Hey Zombyboy,

Help me out a bit on this one as I have yet to figure out where the forgery is.

The guy says on page 8 of his document:

My addition is not typed. It is replicated based on the characters already in the memo. It does not prove that the memos were typed, or that I can type them. It only proves that I know what the font family is and can reasonably accurately reproduce the characters in the memo. The reproductions in the memo demonstrate that and nothing more.

So, yea, he blew it when he called his replicated material exact. But how, exactly, is this a forgery as opposed to, say, an exercise in comparative typographics?

Help me understand what I'm missing here. I'm just not seeing the same problem with this that Paul over at Wizbang is alleging.

Thanks!

Hey, good point--I missed that. I didn't read through the paper well enough.

Okay, the only thing it proves is that he didn't prove anything, then. Even as an exercise in comparitive typographics, when you have to copy and paste bits in like that, for some reason, it simply fails to make any really strong point--but, no, that definitely doesn't make it a forgery.

Yea, that is closer to what my evaluation was when I first saw this several days ago. I didn't get very excited about it one way or another.

He may have some points if the original type really was this thing called 'typewriter' insted of Times New Roman.

All in all, I think most of this stuff is much ado about little and that the complete story will never see the light of day.

There is plenty from recent history that should allow supporters of either candidate and undecideds to make a reasonably informed decision.

I wholly agree.

I'm glad you guys figured this out, because I couldn't make heads or tails of what in the heck the "forger" was trying to prove (I wasn't about to read his document).

It seems to me that he wasted his and everybody else's time for what amounted to an ego exercise. On the other hand, from the WizBang presented it, it looks like the prof was opening himself up to being another inept forger. Why put the disclaimer on page 8?

I might have to take it all back. Go to Wizbang and check out his updates, especially the one below the fold. This gets curiouser and curiouser.

Zombyboy check all the updates... No need for retraction.

People tried to knock my story but it held.

The professor even tried to edit his website and he made it worse.