http://fotoforensics.com/analysis.php?i ... 1e73.86019I have no idea how to read the black and white image.
http://fotoforensics.com/analysis.php?i ... 1193.99756ok now I looked it up, there are actually a few edited regions on both other than the obvious on the second one.
On the short form 1st one there is red around the inside of the security edge, this signifies that the inner page was pasted into an outer frame rather than originally being printed on that frame.
the long form has red inside around each character, (they used the same trick I did on my last Reference letter edit, i copied and pasted letters from another document over a blank security background.)
both are definitely shoops. I know the techniques they used and everything.
Edit: the short form is edited from the top to just above the last "Caucasian", we can tell that because the red paste line to the left and top is present but ceases after that.
What does this mean? there was a child of Barack sr. but the childs name was wrong and the mother was wrong!
The long form in detail; all the text is copy pasta, none is original, it was copypastaed character by character, it's way too bright and has red speckles around it and the bright text region doesn't match the curvature of the screen cut page at the binding of what I presume is a book of blank records (non-blank birth records would not be bound in a book)
obvious shoop is obvious.
Edit2: closer inspection of the long form, the text appears bright on ALMOST all text regions, some brighter than others because all text regions underwent edge smudging, this is obvious on the president's name, the text from above was smudge tooled into is name, the bright spots of the above text (notice there are brights then nonbrights? systematic fading) the bright sports were smudged tooled down, the fake text does not have this systematic fading it's 100% bright.
BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA II - was edited into the document.
next line; Male is legit. something went on with the check boxes, the twin box is legit the other two underwent editing, where the X hits the box there is white suggesting it was digitally overlaid. the triplet box has been badly smudge tooled we can even see that the background of the document is smudged in that box, it's also pure bright it has no systematic fading. the first,second and third boxes are also the same they are pure bright no systematic fading! they were altered.
The date: the month has an extra character that was partially removed, the print type was originally smaller, it read September not August against smudge tool from above. the 4 was originally a 9, again smudge tool from above, the year has been completely molested, smudge tool from the top and the background below it is smudged/erased down into Oahu (we'll get to that in a moment). the time of birth; I'd like it say it's legit, but there is something fishy with the character placement the 4 and the m are on a different level than the others and the 2 is a smaller type font evidence of the smudge tool exists above it, the reason I wanted to say it was legit is because it appears to have systematic fading, but in fact it does not, because it tapers down at the 4 and m it gives the illusion of fading.
Next line; for fucks sake this is the worst line yet, not only is there a huge smudge/eraser line before and after honolulu which extends all the way to the start of Oahu, the text does not have systematic fading, now take the white region as a rectangular box (because it is, and that is a hallmark of a square region having been pasted in) it is at a different angle than the text, it angles down while the text angles up, this is a sign of digital editing in the extreme, the white section corresponds to being level with the border of the digital image (as are every pasted boxy region), the text is angled up though. Now onto Oahu, the same thing goes on here, the white box is paralell to the digital image where as the text does not match this angle and it is bright white, Smudging can be seen from above even from the line separating the year from the date above (sloppy job!)
next line; so bright, so much smudging, so much erasing, the erasing starts at one character length before the text and fills the entire line extending in a rectangular region off the scan into the security background on the right. "born inside city or town limits; too smudged, way too smudge tooled from the above text, it's not just smudging here the white rectangular regions starts well before the "yes" text, this was copied from another document and pasted over this region.
next line; again the place name; heavy erasing and smudging fills the background of the line, NO SMUDGING FROM THE TOP, it smudges sideways to the right ONLY in this line. Honolulu has been pasted in, it's pasting rectangle starts at the bottom of the characters and the white rectangle is parallel to the digital image not the form lines, the first character was slightly smudged to fit the background. Oahu, again, bright white, the white box matches the digital image not the form lines and is at a different angle than the text. Honolulu, Hawaii, so very bright, evidence of sideways right-bound smudging above it the white box starts at one character length before the text.
next line: bright rectangle, notice the form's text fades and isn't a rectangular box in the text telling you what to put in in this line. The address is faked. Inside city or town limits; Legit, it systematically fades, no smudge or eraser lines and it's not a perfect rectangle and the angle matches the text not the image edge.
next line: mother's mailing address; eraser smudge beginning to end of field. Is residence a farm or plantation, the "no" box area is visibly brighter than the "yes" box, yes this has been edited.Whats this/ there's an almost invisible number next to it blending in with the security background "7 or 1" the line below as "9" and below "9" and below "4 or 9" could it be the release date of the blank document? 1994? 1999? it seems to be a hand written mark on an earlier scan.
next line: father's name, Barack, Smudge starts just before it continues till 3 character lengths before Hussein, Hussein is legitimate, a erase/smudge starts before Obama and the white rectangle matches the angle of the image not the text! African is legit.
next line: erase, and smudge smudge smudge, the 2 and 5 are on different levels this would not have happened if typed, they were copied from another form and pasted in individually and were originally digitally pixelated that is visible. Kenya, East Africa; kenya, East is one paste, a smudge is between that and Africa. Africa is legit, it's not a rectangle zone and fades naturally, there is a hidden "1 or 7" written in the security background after africa. A Smudge begins 2 to 3 characters after africa and 1 character after the "1 or 7", very obvious! goes through to fill the student field, there is another hidden "9" in the background after student. "Student" is one of the brightest of all regions and is rectangular and matching the angle of the image not the form definitely fake!. Universty is fake by the same rules as "student".
next line: the text "Stanley" appears very bright and is rectangular the angle matching the image and not the document, definitely fake. A eraser/smudge tool mark starts before Ann and continues past Dunham, both regions are bright white and rectangular matcing the angle of the digital image and not the form! Definitely Fake!. Caucasian smudge and eraser tool galore the whole text field is white outside the text!, If you look closely you can see the outline of black erased characters reading "Indonesian" starting at 1 character width before the C.
Next line: Right under the 15. there is a circular eraser/smudge mark clearly visible. it extends through the age number all the way past Wichita, Kansas. The white distortion starts before the number 18 signifying there was another number there initially and 18 was pasted on top. the 8 is lower than the one and a bigger size. Wichita, Kansas is VERY bright clearly edited after Kansas there are continued white marks signifying other characters were there before that are now missing which extend past the line of the "birthplace" field into the next neighboring field. the text "None" is visibly digital, and poorly done at that, the "o" in it consists of a 5x5 pixel diamond, the pixels clearly visible but are not in relation to the pixels of the image meaning they were there and pixelated before the image was pixelated in smaller resolution. Eraser/smudge marks exist starting before None till after None. In the next blank field box there are white marks signifying that there used to be text there which was edited out.
The next 3 lines: all of the signatures are copy/pasted they are bright rectangular regions with some white extending past the text into regions that have no text, this includes the stamps. all t=of the signatures and stamps have been digitally copied onto the document.
