BAF, nobody is questioning that there are layers. Of course there are layers. They are created when you optimize a PDF, which is often something like an "optimize for the web" option.

I tried it out on a scanned certificate, and I got layers and seemingly mismatched text as well. The only conclusion must be that my brother wasn't really born in Illinois.

Did you watch the video? Did you see that man's obviously fake date.

This goes beyond Hawaii. This is a global conspiracy. All of our birth certificates are fake!

Any evidence against a forgery just becomes part of the conspiracy. That's just how it works.

The video you linked to shows sufficient proof that layers are a natural part of optimizing a PDF for the web. Even if I were to take the additional steps that you are suggesting, that would not prevent me from cheating. I could easily have two versions (doctored and clean) and silently switch between them.

If somebody is genuinely interested in the truth and doubts videos like the one you supplied, the only thing he can do is try it out for himself. And then maybe he would even have to study up on how the entire process of scanning documents works from a technical perspective.

And furthermore, what's to stop people from saying "Fine, these scans are authentic, non-forged digital copies of the certificate... but the certificate itself is fake."? Nothing.

As I've already said, these "forged" scans must be an indication of a conspiracy between the Hawaiian government and Obama. There's absolutely no way for Obama to be the only person involved. So people who believe in the forgery obviously believe in some sort of higher conspiracy; debunking one aspect (fake PDF) does nothing to the overall birther movement.

Why did Obama wait three years before requesting an exemption to the policy of not releasing the long form certificate? Precisely because of this circus; there's nothing to gain. People who understand the fact that he was born in Hawaii need no further proof. The conspiracy theorists will simply widen the scope of the conspiracy.

Everyone else is thinking the same about you Neil.

I didn't realize you spoke for everyone Thomas.

Its pretty obvious. I just made an educated guess.

Oh, there's no question that the CIA, FBI, etc are incompetent money-sucking leeches. Thanks for pointing out the obvious.

In unrelated news... First, they try to deport his favorite aunt, then they question his birth certificate, now they are casting aspersions on his father. What next, they frame him for robbing a man at gunpoint, like O.J.? Obama must have really ticked them off.

Actually, when I state that what was officially release on the website is a "forgery" I am talking about the image itself, not nessecarily the document. The image has been "forged" that is, it has been altered as evidence by the layers. Does the image in the PDF represent the original document? There's no way of knowing without seeing the actual document, but if the image was edited, and that appears most likely, than that leads one to believe that it no longer represents the original document, which means the image has been "forged". It is being passed off as if it were an exact digital copy of the original when it has obviously been edited.

Why was it edited? What are they trying to hide?

No matter how you look at it, the original document is NOT being shown online, the image you see has been edited. Play your word games all you like, but a misrepresentation has taken place by the man (it is ultimately HIS responsibility no matter who did the actual editing) in the highest office your country.

Using that logic I would say it is pretty obvious that everyone thinks you're an @sshole.

Why wouldn't the Hawaiian officials who have seen the original certificate and have given Obama the document speak out if Obama has doctored it?

That's the biggest reason why it makes no sense that Obama has somehow altered the official document he was given.

"Edited"? No, that implies textual changes were made. But is it a direct 1:1 scan? Obviously not. I think the most likely thing is that it went through an "optimize for the web" process.

I have confirmed that it creates layers on my own scans. This is the opposite of "burying ones head"... it's called doing your own research. Don't believe me? Don't believe that video posted earlier? Try it yourself.

Is the PDF a legal document? Absolutely not! It's an unauthorized scan of a certified copy that has no legal bearing whatsoever.

The two certified copies are legal and sufficient proof. I've not seen them myself because, well, there only exists two of them right now, and Obama didn't think I should have my own personal copy. I assume one of them is on display somewhere if you really want to go look at it. Maybe Obama should send each American citizen a certified copy.

http://www.theonion.com/articles/afterbirthers-demand-to-see-obamas-placenta,6866/

I don't know one way or the other what's going on here, but are you really so naive that you think this couldn't be pulled off? Give the right person a bribe, and nobody ever speaks of it. As if these sort of things don't happen all the time in the government as it is - there is plenty of corruption.

I guess someone couldn't distinguish between the phrases "forged" and "optimized by a scanner"...

Then they should have paid some fucking attention while Bush Jr. was in office.

The layers don't tell you anything about what put them there. It could have been automatically done through software or it could have been humans. You can't know. How do we even know what software was used to create the PDF? Everybody seems to think it was Adobe Illustrator, but I haven't seen any proof of this.. Without knowing the software used it's impossible to say. Could a computer program have manipulated a computer file? ZOMG, I think it could have. So there you go.

The original document was not digital so it's obviously not an exact digital copy. I have a rule: I hate computer<->paper interfaces (AKA printers and scanners). Why? They do a poor job and are usually giving you balls more than they're working for you.

Matter of fact, just today I spent a good 40 minutes trying to finally get working drivers installed in Linux so I could print directly to the office printer instead of through a colleague proxy (I tried months ago too, but failed). Even though the exact model was identified and drivers were installed, they didn't work. I had to go on HP's Web site (which insisted that distros usually keep up to date and that I've probably already got the up to date drivers), which redirected me to a third party Web site, download some I don't even know, let that run, log out, run something else... Ugh. Fuck printers and scanners and fuck paper too.

No matter how you look at it, you are not an expert and can't possible know that. You are making assertions about the format of a computer file and the software that created it that you are not intimately familiar with. Pull your head out of your ass already.