|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
ghostrider
Joined: 27 Jun 2011
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
bigverne
Joined: 12 May 2004
|
 Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 10:31 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Quote: |
| You answer to the nation, the 100% who elected you |
That's some Gaddafi-level election figures right there! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 10:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ghostrider wrote: |
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/birth-certificate-long-form.pdf
It was signed by Alvin T. Onaka who is the Registrar of Vital Statistics for the State of Hawaii. So he must be part of the "conspiracy" that visitorq has uncovered. This is getting ridiculous. |
You are ridiculous. Your pathetic "appeal to authority" aside, how do address the fact that the download is separated into many layers that have been digitally altered? Hm?
Also, there is no signature by Alvie T. Onaka, so you're just talking a whole lot of nonsense.
Basically the only half-assed attempt at a rebuttal I've heard since the certificate was released (awhile back) was that some scanners supposedly automatically separate layers. While this is basically false (which anyone who has a scanner and has scanned documents can attest) at best it shows an insulting level of negligence on the part of the White House for releasing a useless document. At worst, it shows that they actually fabricated the birth certificate. In either case, it means that all the smug, idiotic liberal types who like to make fun of so-called "birthers" and label them conspiracy nuts are in fact themselves completely full of crap. If the White House can't even do so much as release a proper document that doesn't separate into layers, then they deserve to have all the scrutiny they've been getting, and then some. Again, I had no reason to even doubt Obama was a citizen until I downloaded this ridiculously shoddy birth certificate and viewed it for myself. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
comm
Joined: 22 Jun 2010
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 10:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Captain Corea wrote: |
I wouldn't give in... because I honestly believe he'll never be satisfied.
It's far too similar to feeding an online troll - with near matching hair! |
Can I get $5 million for my favorite charity for feeding an online troll? Please?
I feel like I've been neglecting Kiva.org a bit lately and want to make up for it. I'll even -gasp- share my college transcript. And when you think about it, is it unreasonable for your employer to ask for your college transcript? Isn't it reasonable to (as his collective employers) ask that of President Obama? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
actionjackson
Joined: 30 Dec 2007
Location: Any place I'm at
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 11:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| comm wrote: |
| Captain Corea wrote: |
I wouldn't give in... because I honestly believe he'll never be satisfied.
It's far too similar to feeding an online troll - with near matching hair! |
Can I get $5 million for my favorite charity for feeding an online troll? Please?
I feel like I've been neglecting Kiva.org a bit lately and want to make up for it. I'll even -gasp- share my college transcript. And when you think about it, is it unreasonable for your employer to ask for your college transcript? Isn't it reasonable to (as his collective employers) ask that of President Obama? |
I'm just going to throw this out there but I think it depends on the job one is applying for on whether or not they should have to supply their college transcripts. I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure there is no law stating that one must have a college education to be president. Furthermore, the University of Chicago Law School is ranked in the top 5 U.S. law schools, I wouldn't think they would just let anyone walk in and start teaching. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mnjetter
Joined: 21 Feb 2012
Location: Seoul, S. Korea
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 26, 2012 12:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| visitorq wrote: |
| Unibrow wrote: |
| Why won't Obama release the birth certificiate? Is he evn a real american? I dont know what to believe anymore. |
You can download the long form birth certificate from the whitehouse.gov website here.
You can then open it up in Adobe Illustrator and open up the layers palette to see that it is not a scan at all, but a complete fake that was digitally cut and pasted together (this is the original document released by the White House itself). Note the pitch-black text that is digitally overlaid (it is NOT ink). Note the kerning in the digitally altered text (impossible to have on typewriters). Note the uniform background that is a completely separate layer from the text (you can toggle it on and off in the layers palette).
It's right there for anybody to download and see for themselves. It takes 3 minutes. The long form birth certificate is a ridiculously shoddy fake. |
Pitch-black text is what you get when you digitally increase the contrast of a scanned document, which is likely what happened here. There are faint handwriting marks, but those would certainly show up in a contrast enhancement exactly the way they are if they were actually eraser marks and not pen marks. The background of the text has been removed and replaced with a fake security backing, which does look a little hokey, but I see no clear-cut evidence of complete fabrication. Just a shoddy job of document editing.
Also, kerning has existed for typewriters since the early 1940s. The birth certificate is from 1961. Do your homework before spreading conspiracy theories. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 26, 2012 2:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mnjetter wrote: |
| visitorq wrote: |
| Unibrow wrote: |
| Why won't Obama release the birth certificiate? Is he evn a real american? I dont know what to believe anymore. |
You can download the long form birth certificate from the whitehouse.gov website here.
You can then open it up in Adobe Illustrator and open up the layers palette to see that it is not a scan at all, but a complete fake that was digitally cut and pasted together (this is the original document released by the White House itself). Note the pitch-black text that is digitally overlaid (it is NOT ink). Note the kerning in the digitally altered text (impossible to have on typewriters). Note the uniform background that is a completely separate layer from the text (you can toggle it on and off in the layers palette).
