I don’t really want to write this article, so I’ll make it short.
Jack Cashill published an article in WorldNetDaily with this picture of Barack Obama and his grandparents:
Obama with grandparents (WND)
Cashill wrote:
The bench is real. The grandparents are real. The wall behind them is real. Barack Obama is not. He has been conspicuously photo-shopped in. Who did this and why remains as much a mystery as Obama’s extended stay in New York.
Cashill then shows the supposedly original photo:
Obama’s leg with grandparents (WND)
The prankster who made the second photo didn’t quite get rid off Obama completely–he left his pants (shown by the arrow).
Supposedly Cashill got it from a guy on YouTube. Birthers will believe anything. WND scrubbed the photos.
The repeating pattern in the bush to the right of Mrs. Dunham is another dead give away.
And the birthers wonder why people don’t believe them…
This is why he, Lucas D. Smith, targets the birthers with his scams. Strong confirmation bias coupled with “magical” or wishful thinking makes the birthers easy marks.
I loved this one, Doc. It’s so absurd.
Alex Pareene at Salon:
http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2011/04/07/birther_photoshop_fail
And Joey Farah must have been upset that Pareene ignored the fake legal mumbo-jumbo Farah adds to his emails. Pareene posted quotes.
http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2011/04/11/joseph_farah_wnd_misinformation/index.html
And the video at YouTube. Hilarious.
WND has made many such phony claims, what is surprizing is that their readers continue to trust this lousy source, no mater how often they are debunked. Hating Obama causes brain damage.
i have heard that among right wing christians it is considered not merely permissible but obligatory to deceive non-infidels.
And this comes as a surprise? 🙂
Blurring present in many places.
Copied and pasted patterns in the bushes and wall.
The unlikely framing of the photo with the subjects to the left.
When they have no evidence, they make things up.
No respect for the dead, for the law, for truth… just hatred.
When caught, they delete the photos.
“What are they hiding?”
Disgusting.
But I’m so glad you’ve caught it here to be archived.
An example of Trump-style politics and Farah-style journalism caught for posterity forever.
And some really ridiculous backpedalling by the birther apologists on YouTube:
“OBVIOUSLY the original photo is not available. Obama was photoshopped into this photo and tried to pass it off as authentic. It is really a piss poor job too. The person in this video did a good job of UNphotoshopping it.”
I think the original creator of the video also claimed, of course only after being called out for his sloppy fake, that all he wanted to do is “show what the original may have looked like”. Of course since he didn’t say that in the video in the first place, it shows again the lies and deceit one can expect from a birther…
The top photo is original.
Bottom photo shows alignment and detail issues caused by copy and paste.
Examine the ground, wall, and trees in the background.
I believe the other posters already did, old sport. That’s why this theory is so ludicrous.
Hi doc. You’re right to point out the photoshopped leg. Also look to the park bench leg that moved with mad. It leaves the bench floating in the air!
I remember seeing this photo in the summer of o9 about the same time that photos of him at occidental posing as Joe cool for a girl classmates camera. What I remarked is that it seems he is wearing a wedding ring! It just seems in retrospect nAtch that some controversy regArding a secret marriage to gain entry back into the country would have surfaced long ago. I guess that there is some restraint after all in the birther ranks 😉
Cashill has cast-iron balls. Because after this scandal of his last week, check out how he begins today’s column:
“Word to Donald Trump: Nothing scares our Lilliputian media like facts. Each fact you present makes them rethink their petty little mission to whittle you down to size.”
Jack Cashill. Talking about how other people are scared of facts.
And the bench!
What I think is funny is what exactly is the conspiracy that’s being presented here? Obama never knew these White people? What about all the other photos he in with them?
Sean. Tisk, tisk tisk… Don’t you know that every photo of Obama with family is faked?
This one -well I have no words. This episode in the birther soap opera speaks for itself.
