It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Justice2012
As I was searching I came across an MSNBC image using google's image search engine, that has the exact Obama certificate with NO GREEN BACKGROUND dated April 27th, 2011. I'm not sure what this means, but here it is.
Originally posted by thegasface
my question is why didnt they just flatten the image??!!?
Originally posted by Habit4ming
What I find interesting is that the birth certificate of Susan Nordyke, born one day after Obama's alleged birth, shows a different address for that hospital. How was that possible??? Not to mention, her box 7C says, Honolulu, Ohau and Obama's box 7C says Honolulu, Hawaii.
Originally posted by atlguy
The original image was from a microfiche, and then that microfiche was scanned into digital storage. When they produced an "official" document, it was then placed over the new official background. Standard practice - nothing odd about it.
Originally posted by mblahnikluver
reply to post by Bonified Ween
Who said I am spamming? I don't spam, people who post the same crap over and over are spamming.
You are obviously angry for no reason. I just pointed out a thread on it already...I do it all the time when I see duplicate topics, that is not spamming, it's helping out ATS.
If you see it as spamming that is your problem. I really dont care.
It becomes annoying when there are 10 plus threads all on the same thing and everyone is saying the same thing..Why not just have one and share it where all the information is in one place?
Oh well...enjoy your BC debate
Originally posted by Justice2012
reply to post by atlguy
How do we know that now? Why did it come from microfiche and not the actual long form hard copy?
Why do the news media have unofficial microfiche?
Originally posted by Blaine91555
Originally posted by thegasface
my question is why didnt they just flatten the image??!!?
Because it's a PDF generated from a scanned document and then the OCR in Acrobat Pro was used to read the text and make it searchable. All that's being found in AI and Photoshop are the layers generated in Acrobat Pro. I see zero evidence of anything other than the OCR being used and yes I am qualified. I have ten years or more using the mentioned software and in particular using this workflow for old documents to make them searchable without altering their appearance.
Just because a person uses these software's does not mean they are familiar with all aspects, nor does it mean they correctly understand what they are looking at. In this case the OP may not be familiar with Acrobat or OCR programs and how they work or what the scan would look like in AI or PS after the fact.
It's a common workflow with old documents that are scanned. It leaves it to appear as is, but adds text over the characters so you can search it. I do the same with all my old documents, except whoever did this did not take the time to go in and deal with the characters the OCR could not read.
They could have removed the layers, but then it would no longer be a searchable document which would negate the whole point. Most people won't notice unless they know how to use PS, AI and Acrobat Pro correctly.
Originally posted by sickofitall2012
reply to post by atlguy
That I get, but why does the copy of the green form look like it was scanned from a book like the white form?
Why add that photo effect if it was just a tranfer onto grren offical paper.
Originally posted by coppo808
I think we all agree the green copy is an exact doctored version of his white ones. I just don't understand why he published the green altered one.