It's right there for anybody to download and see for themselves. It takes 3 minutes. The long form birth certificate is a ridiculously shoddy fake. |
Pitch-black text is what you get when you digitally increase the contrast of a scanned document, which is likely what happened here. |
No, you do NOT get pitch black text, unless it is digitally altered. Black ink is not pitch black like that when it is scanned. Even a thick, permanent black marker would show up multicolored when you zoom in. This is just common sense.
| Quote: |
| There are faint handwriting marks, but those would certainly show up in a contrast enhancement exactly the way they are if they were actually eraser marks and not pen marks. |
Why the hell is there any kind of digital "enhancement"? Why can't the White House just release a proper unaltered document scan?
| Quote: |
| The background of the text has been removed and replaced with a fake security backing, which does look a little hokey, but I see no clear-cut evidence of complete fabrication. Just a shoddy job of document editing. |
Oh please. The fake background is nothing to be concerned about?? You've just admitted the document was edited, so I have no idea how you could possibly argue with a straight face that the document should be accepted as genuine proof of anything. Again, at best it's a worthless document. At worst a blatant forgery.
| Quote: |
| Also, kerning has existed for typewriters since the early 1940s. The birth certificate is from 1961. Do your homework before spreading conspiracy theories. |
I'm no expert, but I'm pretty sure this is not the case. Some old IBM typewriters (which the Hawaii office may or may not have had use of) were capable of "proportional spacing" (which simply makes the fixed spacing of letters proportionate to their width), but that's not the same as kerning per se. Kerning is when the type actually overlap each other like they do in modern word processors. Anyway, the kerning thing might be debatable, but regardless it is still the other evidence that is the most damning (the kerning is just highly suspicious). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 26, 2012 4:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
The definition of a dog whistle is that the bigotry is subtle enough to slip past most people's consciousness. Donald Trump & Friends are now playing tuba in a kindergartners' triangles and Quaker Oatmeal box drum session after recess.
Can anyone say 'flop sweat'?
Desperation is a sad thing to watch--if it's for a worthy cause. When otherwise, it's kind of a delight.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mnjetter
Joined: 21 Feb 2012
Location: Seoul, S. Korea
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 26, 2012 5:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| visitorq wrote: |
| No, you do NOT get pitch black text, unless it is digitally altered. Black ink is not pitch black like that when it is scanned. Even a thick, permanent black marker would show up multicolored when you zoom in. This is just common sense. |
Have you ever used a scanner before? If you scan in greyscale with enhanced contrast (a feature included in all new scanners that I know of after about 2005), or if you scan in plain "black and white," you get exactly that.
| Quote: |
| Why the hell is there any kind of digital "enhancement"? Why can't the White House just release a proper unaltered document scan? |
Good question. I'm not commenting on the authenticity of the document. Just poking holes in your specific arguments.
| Quote: |
| Oh please. The fake background is nothing to be concerned about?? You've just admitted the document was edited, so I have no idea how you could possibly argue with a straight face that the document should be accepted as genuine proof of anything. Again, at best it's a worthless document. At worst a blatant forgery. |
When, precisely, did I argue that the document should be accepted as genuine proof? All I said was that the things you pointed out do not automatically provide proof of the opposite. Glass half full and all that.
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| Also, kerning has existed for typewriters since the early 1940s. The birth certificate is from 1961. Do your homework before spreading conspiracy theories. |
I'm no expert, but I'm pretty sure this is not the case. Some old IBM typewriters (which the Hawaii office may or may not have had use of) were capable of "proportional spacing" (which simply makes the fixed spacing of letters proportionate to their width), but that's not the same as kerning per se. Kerning is when the type actually overlap each other like they do in modern word processors. Anyway, the kerning thing might be debatable, but regardless it is still the other evidence that is the most damning (the kerning is just highly suspicious). |
Good that you admit that you're no expert. I am. I've been collecting typewriters since I was ten years old. I have used and studied them for almost twenty years.
There are two possibilities. First, some typewriters did not have the most consistent of gears when typing. The pull of the ribbon and other factors caused the paper to move different distances when it came to typing specific letters. That's why you would end up with typewriter "fingerprints." For example, the "a" key on the typewriter that I used to use would pull to the left, slightly overlapping with whatever preceded it and making a little extra space on the left.
I know that's not what you're talking about, though. You are correct in assuming that proportional spacing was the kind of kerning that I was initially referring to. If you examine the portions of text that were likely written by a typewriter (the answers to the questions), there are no examples of letter spacing that couldn't be done by letters positioned flush to the edge of their hammer. By the 1960s, proportional spacing had gotten pretty sophisticated, and would absolutely be capable of everything I see on the certificate.
If you look at the other letters (the questions themselves), I don't see any immediate evidence of kerning that couldn't be achieved with proportional spacing, but even if there were, that would likely have been done on a printing press (which could absolutely kern with overlapping characters) instead of a typewriter anyway.
