Obama Long Form Birth Certificate – Forgery or Algorithmic workflow?

This is an ongoing project to describe the highly compressed long form birth certificate of President Obama and to determine if the ‘artifacts’ detected point to a forgery or to an algorithmic operation. After all, the two competing hypotheses are “forgery”, and “created by algorithm”, and therefore it is necessary to determine which hypothesis better explains the observed data.


Read more at Obama Long Form Birth Certificate


16 thoughts on “Obama Long Form Birth Certificate – Forgery or Algorithmic workflow?

  1. Analyzing layers in a PDF computer file is as much folly as seeking a pot of gold at the end of a rainbow. Had the judge allow Orly Taitz to visit Hawaii DOH to see and photograph the original paper, as it sits in the binder in the vault, and the State of Hawaii allowed Official photos of the original paper, to be sold as “State of Hawaii Official photos of the original Obama Paper Birth certificate” under Hawaii’s Historic Property Statute, then we would have saved a lot of time, and Hawaii would have made $millions selling photos.

  2. We agree however the people at the private non-profit called the MCSO CCP, somehow is under the impression that the PDF shows evidence of forgery.

    Of course, the ‘historic property statute’ does not waive the privacy protections.

    Orly had no standing to be allowed such an action, both you and I know this.

    Therefore we have to go with the next best: The verification and certification of the information, accepted by Arizona and other states.

  3. But why do all of that when a simply comparison between an original document and the one posted of Obama’s website?

    After all, we are simply trying to prove a positive, not the negative.

    ex animo

  4. And another thing: hasn’t Obama waved his privacy protections as it relates to the production of his birth certificate since it is now posted on a public website?

    ex animo

  5. waive what? that he was born in hawaii and that he’s over 35? those are the requirements – we knew that from the published birth announcements still on microfiche

    “What Donald Trump’s Birther Investigators Will Find in Hawaii”

    When you go to Hawaii to investigate Obama’s birth, what you’re looking to examine are public records. They’re easy to find. Fly into the Honolulu airport, rent a car, and drive downtown to the state library. You can’t miss it: it’s practically in the shadow of the gold-leaf King Kamehameha statue in front of the Aliiolani Hale, the former palace. Once inside the library, head downstairs where they keep the microfilm. Obama was born (they tell us) on August 4, 1961, but you’ll want the August 13, 1961 edition of the Honolulu Star-Advertiser, because that’s when the birth announcement appeared. When you’ve loaded up the film, flip to the back pages, to the section of the paper called “Vital Statistic.” This is the record of births, marriages, and deaths provided by the Hawaii Department of Health’s Bureau of Vital Statistics. When you get to Page B-6, scan down the lefthand column–there it is, toward the bottom:

    Mr. and Mrs. Barack H. Obama, 6085 Kalanianaole Hwy., son, Aug. 4

    Congratulations! You’ve located the birth announcement. Nothing indicates obvious Kenyan-Communist plotting or the nefarious handiwork of Bill Ayers. And the competing paper, the Honolulu Star-Bulletin, also published an announcement. But you’ll want to be diligent and investigate that address. So you’ll head back upstairs and hunt down a copy of the Honolulu City Directory. Actually, because these documents are snapshots in time, you’ll want the city directories from 1960 through 1962, to see if you can establish any pattern of movement.


  6. @David Farrar – “hasn’t Obama waved his privacy protections”

    Several Hawaii Courts have ruled that no he did not.

  7. @David Farrar – “a simply comparison between an original document and the one posted of Obama’s website”

    Hawaii has done exactly that. In all three certified verifications, they have certified that the information on the White House pdf matches the information on the original vital record.

  8. Somehow I fail to see the significance of all this. The State of Hawaii issued a paper document. The White House scanned that paper and posted it on the internet. The State of Hawaii has confirmed that the info on the paper that they issued and the internet image contain the same information. So any issues with the way the internet electronic version looks (i.e. whether someone manipulated the scanned version or not) doesn’t have anything to do with what was/is on the paper copy. If someone touched up, adjusted, manipulated the electronic copy doesn’t change what is on the paper copy which the state confirms is the same info as on the electronic copy.

  9. True but it helps undermine those who still insist the PDF shows sign of a forgery even though apparently nothing was changed…

    What the investigations have shown is how a simple algorithmic workflow explains most of the artifacts of the PDF… So much for the diligence by the Cold Case Posse… They set out supposedly to rebut claims of forgery and overlooked the simplest explanations.

  10. The comparison was done by the DOH who certified and verified the data.

    Lacking any evidence of forgery, it’s time to abandon this line of ‘prove me wrong’. I assume that even you still adhere to our Constitutional principles?

  11. Have you red HRS 338? Have you followed the rulings in Hawaiian courts?

    Oh the foolishness continues. Poor David, again he has failed to do the proper research, and yet the laws and rulings are available to all.

    The answer is no of course… For the same reason that President Obama having ‘disclosed’ his SSN, grants others access to his SSN files.

  12. NBC: since I discovered a lot of the Xerox stuff, would you like me to do write-ups of some of that for you to post here?

  13. I’d love to post some of what you have found. Your work has been quite impressive in this area.

  14. NBC – what was the nature of the clipping mask border that you created with Preview? How does it compare to the Whitehouse pdf’s clipping mask? Can you post an image of it here?

  15. I think I see your problem, Stephen. You need things in your head to MAKE SENSE. Birthers are blithely unconstrained by such silliness.

  16. Working on it. It adds a border not the clipping mask. I am presently working slowly on outlining the path of the construction of the PDF from its layers.

Comments are closed.