re: #324 Charles Johnson

That’s all true, but more than that — even if you tried to produce a document with one of these hypothetical type-setting typewriters, there’s STILL no way you could produce something that looks like the CBS documents. The fonts these high-end machines used were not the same fonts we use today, and anyone trying to duplicate the CBS docs this way would immediately discover that the spacing, kerning, leading, line breaks, tab stops, etc. were not even close.

And I duplicated one of the docs exactly, in just a few minutes with the default settings of Microsoft Word.

Microsoft Word has had a few revisions since then, and you probably couldn’t reproduce that doc the same way with the latest version. That’s how distinctive the “font fingerprint” is.

I have occasionally been reduced to slack-jawed amazement at hearing FELLOW SCIENTISTS spouting the worst wish-fulfillment/confirmation bias horseshit about their own results, or ones they wanted to be true, and we’re supposed to be the ultimate in skepticism. So, the fact that there are still supposedly intelligent people who won’t believe the obvious saddens, but no longer surprises me.