While it's disappointing that they are still discriminating, it at least opens blood donations by people like me: a straight man sexually assaulted at the age of 11 by a boy of age 14. More than 25 years ago. And now you know the reason (as if anyone should need one) I first started fighting for gay rights.

Yes, Commander Kochner, I committed the cardinal sin of rounding 24-1/2 (+/- 1/4) up to 25. I shall now go and don my hairshirt and beg forgiveness from the gods of precision for daring to use whole numbers.

<div class="idc-message" id="idc-comment-msg-div-988092302"><a class="idc-close" title="Click to Close Message" href="javascript: IDC.ui.close_message(988092302)"><span>Close Message</span> Comment posted. <p class="idc-nomargin"><a class="idc-share-facebook" target="_new" href="http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php?u=http%3A%2F%2 Fwww.birtherreport.com%2F2015%2F07%2Freport-smoking-gun-evidence-revealed.html#IDComment988092302&t=I%20just%20commented%20on%20Report%3A%20Smoking%20Gun%20Evidence%20Revealed%20Proving%20Obama%20Birth%20Certificate%20Computer%20Made%20Forgery!%3F%20-%20Birther%20Report" style="text-decoration: none;"><span class="idc-share-inner"><span>Share on Facebook</span></span> or <a href="javascript: IDC.ui.close_message(988092302)">Close Message I rounded up, Kerchner, since the image was of low quality. 24.4 or 25, my point still stands. The scale is different than the brand Irey used. Which probably isn't exactly 24.000000000000000000000000000000000000000 repeats, but is reasonably close.

RC would love to comment at Birther Report, ramboike. Perhaps you could petition the admins to lift his ban?

Bear in mind that a column is half a repeat, which means that when Irey noted that there was an extra column, that's roughly .5 of a repeat. Of course, he wasn't exact in his measurement of the extra width, so .4 repeats is within his error bars.

Actually, John, if you look closely you can see the slightly off-white background did get copied. Keep in mind that (with very rare exceptions) printers and copiers don't have white ink or any way of generating white other than relying on the blank paper being white. So all one would expect to see in a copy of a page with white background is a slight ghosting effect. You can try it out yourself using colored paper instead of white paper to see what it would look like. Try reducing the copy so that it doesn't cover the whole sheet; that will help you detect where the edge of the original was.

Why didn't you also post his three follow up comments? Let me fix that for you:

Reality Check July 30, 2015 at 11:33 am (Quote) #
Reality Check:
I miscounted late last night. The pattern is 24 across.

Actually it is about 24-1/2 so it depends on where you count the vertical tick marks.

Reality Check July 30, 2015 at 11:37 am (Quote) #
Kevin

I see now where Irey tried (ineptly I might say) to address the Edge Erase feature.

I checked a sheet of green security paper against the Savannah Guthrie photo and the pattern matches. There are approximately 24+ repeats across the narrow dimension. So if you are counting double vertical bars your will get 24 or 25 depending on how the pattern aligns with the sheet. One thing to remember is that these sheets are cut from a larger roll so I am sure that there are variations from batch to batch depending on how the cutters line up. Therefore, it is meaningless to try to take horizontal slices of various birth certificates and try to match up the pattern.

Another thing I found when examining the sheets is that there is a slight skew in the pattern. The sheet cut is not quite parallel to the pattern so that will cause a variation in where the pattern starts as you go up and down the left edge of a sheet. I don’t know whether the skew is intentional or just manufacturing tolerances.

Kevin is correct. You cannot use the form to calibrate to the green security pattern unless you know the printer reduction settings.

Reality Check July 30, 2015 at 1:27 pm (Quote) #
I checked the pattern repeat on a sheet of green security paper and calculated the pattern repeat compared with the Savannah Guthrie photo.

A sheet of 8.5 in wide security paper is 8.5 in or 215.9 mm wide. I measured 10 pattern cycles and divided that measurement by 10 to calculate the pattern width of 8.85 mm. That means there are 24.395 repeats across the page.

When I printed the Guthrie photo the width was 183 mm. The pattern width was 7.5 mm. That gives a pattern repeat of 24.4. This is remarkably close considering the Guthrie photo barely shows the pattern and it was taken with a cell phone. That would introduce distortion. I had to enhance the contrast just to make out the pattern to get a measurement on the Guthrie photo.

Meh. While Irey tries to explain the existence of the edge erase as an attempt to hide the forgery, rather than the normal operation of a Xerox WorkCentre, it's not central to his argument, and he properly accounts for the effect that the edge erase has on his main analysis. I wouldn't call that debunking before publishing. The flaws lie elsewhere.

Something I noticed while reviewing the document:

Irey's graphics don't match his written description. He claims that he only enlarged the Obama pdf in the horizontal direction in order to get the hash marks to line up, which made his 160 mm dimension stretch to 163 mm, while keeping the 133 mm dimension intact. But if you look at the graphic, the vertical dimension is also enlarged, and the bottom hash of the 133 mm dimension comes to a different point on the BC. Assuming he is not outright lying, he either enlarged both, and then enlarged in the horizontal direction again (invalidating his claim about the 133 mm dimension), or he thought he was only enlarging in the horizontal direction but actually enlarged both.

Indeed, it's almost as if the forger was trying to make the spacing look the same as that seen in all the other birth certificates from Kapiolani in the early 1960's. How nefarious of her!