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.
I am sure you have seen this, tell me why you can't believe it?
Do you have a copy of your birth certificate? One from the state, that you went to, or mailed in to, the state record of births and said I need a copy of my birth certificate and you paid your $8.00 or $12.00 bucks to get.
Dig it out and compare the two.
There is something missing from the Internet BC.
I don't know what or where or when, Obama has ever had to prove his citizenship, but apparently he must had done something right, he is sitting in the Whitehouse.
Now I was born in 1961, perhaps the states didn't put their state seal on them back then, you know that raised seal that says, I'm original. I wouldn't know as I can't see mine as mine is still sitting in Austin, and I have never seen it but I have two birth certificates. One of them is sealed by way of legislature as I am adopted. The other one, I used the family Bible as official document to prove my birth and to get my driver's license at age 18.
The only reason I know the raised seal would be appropriate to be there is because I made certain that my children had there certificates at birth, printed and mailed to me.
How do we know that Obama is paying all this money to keep his background a secrete? Is is a rumor, or is there a copy of a speech I missed hearing him say....or a memo document....what?
Last edited by Ellis Bell; 05-15-2009 at 10:03 AM..
Reason: spelling
It took a lot to fill the 'grocery list'. I found good points and bad points. I didn't actually read ALL of those articles, but just took it off the top. One who might be interested will have to do the rest of the work. I can only bring the food to the table....
Absolutely, there are a great many things to be concerned about, aware of, and attention given to. However that doesn't mean one should curl up in the fetal position under a bed in fear as was the tone of the OP's "open letter to Obama".
Politicians, political operatives, media, and even people in general seem to be so willing and open to swallow the hysterics of irrational fear. Everyone offers the worst possible scenario as being the most likely thing to happen and this is just ludicrous and illogical.
Just shoots and ladders... Which are the most likely things to occur to anyone one of us?
Heart attack or beheading by Al Qaeda
A repeal of the 2nd amendment or getting hit by a drunk driver
Gay marriage destroying the fabric of society or dying from tainted food
Asteroid hitting earth and ending all life or getting cancer
All of these things are possible, but everything listed here that is most likely isn't even discussed. Those things in which are most unlikely are addressed in email's like the one for the OP as though they are imminent at any moment.
I just pulled that off photobucket figuring it was the "one" I truly have a hard time believing that if he was not born in the US that he could have gotten as far as he did. I think this is just more sour grapes from people who are upset that not only did a democrat win but that he is african american and to gripe about his birth certificate is a more acceptable way to bring it to light.
Because it does not look like this one with folds and a seal
Or this one without the serial number blacked out
How many copies are there?
There is actually a very simple explanation as to why there are slight differences.
When you scan a document, you have a direct light source that is very bright. Run a scanner, or copier, sometime with the lid open and try to look at the light bar. It is extremely bright. (Disclaimer: I am not responsible if you burn your retinas looking at the light bar on a scanner or copier.)
This brighter light will give you a more true color then a photo taken in what could be deemed natural light. Go ahead and try it yourself if you have a scanner. Take a picture of a colored sheet of paper, then scan the same sheet. There will be marked differences in the quality and color shading. Go ahead, I'll wait....
Also, when you scan a document, the raw graphic is usually very large in size. Something along the lines of 300-600 dpi. Most people will reduce the resolution on a scanned document before placing it on the web, because most monitors will not reproduce beyone 120 dpi. 92 is more common.
So a couple of things happened here. You have a scan of a document that was flattened on a piece of glass with a very bright light source on only one side of the document. This scan had the resolution reduced to post on the Internet. The reduction of the graphic, removed some of the detail that would have been present in the original raw graphic.
Then you have a photograph taken with an ambient natural light source. This light source is not as bright as the scanner, therefore rendering the color differentiation. If you compare the two graphics for overall similarities, they are the same document. If you are looking for a perfect match, you are going to be sorely disappointed.
There is actually a very simple explanation as to why there are slight differences.
When you scan a document, you have a direct light source that is very bright. Run a scanner, or copier, sometime with the lid open and try to look at the light bar. It is extremely bright. (Disclaimer: I am not responsible if you burn your retinas looking at the light bar on a scanner or copier.)
This brighter light will give you a more true color then a photo taken in what could be deemed natural light. Go ahead and try it yourself if you have a scanner. Take a picture of a colored sheet of paper, then scan the same sheet. There will be marked differences in the quality and color shading. Go ahead, I'll wait....
Also, when you scan a document, the raw graphic is usually very large in size. Something along the lines of 300-600 dpi. Most people will reduce the resolution on a scanned document before placing it on the web, because most monitors will not reproduce beyone 120 dpi. 92 is more common.
So a couple of things happened here. You have a scan of a document that was flattened on a piece of glass with a very bright light source on only one side of the document. This scan had the resolution reduced to post on the Internet. The reduction of the graphic, removed some of the detail that would have been present in the original raw graphic.
Then you have a photograph taken with an ambient natural light source. This light source is not as bright as the scanner, therefore rendering the color differentiation. If you compare the two graphics for overall similarities, they are the same document. If you are looking for a perfect match, you are going to be sorely disappointed.
Good information, these birthers could care less. The BC was created and handled by the second person that was on the grass the day Kennedy was shot.
People, please do not make this yet another one of the 24985724309857349086723409875630478989857 danged Obama birth threads.... for pete sake.
We have a thread for that, use that one.
Where is it? They have all been locked.
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.
