Readers here may recall that I dismissed Ron Polarik, MS, PhD as a credible examiner of the Obama birth certificate image, and cited some third-party analysis debunking it.
Let me say first that Ron Polarik (a pseudonym) has no MS and no PhD. The person behind Ron may have these degrees or he may not. So long as “Ron” is anonymous, he has no right to claim any qualifications beyond what his own skill as a writer and scientist exhibits (i.e. high school dropout). The fact that this person claims credentials but offers no evidence that he holds them tells us right off to expect problems in the evidence department, and so was the case with his “Final Analysis“.
Anyhow, Polarik is back with a claim that he has refuted his nemesis, Neal Krawetz PhD (real), in a new article called “Obama’s Forged Birth Certificate“. Polarik (or someone pretending to be him…how can you pretend to be someone pretending to be someone?) is running around the Internet now posting a message advertising his new article.
Polarik’s ranting style is still a pain to read. And puh-leeez, don’t you know that a web site can have more than one page? Break it up, dude! One long web page is so 1990’s.
I noted lots of repeated material from before, and lots of irrelevant material still. Here’s a great quote to illustrate Polarik’s sense of fantasy:
The image acquired by the scanner was then saved as a JPG file. This is the file that was sent to the person who would do the actual forging. So how does Polarik know the forger didn’t scan the document himself? Of course he doesn’t and he couldn’t. But Polarik is comfortable making things up as he goes along. This is the disconnect between evidence and conclusion that Polarik doesn’t seem to see. Polarik’s “analysis” is much more about Polarik than it is about analysis.
The following image was attributed to Polarik: