28 Apr 2011, 12:35 am
Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
28 Apr 2011, 12:53 am
Inuyasha wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
Apple_in_my_Eye wrote:
I hadn't heard that. I kind of wish he hadn't done it, so that the crazies could continue to discredit themselves.
My thoughts as well
Apparently they're still at it though.Trump now wants Obama's college transcripts and is chastizing the media for not doing their jobs.
And it's the media's job to chase a non-existent story? Why is it so hard to believe that Obama achieved everything he claims in academia? Considering that the majority of the birthers are hardly the intellectual type to the point of despising higher education, one can ascribe prejudice against the brainy, as well as racism, to those idiots, too.
28 Apr 2011, 1:44 am
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
Apple_in_my_Eye wrote:
I hadn't heard that. I kind of wish he hadn't done it, so that the crazies could continue to discredit themselves.
My thoughts as well
Apparently they're still at it though.Trump now wants Obama's college transcripts and is chastizing the media for not doing their jobs.
And it's the media's job to chase a non-existent story? Why is it so hard to believe that Obama achieved everything he claims in academia? Considering that the majority of the birthers are hardly the intellectual type to the point of despising higher education, one can ascribe prejudice against the brainy, as well as racism, to those idiots, too.
And he graduated Magna Cum Laude at Harvard Law School. There is evidence for that. Next thing you know someone will say there was a conspiracy at Harvard to change his grades and all his classmates are sworn to secrecy.
28 Apr 2011, 1:49 am
28 Apr 2011, 2:14 am
28 Apr 2011, 2:19 am
28 Apr 2011, 2:34 am
28 Apr 2011, 2:59 am
psychohist wrote:
Master_Pedant wrote:
Maybe I should be clearer. There probably was a handful of partisan Democrats who thought suchc lunatic, self-justifying thoughts - but it nowhere near approached 20% of the Party base, let alone a respected 20% that leading Democratic Party figures would pander to.
Good to see you have such respect for Trump, I guess. Me, I think he's an idiot, but then I'm one of those crazy Tea Party people.
As for the 20%, good to see that's only half of the 40% number mentioned earlier in the thread for Democrats who were 9/11 conspiracy theorists. I guess the Democrats have twice as many crazies as Republicans - or are you one of those who think the live video of an aircraft crashing into the twin towers was faked?
Yeah, calling people "9/11 conspiracy theorists" is a surefire sign I agree with them...
I haven't seen the polls, yet, but I'd like comparative samples for Independents and Republicans.
28 Apr 2011, 3:35 am
AceOfSpades wrote:
Quote:
If Obama Would Show Us His Penis this Would be Settled
If Obama was born in the United States he would be circumcised, therefore if we view Obama's penis and it is circumcised, this would be settled once and for all.
Not all males born in the US are circumcised, but it's a popular option and sometimes is done as a matter of practice without even asking the parents. That point aside, if Obama really was born in Kenya to a Muslim family, he would likely be circumcised anyway, because it's a common practice in Islam (though not mandatory)[65].
Furthermore, Larry Sinclair provided Michelle Obama was a detailed description of his penis and if we just got a hold of it we could break the story once and for all. Sinclair stated already, though, that Obama is not circumcised.
If Obama were ever to flash his penis for us all to verify, birthers would still not be convinced, they'd believe:
1. Obama was circumcised sometime since moving back to the US to prove later on he was born here
2. Just like the birth certificate, they'll demand to see the long form.
If Obama was born in the United States he would be circumcised, therefore if we view Obama's penis and it is circumcised, this would be settled once and for all.
Not all males born in the US are circumcised, but it's a popular option and sometimes is done as a matter of practice without even asking the parents. That point aside, if Obama really was born in Kenya to a Muslim family, he would likely be circumcised anyway, because it's a common practice in Islam (though not mandatory)[65].
Furthermore, Larry Sinclair provided Michelle Obama was a detailed description of his penis and if we just got a hold of it we could break the story once and for all. Sinclair stated already, though, that Obama is not circumcised.
If Obama were ever to flash his penis for us all to verify, birthers would still not be convinced, they'd believe:
1. Obama was circumcised sometime since moving back to the US to prove later on he was born here
2. Just like the birth certificate, they'll demand to see the long form.
ROFLMAO
The bolded statement is probably one of the funnest examples of deadpan snarkery in written form I have every seen.