I just love the way sunlight and the shadows work in the bottom picture. You can totally tell the wall was cloned a lot but they tried to duplicate parts of the sunlight. It just doesn’t jive with reality
Both photos look fake.
Someone explain the strange light area between obama’s left leg and his grandmother.
It seems to me that there should be a shadow there.
Also, if you blow the top photo up obama’s left and right trouser pants leg have a
straight, non-pixelated end to his leg image.
Very strange. To me there are both photoshopped. Sorry.
“leg image”? Kookoo. Actually you may not have realized this but light works in 3 dimensions. Depending on the time of day the light would be at a different angel. You can tell by the shadows of the trees near the wall. Also the bench isn’t against the wall but probably a few feet from it. So the light would be directly hitting the wall behind Obama and his grandparents.
Nonsense.
Why
“Why”
As in, for what possible reason? Unless someone is just chasing shadows and inventing conspiracies like most birfers.
It’s an upright pillar for the bench. Since the bench is still there, you can compare it and especially the stone wall behind it, to these photos. The big tree is still there, and it has grown.
You can compare the altered photo with the wall and it will become extremely obvious.
http://cryptome.org/info/obama-bb/obama-bb.htm
I can’t read this without laughing, but it’s all “expained” here:
http://educate-yourself.org/cn/nicoloffthreestooges6part25apr09.shtml
And I’m telling you that you’re wrong. I have 20 years of experience as a professional using Adobe® Photoshop® software.
I’m also telling you that your confirmation bias has you chasing non-existent aberrations in the photograph.
Pollarik doesn’t count as a professional
I kinda started laughing when I read 3 arms. Yeah the author doesn’t notice his grandfather’s arm is at an angle and arms have elbows and his grandfather could bend his
Exactly. Birthers reek of desperation and homemade hooch.
Farah has to keep his Lie Factory busy.
> If you blow it up you will also see that the light pixels intrude into
his grandmother’s ankle.
You shouldn’t be drawing inferences from an image that has very poor quality to begin with.
First, it is very small. Then it looks like it was JPG-compressed at least two times, possibly including some kind of sharpening or contrast enhancing process, maybe not even in a “good” program such as PS.
In short, it is really impossible to tell if it is unretouched or not. Anything that might seem suspicious can be due to the quality of the image (“bleeding”, pixel patterns etc.). OTOH, anything that might be used to identify tampering can be hidden in the poor quality (I usually retouch my images at the original 21 megapixels, then reduce to about 1.5 megapixels for web publishing which reduces any traces of editing to the sub-pixel level).
This may be different if we had a high-quality version (at least 2 megapixels, first-generation straight-out-of-camera). This would then assume any forging that was not detected must have been done by someone who *really* knew their tools-of-the-trade, not some sloppy amateur.
As many have said, it is virtually impossible to say “this image is not a fake” with 100% certainty; you can only say “this image is a fake” with 100% certainty – as with the second image above.
In addition, another thing that gives the 2nd image away as forged is its blurriness. I don’t think even the best sharpening filters (and I have a couple that are very good) could create image 1 from image 2.
I supposed it was blurred because the forger hoped to hide traces of his PS work (he must have been a real dilettante if he didn’t know the clone tool traces would be noticed by anyone even remotely familiar with editing).
J. Loleczek, Obama takes a picture with his grandparents and you see a conspiracy. You need professional help, see a doctor.
You’re thinking two dimensionally
Borderraven, why don´t you keep taking pictures of underage girls on the beach instead of trolling here and elsewhere ?
What a bunch of clowns. I can manipulate a photo better than that.
I doubt medical science can help.
Uh oh. I think they’ve figured it out!
http://educate-yourself.org/cn/baracksoetorofamilyphoto16sep08.shtml
You’re never yet seen a stupid conspiracy theory you didn’t like, have you?
and if you can make it through that without laughing, try the next bit
http://educate-yourself.org/cn/baracksoetorofamilyphoto16sep08.shtml
it provides proof that Obama is, like, OMIGOD,. a REPTOID!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!elevelty
I’d say you couldn’t pay people to make this up, but I doubt people write for WND for free
Hey Majority Will, I’m still waiting for the answers to my three questions.
