First of all, that was some tl;dr in your first post. An abstract of what kind of point you were going to make might have made me read past the first four sentences.
Second, you were spouting about inane birther stuff, which is an instant turn off.
Lastly I wasn't necessarily calling you a birther, I just said I would never understand the mind of a birther, nor any conspiracy nut for that matter.
That was kinda my whole point. There
was no abstract - I was honestly going through the document as I was writing the post up, recording my conclusions. Yes, I could have edited in a summary after the post was complete, but the idea wasn't to get a specific point across - it was to point out the oddities as I saw them, and ask you all what you made of them.
Everything seemed to point to a very unusual amount of incompetence on the part of whoever digitally handled that document - whether they were intending to commit forgery or make it more readable, I didn't know. All I knew was that at first, second, and third glance,
something was messed-up and raising a lot of legitimate questions with a lot of people. The fact that it sounded like what you call "birther" stuff was because hey, the (apparent) facts were pointing at a document that had been severely digitally altered, which I gather is what the so-called "birther" proponents generally claim.
In any case, the documents really indicate extreme incompetence by whoever was responsible for creating those PDFs - especially the first one, now that I've thought things over! I mean, it looks like the person was told to post a PDF of Obama's birth certificate, so they Googled for an image of it, found the one on Snopes, physically printed it out (hence the header and footer), and scanned that in to get a PDF! Utter incompetence, and I'm still really surprised that HLP hadn't picked up on the whole thing... debunking the forgery claims or not. *shrug* Whatever.
