the long lost birth certificate

[hoot]

I wonder if this birth certificate is the best money can buy?
Hoot

[PUCKER]

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default ... g-form.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Keeping politics out of it and just looking at the PDF (from a graphical perspective) I see some unusual things when I open it with Adobe Acrobat Professional. All of the type (letters, words, etc, which this document is supposedly a scan of an original, right?) appear as white/reverse when the document is first opened and also when I resize it (zoom in, zoom out, etc.). This leads me to believe that this was created on a computer and tweaked, in other words, I doubt the authenticity. I say this from my experience in the publishing field and dealing with PDFs for ads. It could very *easily* be faked.

[PUCKER]

Apparently other folks are seeing the same issues (the layers, if you will) with the document:

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/buster/bar ... ent-098513" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Beiruty]

Did they really call black folk "African" back then where it says "Race of father"? I thought "Negro" was the term that would have been on a birth-certificate.

This is NOT the original it is a computer reproduction from the original. Scanned signuatures sand seals and the rest is compugter generated. It is certified copy (reproduction) of the orginal.

And good catch for the race.

[Rex B]

And it's still a "Certificate of live birth", not a birth certificate as most of the rest of us have.
I have read reports of people who were born within days of BHO, at the (alleged) same hospital, and they have an actual birth certificate.

The US Govt is in the business of making official-looking documents. I think they could do better than this.

[i8godzilla]

Typewriter with kerning ability in 1961? Cool...............

[Oldgringo]

Did they really call black folk "African" back then where it says "Race of father"? I thought "Negro" was the term that would have been on a birth-certificate.

Good eye! I remember reading "Something of Value" and seeing "King Soloman's Mines", "Mogambo", etc. In those instances, African meant from and of Africa.

There weren't any African-Americans when I graduated from HS in Nashville, TN in 1960. You were either an American or you weren't. Frankly, I still don't know when the term African-American came into being or what it means. Perhaps I'll run into a Bulgarian-American or an Equadorean-American or some such who can shed some light on the subject. I'd really like to meet an Icelandic-American and see what they have to allow on the subject.

[The Annoyed Man]

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default ... g-form.pdf

Keeping politics out of it and just looking at the PDF (from a graphical perspective) I see some unusual things when I open it with Adobe Acrobat Professional. All of the type (letters, words, etc, which this document is supposedly a scan of an original, right?) appear as white/reverse when the document is first opened and also when I resize it (zoom in, zoom out, etc.). This leads me to believe that this was created on a computer and tweaked, in other words, I doubt the authenticity. I say this from my experience in the publishing field and dealing with PDFs for ads. It could very *easily* be faked.

I opened the PDF in Illustrator CS5, and here are some screen snapshots of what I found:

1. Screen snapshot, showing all the layers turned on:


2. Screen snapshot, showing the background layer turned off:


3. Screen snapshot, showing the background turned back on, but the text objects turned off (oddly, some of the text stuff appears to be part of the background):


4. Screen snapshot, showing all the layers turned off:


In any case, this is definitely a layered file....but that doesn't answer how it was scanned.

[WildBill]

Typewriter with kerning ability in 1961? Cool...............

I just learned a new word. Cool....

Actually, it is proportional spacing, not true kerning.

In any case, this is definitely a layered file....but that doesn't answer how it was scanned.

I think that's the problem. It wasn't scanned. It was generated with Mac OS X 10.6.7 Quartz PDFContext.

[Beiruty]

Why some of the signatures are on different layer (background) than the foreground layer? the layer I thought should be the green pattern simulating the official paper and nothing else. the rest of the text objects should be part of the foreground.

There is no scanner that do one scan and generate multiple layers from the same single scan. That is impossible! This is poor attempt to computer generate a certificate. It is a Photoshop composite.

BIG GOOF: Why in the world the last digit "1" of the Department of Health ID number is on the background layer and NOT on the other layer? Because it was added later on in Photoshop!

This is will open more questions than the short version. Whoever released it is an IDIOT or wants to be a whistleblower

[WildBill]

There is no scanner that do one scan and generate multiple layers from the same single scan. That is impossible! This is poor attempt to computer generate a certificate.

This is will open more questions than the short version. Whoever released it is an IDIOT or wants to be a whistleblower

He didn't cover his tracks very well.

[baldeagle]

This is interesting or at least curious. This is a real birth certificate from the same time period. It's hard to see the detail, but the date of birth is 8/5/1961. Obama's birthdate is 8/4/1961. The Department of Health ID number on Obama's birth certificate is 151 61 10641. The ID number on the other one, from a birth a day earlier, is 151 61 10637. Both have the date 8/7/1961 as the date the parent signed, but the doctor signed Obama's birth certificate on 8/8/1961. The other one, with a lower number, was signed by the doctor on 8/11/1961. And the Registrar accepted Obama's on 8/8/1961 but the other was accepted by the Registrar on 8/11/1961.

Not sure if any of this means anything at all, but it is curious.

EDITED TO ADD: Some are making a big deal out of the "fact" that there was no "Kapiolani Maternity and Gynecological Hospital", but they're wrong as the linked document clearly shows.

[Rex B]

He, or someone in his employ, really does think we're stupid.