I’ll understand if you do not wish to comment.
oops. elmo beat me to it 😀
The answers to all three are simple, “because that’s what it looked like when they took the photo.”
Here’s my question. Who are you REALLY?
“WND scrubbed the photos.”
WhirlNutDeli also scrubbed the photo of Joseph Farah in a sheep stable.
Orly Taitz.
Ambient light comes from many sources. It reflects and refracts. Shadows and fabrics curve.
It’s not a high resolution scan so pixelation is expected.
However, I see absolutely nothing to indicate that the place and subjects aren’t as photographed.
You’re suffering from severe confirmation bias, pareidolia and apophenia.
You understand very little obviously.
So those are your “I have 20 years of experience as a professional using Adobe® Photoshop® software.” answers to three simple questions? Insults? That’s it?
The questions were in regard to the “original” photo and are namely:
1) Is it possible to have the light area in front of the grandmother’s ankle? 2) Why does this light area exist when compared to the shadow to the left and to the right and with people sitting close together above? 3) Explain, professionally, the abrupt end to the shadow right after obama’s left leg
Put your own biases aside and please provide answers as a professional looking at any typical photo.
I answered your questions. You’re not paying attention.
No, I don’t believe you did. Sorry.
I don’t blame you for not answering.
The answer is obvious…It isn’t Obama that was photoshopped in, it was his grandfather…
Why is he looking in a different direction than everyone else?
Why doesn’t he actually put his hand on Obama’s shoulder?
What is up with that male camel toe of his…is that for real?
Let me ask you a question.
How familiar are you with the art and science of photography, physics in general and the properties of light specifically, and either darkroom or digital photograph scanning and retouching?
If you look real closely at the wall behind the President’s grandmother, you’ll see an image from a Mayan spirit totem.
Do you see it?
That was not intended to be a factual statement, per Sen. John Kyl. Kyl is from Arizona, and that explains everything.
Answer MY question, please – who are you really?
Do you believe the President was born in hawaii?
Do you believe the President is eligible to be President?
Do you believe he’s hiding something about the details of his birth?
Belief. Interesting choice of words. And yes, I did. You’re still not paying one lick of attention.
It doesn’t take a professional to answer your questions….just someone who is not a conspriacy nut. All the copies of this picture I have seen leave very little of the area you’re focusing on. Add to that, we don’t know what time of day it is (what direction the sun is), add that the area is obviously partially shaded by trees, and finally throw in light reflection and refraction. Given how little we have of the area, making it impossible to figure out what the actual shadow pattern are, and how little we know about the conditions that would effect the lighting and shadows, how could anyone, with any level of expertise make any conclusions?
How is that insulting? And I asked you a legitimate question:
How familiar are you with the art and science of photography, physics in general and the properties of light specifically, and either darkroom or digital photograph scanning and retouching?
“I take it the questions make you uncomfortable.”
Not at all. But I find your posts and questions ridiculous. If you think that’s insulting, then the shoe fits.
Light reflects and refracts. Ambient light bounces. Different colored and textured objects like fabric curve and fold.
Once again, there’s your answer. Do the normal properties of light make you uncomfortable if they don’t fit your paranoia and suspicions? Are you shredding tissue into a box right now?
If you don’t want to be ridiculed, then stop being ridiculous.
I think J. Loleczek is behind the whole thing. Not ust the pictures butte whole Obama fraud. She’s come back to the crime scene like many killers do. No one would suspect she masterminded this entire Manchurian Obama candidate thing, but I did. J. Loleczek isn’t crazy, she’s hiding something. She’s hiding a lot. What does she get out oncoming to this site?
If we want to clear up any of this we need to start with her. We need to go through her personal files (if she early is a her).
What is she hiding?