Also, just as a last thought, if you look at some of the letters--for example, the capital W in question 4--in fact, there is clear evidence of lack of genuine overlap kerning.
EDIT: By the way, just to clarify, kerning is not limited to overlap of characters. Even on a computer, when you adjust the kerning of your typeface, you can add negative kerning, adding extra space between your letters instead of the other way around. Kerning is just the amount of space between characters adjusted to fit the aesthetics of individual letter combinations. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 26, 2012 7:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
A religious person comes up against an ethical problem. He could go to a neutral observer for advice, but because he is religious, goes to a preacher. In other words, he knows the kind of answer he wants and goes to the kind of person who will give him the advice he already knows he wants to receive.
Donald Trump, a capitalist who has by definition no ethics other than making money, projects his value system onto Obama.
Duh. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Unposter
Joined: 04 Jun 2006
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 26, 2012 8:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Trump just wants his tax cut and his celebrity. Ignore him. He won't go away but whatever he says doesn't deserve responding to. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 26, 2012 11:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mnjetter wrote: |
| visitorq wrote: |
| No, you do NOT get pitch black text, unless it is digitally altered. Black ink is not pitch black like that when it is scanned. Even a thick, permanent black marker would show up multicolored when you zoom in. This is just common sense. |
Have you ever used a scanner before? If you scan in greyscale with enhanced contrast (a feature included in all new scanners that I know of after about 2005), or if you scan in plain "black and white," you get exactly that. |
This document wasn't greyscale, so not sure why you would bring that up. Regardless, I scan documents all the time and never have I encountered what you are talking about: the text has not merely been darkened, it has been vectorized into solid black, and separated into different layers that are distinct even from the (fake) background.
Hell, some of the letters are even identical copies of each other (right down to the pixel). This is definite proof that the document is not authentic.
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| Why the hell is there any kind of digital "enhancement"? Why can't the White House just release a proper unaltered document scan? |
Good question. I'm not commenting on the authenticity of the document. Just poking holes in your specific arguments. |
Why don't you comment on the authenticity of the document?
| Quote: |
| When, precisely, did I argue that the document should be accepted as genuine proof? All I said was that the things you pointed out do not automatically provide proof of the opposite. Glass half full and all that. |
So you don't deny that the document should not be accepted as genuine proof then? Good, I hope you'll keep that in mind the next time hear the talking heads on MSNBC making fun of "birthers".
| Quote: |
| Good that you admit that you're no expert. I am. I've been collecting typewriters since I was ten years old. I have used and studied them for almost twenty years. |
Oh, you're a typewriter expert? Forgive me for taking that claim with a huge grain of salt. I was just being humble, by the way. I actually do know a fair deal about typography; I just haven't studied the history of typewriters down the different models and what each was capable of in each year (somehow I doubt you have either)...
| Quote: |
I know that's not what you're talking about, though. You are correct in assuming that proportional spacing was the kind of kerning that I was initially referring to. If you examine the portions of text that were likely written by a typewriter (the answers to the questions), there are no examples of letter spacing that couldn't be done by letters positioned flush to the edge of their hammer. By the 1960s, proportional spacing had gotten pretty sophisticated, and would absolutely be capable of everything I see on the certificate.
If you look at the other letters (the questions themselves), I don't see any immediate evidence of kerning that couldn't be achieved with proportional spacing, but even if there were, that would likely have been done on a printing press (which could absolutely kern with overlapping characters) instead of a typewriter anyway. |
This is your opinion. I suppose in the case of kerning, you can eke out the benefit of the doubt. Until you actually prove it, however, it remains highly suspicious. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Udo
Joined: 22 May 2011
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 26, 2012 12:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
He is a product of affirmative action. I have seen this for the past 35 years during my stints in the gov't / private sector. It is unfair in the sense that he was considered "black" for affirmative purposes and manifold by political correctness. He draws heavily on slogans as opposed to articulation.
Bottom Line so I won't bore you- he is probably IQ 120-135 on a Weschler scale maybe less since he has been groomed for a couple of decades. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JustinC
Joined: 10 Mar 2012
Location: We Are The World!
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 26, 2012 4:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I thought he was the product of a connected upbringing and a former President who couldn't string four words together to make a coherent sentence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 26, 2012 4:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Udo wrote: |
He is a product of affirmative action. I have seen this for the past 35 years during my stints in the gov't / private sector. It is unfair in the sense that he was considered "black" for affirmative purposes and manifold by political correctness. He draws heavily on slogans as opposed to articulation.
Bottom Line so I won't bore you- he is probably IQ 120-135 on a Weschler scale maybe less since he has been groomed for a couple of decades. |
This complaint truly baffles me. What do you call that of which George W. Bush is a product? Persistence and grit? Give me a break.
I am astounded at the tendency of people to complain about people drawing dozens of dollars a day from the government for food stamps or Section 8 or even phone assistance when children of the elite like Mitt Romney are bailed out for outrageous sums as high as $10 million. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
