Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Keep the crazy conspiracy theories coming. They're just proving to the independents that the right-wing is just nuts.
for myself i try and keep politics out of this debate. obama is just "president x" as far as i'm concerned, neither right nor left. i'm just interested in the formation/development of a conspiracy theory.
i do agree tho with your general point. in this specific case the more noise the birthers make the more likely obama is to pick up the independents.
I'm thinking that a bunch of yahoos on the internet really don't know jack. There are people who's job it is to do this stuff and they have done their job. Seriously, when I read "carbon dating the BC" I spit coffee on my monitor. How does this sound reasonable to someone with a normal IQ?
Its quite scary when you know that the average IQ is 100... means that there are a LOT of people with an IQ lower than that and a still considerable number of people with an IQ a lot lower than that. Ouch.
Once again, as I said previously, the program will not create layers AND POPULATE the layers with data. This is a demo opening a scanned document in Illustrator, and though Illustrator does create layers (a function of the software) only one layer contains the data.
The video is conclusive proof of manipulation, particularly regarding the layer that has "Date Accepted" 196 an the other layer has the 1 to make 1961, with the 196 and the 1 dramatically different color/impact.
But there is a lot more than this ... even though this evidence is conclusive proof of a "constructed" document.
There are different pixel sizes within the body of the scanned image ... signatures appear to be from the same person, and a dozen other anomalies.
But the determinative proof comes from the multiple "populated" layers ...and the lack of chromatic aberration on some of the text layers, with other text showing that aberration that is generated by a color scan ... meaning that the text without that aberration was not part of the same scan as was the other text.
100%, absolute fraud .... and those attempting to explain it away are either complicit in the fraud, or hopelessly ignorant.
Once again, as I said previously, the program will not create layers AND POPULATE the layers with data. This is a demo opening a scanned document in Illustrator, and though Illustrator does create layers (a function of the software) only one layer contains the data.
The video is conclusive proof of manipulation, particularly regarding the layer that has "Date Accepted" 196 an the other layer has the 1 to make 1961, with the 196 and the 1 dramatically different color/impact.
Its quite scary when you know that the average IQ is 100... means that there are a LOT of people with an IQ lower than that and a still considerable number of people with an IQ a lot lower than that. Ouch.
H
These matters are really more than a measure of IQ. That's what makes them interesting to me...to a degree. I would imagine some very intelligent people believe in things that might suggest, in themselves, that one's intelligence is questionable. Indeed. I think that intelligence and judgment are not 100% the same thing. Furthermore, when we get frustrated, we can get emotional and reactionary which may have little to do with how smart we are.
GuyNTexas, I watched the video and it was interesting. I have to admit it does make me rethink things, even as a liberal who voted for Obama in 2008 and has mostly supported Obama. So the fact you are getting me to rethink does really say something.
This is my only question, though. I wouldn't be surprised if Obama is trying to hide something, hence the multiple-layered tampered-with long form birth certificate. But it's the year of birth and the signatures that were manipulated with, not the place of birth, so how does that prove that what he's trying to hide is having been born outside the U.S.? Maybe he is trying to hide the year he was born or something else, but was nevertheless born in the U.S. Why would they tamper with the "1961" and the signature if what they were trying to hide was where Obama is born?
What he may be trying to hide may be a discrepancy that he just didn't want to have attacked when it was an honest human mistake. For example, I have two dates listed for my birth. I was also incubated for 4 months according to one document and for an entire year according to another document. Let's pretend for a second that I was born in the U.S., was of age for presidential candidacy, was super-qualified in all other ways, and running for president. I may be motivated to change the discrepancies to avoid any suspicions that would arise from what was honestly just human error or infallibility.
To take it even a step further, there is even some straight up sketchiness on my birth certificate. My biological mother listed her own father as my father, which is probably just a name she put to fill in the space, but if I were a presidential candidate there would probably be all sorts of alarmist stories about "Presidential Candidate Found to Be Incest Baby". The fact that it's highly unlikely and the fact that it reflects the circumstances of my birth and not my (completely hypothetical) ability to run for president doesn't matter. It would just be more bait for my opponents. Obama may be trying to avoid a situation like this.
It's also possible that whatever he is hiding is more sinister than that, but it still seems like whatever he is hiding isn't related to his place of birth, but rather the date of birth or whoever authorized the long form certificate.
Last edited by nimchimpsky; 04-29-2011 at 01:11 PM..
Totally amazing that you lefties place so much value on the legitimacy of this "National Review" ultra establishment conservative organization when it agrees with your agenda ONCE.
Of course, the National Review is just the other side of the same coin .... because the neocons LOVE Obama .... he loves big government ... war ... tyrannical government control .... he's owned by the banker gangsters ... and he literally is George Bush on steroids ... so why wouldn't they like him?
The Republicrats did as much for Obama as the Demopublicans did .... can you imagine a greater favor to the Dems/Obama than to offer up that dynamic duo sad excuse and walking corpse of a joke McCain ..... and the Cherry on Top, Palin? Great Lawd ..... in the old fight days, they called that throwing the fight ... a set up man ... a dive man .... a shill.
That's right ... just like Kerry (Bush's cousin, and fellow Bonesman) was a dive man.
You people are Soooooooo Gullible. Really sad.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