OK, fair enough. I started my career as an engineer with Kodak in Rochester, NY in the photo processing division. My whole career was in the photo industry. I started my own manufacturing company producing goods and services for the photo industry. I do have darkroom experience.
Being a engineer (electronics) I am well grounded in physics in general. The properties of light specifically is not a specialty although I am well versed in it. I have used PS but only as an amateur photographer, and not very much at that.
So when someone presents themselves as having superior knowledge of a discipline as you did I want to glean information from them. You presented yourself as such and I asked you three simple questions. My original statement was that I believed that BOTH photos were PS’d. I limited my concerns to only the small area between obama’s left leg and his grandmother’s right ankle.
I feel you want to avoid the subject because you also suspect something is wrong with that area or, on the other hand, you lied stating that you have 20 years experience with PS.
I wonder who Simon Maloy is?
Answered my own question. He’s with MMA.
I don’t believe you. You’ve already lied about everything else. I know you’re hiding something and I have a hunch I know what it is…………..yeah THAT!
I’m on to you. Don’t think I’m not!
I haven’t noticed discomfort on the part of any of the responses to you – what I have noticed is you attempting a naive analysis of a low-quality compression of (presumably) a scan of a photograph. As amateur ‘analysts’ often do (especially if they are as impaired by their confirmation biases as most birthers are…), you are seeing ‘anomalies’ in everything you can’t explain (and I suspect that ‘everything you can’t explain’ regarding image analysis is pretty close to everything there is to know about the field of image analysis…). If you want to prove that you are an intelligent human being, go and learn something about image analysis and and figure out the ‘meaning’ of your anomalies on your own (I guarantee that they will turn out to be insignificant artifacts of one sort or another). If you want to provide evidence that a particular anomaly is significant, you must explain not only how such an anomaly could have arose, but also provide some evidence that it could not have arisen naturally (as well as evidence that it isn’t an artifact of the repeated lossy conversions of the image…). Pointing out a bunch of things that are, in your naive opinion, anomalies and expecting others to explain how you are full of crap is both lazy and intellectually dishonest.
I’m saying you’re wrong. I suspect nothing. You’re being paranoid. And I haven’t lied about anything. There’s no reason to “believe” (your word) that the photograph has been faked or significantly altered. Of course, there’s no way of knowing unless you can produce the original film. I’ll stick with Ockham’s Razor, common sense and the absence of motive.
“Being a engineer (electronics) I am well grounded in physics in general.”
Nice pun but you’re still seeing phenomena easily explained by the natural properties of ambient light.
Your suspicions are unwarranted and you’ve done nothing to prove any significance whatsoever.
And what you feel is irrelevant.
I really don’t see what you’re talking about. Are you looking at a different photo than in my article above?
J. Loleczek, are you one of those “moon hoax” people who pore over NASA photos looking for oddities?
Majority Will: Of course, there’s no way of knowing unless you can produce the original film.
******OK, I suspected a discussion would be impossible on this site. Could anyone tell me the history of this photo (the top one)? How did it pop up on the internet? Who published it initially? Thanks in advance.
OMG- Look at the cryptome link above! What a great job- I wonder if the anomaly hunters will still see Photoshop where none exists!
The location looks exactly the same except the tree behind them is thicker, proving either A) Photoshop or B) Trees grow over time.
I copied both photos from your article.
I’m not sure I follow. So…..
1) The top photo (Obama plus grandparents), is real, but WorldNetDaily is claiming that it is fake.
2) The bottom photo is a fake done by someone at WorldNetDaily, but they are claiming it is real.
Is that it?
Well, aren’t you a suspicious little fella?
What else do you find suspicious?
BTW, the Mayan spirit totem image on the wall also looks like an angry gorilla from the nose up.
sigh.
Harumph.
I have no clue what you’re talking about. This is like those “Magic Eye” pictures.
noob
Photoshop has an aging function for trees? Awesome!
curious about J. Loleczek, what is his point, does anybody know (except maybe the point on his head)
Best of luck with your mysterious quest but it sounds like you need a nap first.
