obama's birth certificate PDF examined by actual expert. (county, state, claims)

[wrecking ball]

most birthers, including the ones on this forum, claim that the PDF of obama's long-form birth certificate ( LFBC ) that was posted online by the white house has been "proven to be fraudulent". this claim comes from the findings of the maricopa county cold case posse ( CCP ) birther investigation and/or WND articles ( which are primarily the same claims from the same people ). one big problem tho.......... none of these claims were from actual experts. mike zullo of the CCP admitted exactly that in the last press conference. so john woodman, who wrote a book debunking the "fraudulent LFBC" claims ( altho woodman also isn't an expert ), took the logical step and actually contacted an expert for their opinion

Genuine, World-Class Computer Expert Evaluates Obama’s Birth Certificate PDF


not surprisingly the expert opinion directly contradicts the CCP.

[SourD]

He doesn't contradict anything, he says he doesn't know and makes a few guesses. He couldn't actually duplicate the same artifacts, his reasoning means nothing in the long run.

[gallowsCalibrator]

He... He got the godfather of MRC to look at this? Well shiiiiii....

The documentation and methodology being described is a good read. It's refreshing to read a report by somebody actually knowledgeable in the technological field they are speaking of.

[wrecking ball]

Originally Posted by SourD

He doesn't contradict anything,....

yes, he does.

garret papit's ( for the CCP ) claim was that the anomalies were absolute proof of manual tampering/forgery. from prof. ricardo de queiroz:

"The question is whether all these artifacts we see after rendering the PDF of [ the LFBC ] are signs of forgery. I do not see that. I see them more likely as a result of inadequate processing."

[SourD]

Originally Posted by wrecking ball

yes, he does.

garret papit's ( for the CCP ) claim was that the anomalies were absolute proof of manual tampering/forgery. from prof. ricardo de queiroz:

"The question is whether all these artifacts we see after rendering the PDF of [ the LFBC ] are signs of forgery. I do not see that. I see them more likely as a result of inadequate processing."

He also said that those artifacts are indicative of Adobe applications. He doesn't offer any clues as to why the metadata in the online PDF says it was generated with MAC OSX's PDF generator which is Preview.

[wrecking ball]

Originally Posted by gallowsCalibrator

He... He got the godfather of MRC to look at this? Well shiiiiii....

yep. hard to dismiss those credentials on the subject.


mike zullo of the CCP stated in the last press conference that they were unable to get experts to give an opinion on the LFBC. john woodman an a single email have shown this to be false. i think a more likely scenario is that zullo was unable to get an expert to give the opinion he wanted.

[wrecking ball]

Originally Posted by SourD

He doesn't offer any clues as to why the metadata in the online PDF says it was generated with MAC OSX's PDF generator which is Preview.

because preview is the default setting for PDFs on MAC OS X.

https://startit.artic.edu/kb/softwar...r_default.html

[carterstamp]

WB, great attempt, but it's hard to persuade the delusional to give up their dreams of a "do-over".

[tluv00]

Using a PDF to verify an actual document is ludicrous.

[wrecking ball]

Originally Posted by tluv00

Using a PDF to verify an actual document is ludicrous.

yep. that's pointed out in the beginning of queiroz's opinion.

but....... that fact was apparently overlooked by the CCP.