Hermitian Red Herrings

Hermitian raises several complete red herrings. He observes that the AP LFBC PDF shows color fringes, and that a court filing showed pin cushioning, but these effects are absent in the WH LFBC as well as our Xerox scans. Why this is relevant is beyond me…

Color Fringes –

Hermitian believes that you can detect the scan direction from color fringes, but provides no analysis. We already know how we can accurately determine the scan direction, but somehow Hermitian still has to catch on to a far simpler approach. If he has a better method, or a method that disagrees with our findings, then let him present his analysis.

Pin Cushioning

A second anomaly is the absence of “pincushion” distortion of the individual text characters. The pincushion distortion was particularly pronounced in the page 4 LFCOLB image from court documant 35-1.pdf filed in the Southern District of Mississippi Federal court. The AP PDF file “ap_obama_certificate_dm_110427 copy.pdf”, as previously stated, has faint color fringes. Both of these documents are believed to have been produced by digital scanning of a paper original.

From the Affidavit
This pincushion distortion of the text characters is not present in the WH LFCOLB PDF image or the (page 2/8) LFCOLB PDF image. The rectangular grid lines are everywhere straight in these earlier LFCOLB images.
Why our friend is pursuing aspects that are not present in the WH LFBC nor our Xerox scans is beyond me… Needless to say, his ‘findings’ about the documents provided to the Court have long since been refuted, as have his claims about the AP PDF.
What remains is the unremarkable fattening of letters, which is to be understood when you capture an already highly compressed document and compress it again.
I am still looking forward to Hermitian attempting to properly rebut my findings but at the moment it appears that his efforts have failed.

6 thoughts on “Hermitian Red Herrings

  1. NBC

    “Hermitian raises several complete red herrings. He observes that the AP LFBC PDF shows color fringes, and that a court filing showed pin cushioning, but these effects are absent in the WH LFBC as well as our Xerox scans. Why this is relevant is beyond me…”

    I’ve never heard of an incomplete red herring — but NBC must have…

    “Color Fringes –

    “Hermitian believes that you can detect the scan direction from color fringes, but provides no analysis. We already know how we can accurately determine the scan direction, but somehow Hermitian still has to catch on to a far simpler approach. If he has a better method, or a method that disagrees with our findings, then let him present his analysis.”

    This happens to be a well known fact — although evidently unknown to NBC.

    So cough up the Xerox 7655 scan to PDF file. It I find color fringes then I will determine the scan direction. The Xeroz 7535 is devoid of color fringes.

    “From the Affidavit

    “”This pincushion distortion of the text characters is not present in the WH LFCOLB PDF image or the (page 2/8) LFCOLB PDF image. The rectangular grid lines are everywhere straight in these earlier LFCOLB images.””

    “Source

    “Why our friend is pursuing aspects that are not present in the WH LFBC nor our Xerox scans is beyond me… Needless to say, his ‘findings’ about the documents provided to the Court have long since been refuted, as have his claims about the AP PDF.”

    Because the page 4 of 35-1.pdf, the AP LFCOLB PDF and the Muscatine LFCOLB PDF all have something in common. They are all believed to be scanned from paper originals. And since they all have color fringes and pincushion distortion to varying degrees it raises the obvious question as to why the Xerox scan to PDF files do not.

    Maybe you could explain that to everyone NBC ?

  2. Because the page 4 of 35-1.pdf, the AP LFCOLB PDF and the Muscatine LFCOLB PDF all have something in common. They are all believed to be scanned from paper originals.

    The AP document was made from a photograph taken, the Muscatine was based on the jpeg provided by the AP…

    Man, you are quite funny… Have you ever thought about formulating a relevant scientific hypothesis rather than create strawmen?

    Are we now returning to your embarrassing claims in your affidavit?

  3. Because the page 4 of 35-1.pdf, the AP LFCOLB PDF and the Muscatine LFCOLB PDF all have something in common. They are all believed to be scanned from paper originals.

    Except the latter two are believed to be digital photographs of a B&W photocopy (the Muscatine being a massively retouched version of the AP), which means the color fringe comes from the camera, not the scanner.

  4. So cough up the Xerox 7655 scan to PDF file. It I find color fringes then I will determine the scan direction. The Xeroz 7535 is devoid of color fringes.

    Well, there you go, we now have an example of lack of color fringes and yet you still believe that a Xerox work centre should show fringes?…

    You’re hilarious my friend… You cannot even keep your hypotheses consistent

  5. Except the latter two are believed to be digital photographs of a B&W photocopy (the Muscatine being a massively retouched version of the AP), which means the color fringe comes from the camera, not the scanner.

    Our friend Hermitian is still unwilling to accept the evidence that contradicts his position.

    Funny how he now returns to issues that he himself admits are not issues on Xerox WorkCentre scanners…

  6. Some folks just have a horrible time saying: “I was wrong.” It’s unfortunate because the more they dig in when the evidence is overwhelmingly against them, the more foolish they end up looking.

Comments are closed.