The only mystery is why someone would actually post that birther nonsense you posted.

Ain't that the truth.

And it's shortsighted to exclusively blame the media: without the consumers (and the advertisers), the media product ceases to exist. So it's not exclusive;y the media's fault - we the consumers bear responsibility here, too.

Well, the conspiracies lives on!

It just goes to show that proof and evidence is wasted on the true believers. Disconfirmation bias and cognitive dissonance at its finest.

Is it safe to say the same about the pictures of OBL?

Yup! Obama's smart enough to be part of a great conspiracy to defraud the American people and take over the country, but with all that conspiratorial power, can't manage to fake his birth certificate well enough to fool and barely post-pubescent kid with Illustrator.

Did anyone really expect different?

If president of US cant forge his Birth certificate then its a proof that Americans are idiots.
Or is it that Obama is playing with you brains.
I mean if all was perfect...then you now....
Damn we live in a matrix.

Narrator sounds young. Watched 30 seconds of it, and i've already gotten the impression this guy is some young college kid. Probably one of those Yellow Elephant types.

OK, i watched three of this guys videos.

the first is an analysis of the layers that went into making the pdf, as shown using Adobe Illustrator.

the second is a defense of his claim that scanning alone does not produce these layers

the third is a critique of the short form birth certificate released much earlier.

The analysis of the short form birth certificate focuses on its lack of creases, mint condition and typing anomalies comparing the apparent age of the certificate with the form of wording used then and now. All criticism of the short form certificate is invalid given that it was publicly claimed by the WH to be a recent official copy provided by State of Hawaii. It is therefore not surprising it is in mint condition, uses contemporary wording, and is uncreased.

The first two however provide compelling evidence that the pdf of the long form certificate is not exactly the same document as the official birth certificate.

The quality of the work gone into the changes is careless.

However the analysis is unable to show what was under the parts that were changed.

That is, it does not show if it was clearly an invented document, a substantially altered document, or simply an attempt to enhance the original to improve legibility without substantive changes.

Hey, seriously, this whole thing is messed up. I know the birthers are sort of whacky, but the people who accept Obama on face value are exhibiting a certain level of faith and disbelief, just from the opposite direction. Come on, this is the Transparency President, what a load. Why so much drama over NOT producing a legit certificate?

A riding buddy of mine posted

Followed by
Now, I know you don't want to be proven wrong after a long and vigorous defense, and after heaping ridicule on the "birthers", but.... What if there is something to this? The "certificate" came straight from the White House, this isn't some crazy stuff dug up from nowhere.

I don't have a dog in this fight, I say fait acompli, he's already president. But this has a strong odor of Dan Rather's fake documents/Morton Downey Jr. backwards swastika. You know, a birth certificate is no big deal. Trump is right, why not kill the rumors and produce it? If you don't have anything to hide, why keep hiding? :arrgh!:

Conversely, if you don't have anything to hide - why bother lending any "credibility" (illusory or real) to the claims by responding at all?

I can't prove or disprove this one way or the other; in my own experience, I've used scanning software that will absolutely produce the "Layers" results seen here. It's been awhile, and I'm not 100% sure what software processes I used, since I'm not still in that business; I am 100% certain that I have done exactly what this person did in the video, and am also 100% certain that the chain of custody in doing so started when I was handed the paper document, and ended when I finished "disassembling" the final product.

(For the record, I believe the scanner I used was an HP, the platform was a Mac running OS 7.x, the software was Illustrator 4(?) & Acrobat Reader. I cannot recall the scanning software - might have been QuickPage(?) or something like that; it did OCR and image scanning. My memory may not be completely accurate on this, though.)

In my experience, the "deconstruction" of the scanned document is an absolute fabrication of "results" based on the desires of the presenter, and is not consistent with, nor indicative in any way of a fabricated document.

No, because there's a mountain of evidence to prove that everything's legit. Birth announcements in the newspaper from 1960 whatever, the entity that issued the original document saying "yes, this is a real and true document, shut up you birthers are crazy"...but that's all discounted because someone who opened up Photoshop didn't like what they saw? That's sketchy "evidence" at best. When you weigh the two against each other, there's really no contest. The birthers are asking someone to believe that there's a fraud on a massive scale, involving the deceased parents of the man who would be president, the hospital he was born in, the state of Hawaii all the way up to and including the entire U.S. government, and the evidence they have for that is the say-so of amateur Photoshop jockeys.

Grasping at shreds of dubious evidence and discounting every piece of evidence to the contrary, no matter what it is or how solid it is, highlights the cognitive bias in certain people and is the main reason why they should be ignored and discounted as loons.

Let me know when you get around to analyzing Cap'n Crunch's naval commission documents. I have the sneaking suspicion he's not a real Cap'n. :har::har::har: