Wouldn't it be easier to edit just a single layer?
Also, how do you know it's easy to do? Have you done it, or know someone who has? Just curious.
If you want people to notice you doctored the do ent, sure
It's actually easier to just edit a non-layered do ent, basically dragging your argument that the multi-layer format is fishier than a non-layered straight into the ignorant and absurd territory...
Seems to me it's more effective to alter a do ent that can be explained away as a normal feature of a copy process. After-all, you two lemmings are proving that there is no possibility in your mind that it could be an altered do ent. If this was a forgery, they sure fooled you two.
Except that post-facto digital alterations to a digital do ent are quite detectable, even more than non-digital alterations.
The point here is that your contention that the do ent is intrinsically "fishy" because it's multi-layered, it's actually completely erroneous. It's actually more "fishy" to see a single-layer do ent, since it's easier to hide the doctoring.
Whats worse is you calling people ignorant, when the grossly ignorant all along was nobody other than you.
Sorry that you are so narrow minded.
Do you think it's a forgery?
Yes or no.
You have officially derailed...
I take exception to the inference that WC was ever on the rails in this thread.
You say it isn't a forgery, but then turn around and say it is "fishy" even though there is a logical, reasonable, and fully plausible explanation.
Cognitive, meet dissonance.
Dissonance meet cognitive.
You have to know that this sounds like the 9-11 truthers who find things "fishy" about the "official" explanation, right?Cognitive dissonance is an uncomfortable feeling caused by holding conflicting ideas simultaneously. The theory of cognitive dissonance proposes that people have a motivational drive to reduce dissonance. They do this by changing their at udes, beliefs, and actions.[2] Dissonance is also reduced by justifying, blaming, and denying. It is one of the most influential and extensively studied theories in social psychology.
Start down that path at your peril.It's fishy that Bush's cousin workedf for building security at the towers
Either the explanation is reasonable, or it isn't.
By stating it is "fishy" you are directly implying that the most plausible explanation, i.e. somewhere in the scan/save/email/host on server process Adobe OCR split the file into two layers, is not reasonable.
Is that what you are trying to say?
It's "fooled" us because it's much harder to do it on multiple levels than one, rendering your "fishy" argument null and void.
Your argument frankly makes no sense. You're saying the more authentic something looks, the more suspect it is. Kinda like a conspiracist, you're willing to keep changing your argument if it gives you hope at being right.
There's some rock-hard stupid on display here.
WC, you know, it shouldn't be a point of pride to believe in things that make no sense, or have no proof. You wear those beliefs like a badge of courage. YOU are the narrow-minded ones, as no matter what we say, you continue to grasp for arguments that justify your new belief.
.
No. I don't think it's a forgery.
Why do you think it would be easier to forge a multiple-layer do ent rather than a single-layer do ent?
It's not necessarily easier, but the green around the text is already removed in a manner that is explainable. Subtle mistakes are more easily blamed as the process. The black and white characters have no aliasing to worry about and are then easily moved as needed. The green is easily manipulated as needed also.
Think about it. A recreation can look as good as the pdf scan.
Dude. You're a smart guy. Why the would you argue with someone who clearly commands a much more in-depth knowledge of the subject at hand than you do, when you yourself know almost nothing? You can't even answer basic questions being asked of you, yet everyone else is narrow minded?
It's astounding to me how someone can show intelligence at times and then prove themselves to be completely incapable of rational thought.
WC is a smart guy?!?!!?!? If WC is smart I must be the lovechild of Albert Einstein and Hawking.
I'm sorry but there is more to being smart than copy and pasting wikipedia. Perhaps a bit of critical thinking. Perhaps.
All I can say to the above is:
But in the meantime you're intent on stirring up "what if's" and conspiracy theories. At the end of the day if you believe that it's real, why all of the theatrics?
Karl Rove had it right. More people should have heeded his warnings. For all of his failings, he is a pretty bright guy.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_1...73-503544.html
This is all you really needed to say IMO:
If you go and look at post #47, all I did was point out a problem that people would perceive. Then in post 50, yes, I decided to stir the pot.But in the meantime you're intent on stirring up "what if's" and conspiracy theories. At the end of the day if you believe that it's real, why all of the theatrics?
Karl Rove had it right. More people should have heeded his warnings. For all of his failings, he is a pretty bright guy.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_1...73-503544.html
This is all you really needed to say IMO:
I too, agree this birther issue should be avoided by any candidate who wishes to be viable. I have stated similar remarks in the past. I also said to the effect that I believed it possible, that not showing proof, was possibly an intentional trap to make others look bad. For all I know, this format that was released was to keep the controversy alive rather than kill it.
If it's not easier, why would someone do it that way? After all, when one if forging something, they want to do it as authentically as possible, which means they're probably going to go the easiest route that would still look authentic. Why would anyone make it harder on themselves?
Also, how do you know easily it is to manipulate the various layers? Is this based on expertise you possess, or an expert opinion you found somewhere?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