28 Apr 2011, 8:32 am
28 Apr 2011, 9:16 am
28 Apr 2011, 9:50 am
28 Apr 2011, 9:57 am
28 Apr 2011, 10:00 am
sartresue
Veteran
Joined: 18 Dec 2007
Age: 71
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,313
Location: The Castle of Shock and Awe-tism
28 Apr 2011, 10:04 am
zer0netgain wrote:
I'm not going to read 4 pages before posting, sorry.
It's a fake...already proven. The document does look authentic at first glance, and I was not going to call it a fake until I could see someone demonstrate how it was otherwise. I've now seen the proof for myself.
Here is why it is a forgery and you can confirm this for yourself.
The PDF directly from the White House has LAYERS to it.
For those who don't know, if you scan a document into a computer either directly to PDF or to a program that will print to PDF you only get ONE LAYER in the end product. Any other layers indicate editing was done to the scan...unless you're smart enough to "flatten" the image which converts the edited document back into one layer. Then you would need something like a hex editor to search for proof that the document was modified.
So, anyone can take the PDF directly from the White House website, open it with Adobe Illustrator and unlock the bound layers. This would not be possible if there was only one layer. You cannot "un-flatten" a PDF. Binding layers into one layer is done so you don't accidentally muddle stuff in placement when you click on the document with the mouse pointer. Binding allows you to keep layers together as a whole. Flattening permanently converts the layers into a single layer.
So, the PDF directly from the White House has multiple unlockable layers showing that entries on the document were added in stages. This is clear evidence that it is a composite image, not an original.
Forgery...pure and simple.
What is dumbfounding is that this is such a blatant oversight that any decent forger shouldn't have made this mistake....as if it was intended for this forgery to be discovered by those who would inevitably examine it.
Go to any Photoshop forum and see what experts in Photoshop have to say on the topic. The average user (like me) would not have spotted this by looking at the PDF. I based my initial assessment on a visual inspection to see if it looked fake. My best suspicion would be on how the document didn't looked "scanned" (if you print to a PDF from memory vs scan on a flatbed you'll understand this). I wanted someone with expertise to weigh in before I cast judgment against the document being authentic.
It's a fake...already proven. The document does look authentic at first glance, and I was not going to call it a fake until I could see someone demonstrate how it was otherwise. I've now seen the proof for myself.
Here is why it is a forgery and you can confirm this for yourself.
The PDF directly from the White House has LAYERS to it.
For those who don't know, if you scan a document into a computer either directly to PDF or to a program that will print to PDF you only get ONE LAYER in the end product. Any other layers indicate editing was done to the scan...unless you're smart enough to "flatten" the image which converts the edited document back into one layer. Then you would need something like a hex editor to search for proof that the document was modified.
So, anyone can take the PDF directly from the White House website, open it with Adobe Illustrator and unlock the bound layers. This would not be possible if there was only one layer. You cannot "un-flatten" a PDF. Binding layers into one layer is done so you don't accidentally muddle stuff in placement when you click on the document with the mouse pointer. Binding allows you to keep layers together as a whole. Flattening permanently converts the layers into a single layer.
So, the PDF directly from the White House has multiple unlockable layers showing that entries on the document were added in stages. This is clear evidence that it is a composite image, not an original.
Forgery...pure and simple.
What is dumbfounding is that this is such a blatant oversight that any decent forger shouldn't have made this mistake....as if it was intended for this forgery to be discovered by those who would inevitably examine it.
Go to any Photoshop forum and see what experts in Photoshop have to say on the topic. The average user (like me) would not have spotted this by looking at the PDF. I based my initial assessment on a visual inspection to see if it looked fake. My best suspicion would be on how the document didn't looked "scanned" (if you print to a PDF from memory vs scan on a flatbed you'll understand this). I wanted someone with expertise to weigh in before I cast judgment against the document being authentic.
Egg Layers (Short Form) topic
The yolk is on you. You also have the white slimey layer Too many layers here. (11)
EDITFound Another layer. Now there are 12 layers. WOO WOO
Last edited by sartresue on 28 Apr 2011, 10:47 am, edited 1 time in total.
28 Apr 2011, 10:15 am
