smiley face” in the cursive “A” of “Alvin” in the signature portion of the stamp.

When you compare this with images of other impressions made from the same stamp (such as on the Obama Certification of Live Birth [“short form”]), there’re similar smudging and overinking effects but on different parts of the stamp. On the Obama “short form” example, the whole right side (especially the third line) is so smudged that if you didn’t already know what it was supposed to say, you likely couldn’t tell.

“and has too many mistake [sic] to be real.”

Well, considering that so far you’ve shown no mistakes that aren’t easily refuted, I’d like to see some of these.

“And lately, *even his own lawyer* did not care to introduce that into evidence.”

Because that’s not what this particular case was about. Unlike the Birther attorneys, she understands enough pre-Law to know that each case is about a specific thing, that irrelevant evidence does no good, etc.

This lack of knowledge of even the basics of pre-Law is endemic among the Birther attorneys so far, including Orly Taitz, Philip J. Berg, etc. etc. etc. This is why out of over 100 cases so far, none have made it very far, and they always get thrown out on technicalities such as standing. Heck, Orly even tried to subpœna Obama on her own authority, which is not something that attorneys can do. Only judges can do that.

The “computer graphics experts” and “document analysis experts” on your side show similarly appalling levels of lack of expertise in their claimed fields, committing mistakes that rank beginners in those fields wouldn’t make.

Hint: a “computer graphics designer” ≠ “forensic document digital analyst.” They’re very different skill sets, and even talent sets! Graphics design is a creative field. A talented graphics designer is usually right-brained. Forensic document analysis, on the other hand, is (as the name suggests) an analytical field, and a technical one at that. People who are good at that are usually left-brained. It’s very, very rare to find a creative graphics designer who is also a good document analyst, or vice-versa. People who are good at the one tend not to be good at the other.

A graphics artist or designer to claims to have the knowledge and skills necessary to properly analyze the Obama birth certificate is like unto an otherwise competent and even talented chef who claims to have the knowledge and skills necessary to prescribe safe and effective herbal medications, taking into account their physiological effects, side-effects, indications, contra-indications, and interactions with other herbal and pharmaceutical medications and even foods (e.g. not using statins [including the herbal statin red yeast rice] and either eating grapefruit or drinking grapefruit juice, let alone taking grapefruit-based supplements — doing that even once can kill you dead!), because of his years or even decades of experience in using herbs in cooking, no matter how expertly.

Obama’s attorney said nothing of the sort. Note that the video you posted is just some guy spouting his opinion. We have the actual unedited video of the actual proceedings of the hearing in New Jersey with attorney Alexandra Hill (three YouTube videos embedded on a page at ORYR, a Birther site, no less [see below]!), and she said absolutely nothing of the sort. Not once did she even so much as utter the words “forgery” nor “fake” in any context,

This information comes from an article by one Dan Crosby posted at The Daily Pen, a notorious Birther / RWNJ blog. Both The Daily Pen in general and Crosby in particular have been caught in outright lies on multiple occasions. Not merely being wrong nor mistaken about something. Bald. Faced. Lies. Making stuff up. Out of 100% genuine whole cloth.

Heck, The Daily Pen’s main guy, Penbrook Johannson aka “Penbrook One,” was himself caught Photoshopping an image of a data table from the INS, to completely alter its meaning.

Anyway, Crosby’s lying blog article was reposted or linked to from such Birther websites as Before It’s News, ObamaReleaseYourRecords (ORYR), The Tea Party Tribune, and from there to numerous others, and the info reposted in videos such as the one you embedded.

Once they actually watched the video and realized that the main point of the article was a bald-faced lie, ORYR posted a weaseling “correction” at first buried at the bottom of the page, now copied to near the top (click the above link and see for yourself):

---

_{UPDATE: After re-watching the 3 hour hearing there is no admission that the birth certificate is a forgery by Obama’s paid lackey. Where Dan Crosby heard that who knows. You will have to follow the link and ask him. Aside from this one sentence, “Obama’s lawyer, Alexandra Hill, admitted that the image of Obama’s birth certificate was a forgery“, the rest of the opinion piece is spot-on.}

---

I’ll see your one Birther YouTube video and raise you a bunch more that I’ve already ripped to quivering, bleeding shreds every single point made in them. And I did it over ½ a year (6 to 8 months as I type this) ago! You see, unlike the makers of these videos, I really am a computer imaging specialist who also knows the details on the specific relevant technologies.

• Obama Birth Certificate Faked In Adobe Illustrator - Official Proof 1
• Obama Birth Certificate Faked In Adobe Illustrator - Official Proof 2 ( Optimizing )
• Obama Birth Certificate Faked In Adobe Illustrator - Official Proof 3
• Obama Birth Certificate Faked In Adobe Illustrator - Official Proof 4 ( OCR / Optimizing )
• COMPUTER EXPERT CALLS OBAMA DOCUMENT 'OBVIOUS FAKE'Link
• BREAKING! BHO Birth Certificate - SEVEN MONUMENTAL PROBLEMS - This is FAR From Over."
• Obama Birth Certificate: Fake, Fraud or Genuine? -- the EXPERT Evaluation -- Part 1
• Obama Birth Certificate Faked - Final Definitive Proof:
• 2011-05-01 Obama Birth Certificate #2.mp4:
• Obama Birth Certificate -- EXPERT Eval Part 3: Mystery of the Strange Layers Continued
• Obama Birth Certificate -- EXPERT Eval Part 4: Mystery of the Strange Layers Conclusion
• Obama Birth Certificate - Explanation + reproduction of so-called "Tampering". (Layers, PDF)
• Obama Birth Certificate BUSTED. CHECKMATE GAME OVER!!" video.

That list is only of videos where people have Replied to my comments, thus notifying me. I know that I’ve posted in others as well on this subject, so that’s an incomplete list.

On the first YouTube video above (the one on "Layers"), in its Text Comments, you’ll see an exchange between me and one “trident3b.” I had given easy, step-by-step instructions on how anyone who had a flatbed scanner and relatively recent versions of Adobe Acrobat Pro (not Reader!) v6 or later, and Illustrator v10 or later, could produce every single one of those effects that that whole series of videos talks about, from a known genuine document of their own, by following a very few simple steps that are the logical and likely steps that someone would do if they had access to a computer with that software and a flatbed scanner, and were handed a document and told to scan it to a .PDF for use on the Internet, and also told not to OCR it. Except for un-checking the OCR checkbox, all you do is accept all of the default settings in the one dialog that appears!

Anyway, “trident3b” (a Birther at the time, but one with a somewhat more open mind than most) actually tried the instructions I gave, using a DHC delivery addressing form as his sample document (not all that similar to the Obama Certificate of Live Birth, but it still worked). He indeed saw the same effects that the “experts” on these videos and in your threds claim were evidence of fraud, from a document he knew for a fact was genuine! He posted his results in his own YouTube video, in which he mentions me by handle: