Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: KyrosL who wrote (68535)	9/9/2004 4:21:50 PM
From: carranza2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793648

You can easily determine that a document was done on a typewriter versus a modern laser printer. All you need is a fairly low power microscope to examine the ink pattern. I find it unbelievable that this simple test was not done. The document has obviously been photocopied many times in order to purposefully make it appear aged so I doubt that what you suggest can be done. Then again, I'm not proficient in this arena, so maybe it can.

To: KyrosL who wrote (68535)	9/9/2004 5:02:23 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793648

You can easily determine that a document was done on a typewriter versus a modern laser printer. All you need is a fairly low power microscope to examine the ink pattern. I find it unbelievable that this simple test was not done. You don't even need that, just a manifying glass. At most. Typewriters have keys that strike the page and leave dents. It's easy to feel and see.

To: KyrosL who wrote (68535)	9/9/2004 7:21:51 PM
From: carranza2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793648

You can easily determine that a document was done on a typewriter versus a modern laser printer. All you need is a fairly low power microscope to examine the ink pattern. I find it unbelievable that this simple test was not done. I thought that checking for a then non-existant laser printer would be impossible because the documents had been photocopied too many times, but it turns out that there is evidence of laser printing: allahpundit.com A question arose in the comments to the previous post about whether it was significant that the text is legible through the blacked-out portion. Reader "Lickmuffin" suggested that the memo must have been produced on a laser printer rather than a typewriter because "a marker cannot completely obscure laser printer toner -- toner is a fused plastic, and will remain somewhat glossy and reflective when overwritten with a marker." Robert Crawford replied that the black-out was probably done to a photocopy of the original, not the original itself, hence the presence of laser toner. It's getting worse for Dan.