Have you looked here? http://weeklyworldnews.com/
Yes, I was already “guessing” that it was the same thing as what can be seen behind Obama ‘s grandfather’s right leg. And yes, there is more shadow there ( I mean between Obama and his grandmother).
But you do kmow what birfers when confronted with actual reality, will do: stick to their delusion.
How long before Loleczek claims that whoever takes care of those benches in the neighborhood, reconstructed this bench to make it resemble the bench with the support pillars that people with nonconspirational minds see in the first picture. It proves how deep and far-reaching the conspiracy really is.
And now naughtily, I will re-quote your linj
oops, hit the wrong button meant to write “re-quote your link:
http://cryptome.org/info/obama-bb/obama-bb.htm”
Doc, he ‘s talking about the support pillar in the middle of the bench – not realizing that it is a support pillar. Me and you just do not see the problem, because we subconsciously link it to that thing behind Grandpa’s right leg. Funny thing: he claims it is too light for the rest of the photograph, while it is probably the fact that there is so much shadow there that obfuscates the fact that it is, well, a pillar. Those, d.mn three dimensional things can sure deceive the eye – of someone who is deliberately looking for inconsistencies.
In all fairness, James M already pointed it out much higher in the comversation.
The question remains: why would they photoshop that first picture. I also wonder when that picture was taken, because Adobe Photoshop is from 1987.
J. Loleczek shot Kennedy.
I thought this was all stemming from a theory that the Obamas and the Dunhams are all Lizard People. Once you’re down that road, wondering why people would do stuff like photoshopping seems fairly pointless.
Nobody has noticed this so far but I would like to call your attention to it since you have photography knowledge gained at Kodak (usurped by ITEK) :
Note in the top photograph grandpas fingers are pointing straight outward in the way alien’s fingers would point outward if they were trying to beam an effect using their extraterrestrial powers. I am a physicist at Lockheed Martin and I can tell you that using my super-secret photo enhancement technology it is clear there is an alien beam rendered visible using electro-optical techniques. I believe the conspiracy involves time travel and DNA implantation but I can’t be sure. My analysis indicates the beams have rendered Obama (originally a normal Earthling) 12 times more intelligent than any previous Earthling. Additional investigation indicates that beams similar to Grandpa Dunham’s (around the world) have systematically reduced birther IQ’s by 0.73, leaving them at the imbecilic IQ level.
Give me your coordinates (is it Rochester?) and I’ll try to get you back up to 0.78.
I just think they were trying to help him with his amkneesia.
*drumroll*
For crying out loud, just look at the bench on grandma’s left.
Which image is faked?
You don’t need to be a CIA image analyst to figure it out.
Were you babbling about the freakin’ bench support pillar? You didn’t know that benches need support and you claim to be an engineer with a knowledge of physics?
I didn’t realize you had no idea how a bench was made.
Hmmm. You know, Loleczek is just “LOL” with some letters thrown on at the end.
Do you suppose we’re being lolbirthered?
No, but J. Edward Tremlett is an anagram for “Drat! Wet, melted Jr.”
Hmmmm. 😀
Ron Polland (Polarik) has said that ALL photos of Obama’s early life have been Photoshopped. I wrote about this two years ago, this month.
http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2009/04/obamas-entire-life-photoshopped/
Standard practice when shooping an image. It helps make the edited areas less noticeable. It’s impossible for the picture of all three to have originated from the picture with just the grandparents unless there is a MUCH higher quality image that hasn’t been released yet. I’ve checked but could find nothing but that degraded quality pic that World Nut Daily posted.
Exactly. I found this after a search:
http://cryptome.org/info/obama-bb/pict74.jpg
It’s apparently the bench that the photo was taken.
You can see which image is clearly shooped.
Overspecialization.
He’s not that kind of “engineer”
Well, the CS6 version does, which all us Soros minions get a year in advance, you know?