Moderated Obama birth certificate CT / SSN CT / Birther discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
Robert Prey said:
Off topic. The question is, is the COLB authentic or a forgery.
Click to expand...

No, that's your question. Ostensibly this has to do with Obama's eligibility to the Presidency, but that question has already been settled. Therefore if it's no longer about eligibility, it can only be about sour-grapes picking away at the opposing candidate. It's a pointless political witch-hunt at this time.

But I find it highly amusing that you think understanding the fundamental principles of the evidence in question is somehow "off topic." All the arguments in favor of forgery are based on technical knowledge. You're declaring it off-topic because you don't want to have a discussion that shows your critics are more knowledgeable than you, and their beliefs more factually defensible.

If you say it is authentic, then prove it.
Click to expand...

Shifting the burden of proof. You already claimed it was a forgery, and we're simply disputing that claim. Claims of forgery always carry the burden of proof. We went over this at length in the JFK thread, and you dodged the burden-of-proof question there too.

But as to your threat, no, I cannot do that to myself.
Click to expand...

It started as a question. It escalated only when you refused several times to answer it.
 
Robert Prey said:
You claim it's authentic. The burden of proof is on you.
Click to expand...

What makes you say that? It has been certified authentic by the issuing authority. You're the one telling us you have evidence that Hawaii's certification is fraudulent. Claims of fraud and forgery always have the burden of proof, which you accepted at the beginning of your participation. Why have you suddenly decided you no longer have that burden?
 
Robert Prey said:
Off topic. The question is, is the COLB authentic or a forgery. If you say it is authentic, then prove it. But as to your threat, no, I cannot do that to myself.
Click to expand...
Why was an Acrobat document opened in Illustrator?

Elaborate the difference between interpretation which occur between Acrobat, illustrator, Photoshop, In-Design, and Quark.

Why are those all different?

Why do they construct layers differently?
 
Being certified as authentic by State of Hawaii makes its natural state authentic. Meaning that the burden of proof falls on the person claiming that it is fake. It is just liking being on trial for a crime, your natural state is innocent until the state provides proof of guilt. The fact the burden of proof is trying to be shifted shows how pathetically weak the birther argument really is.
 
Robert Prey said:
"The layered PDF should just be opened in Adobe Illustrator (CS4).
At this point it only shows one layer
Now in Adobe Illustrator activate the menu in the layer window (top right corner) and click on "Release To Layers (Sequence)"
This will "create" layers from the layered PDF."
Click to expand...
Hmmm.

If you just "created" layers, doesn't that mean they were not previously there in the document posted by the president's people?
 
It boils down to, like Jay said, the fact that claims of forgery have the burden of proof. Anybody who claims that the documents are forged, yet doesn't understand that, has no business debating the subject at all.
 
Robert Prey said:
Experts on both sides of the birther issue call them layers.
Click to expand...

There is no birther "issue"....that was "solved" months ago when Hawaii confirmed that Obama was indeed born in Hawaii.

Certain people maintaining that there is still some "debate" going on, only illustrates how there are those who really hate that Obama is President (for whatever reason).



As has been pointed out to you, Robert....you are only "fooling" yourself.
 
Robert Prey said:
You claim it's authentic. The burden of proof is on you.
Click to expand...

Hawaii have stated that it is authentic. You know, the ones who issued it in the first place.

It's Birthers who have say it is not. What "evidence" do they have that trumps the issuing State?

Can the Birther movement produce genuine evidence that Barack Hussein Obama was born in Kenya?

Can the Birther movement provide evidence that Ann Dunham travelled to Kenya during the period when BHO was due to be born?
 
Straw Man said:
Hawaii have stated that it is authentic. You know, the ones who issued it in the first place.

It's Birthers who have say it is not. What "evidence" do they have that trumps the issuing State?
Click to expand...

The fact that the issuing state has not released the original.
 
Last edited:
twinstead said:
It boils down to, like Jay said, the fact that claims of forgery have the burden of proof. Anybody who claims that the documents are forged, yet doesn't understand that, has no business debating the subject at all.
Click to expand...

Anyone who claims the document is an authentic copy without having seen the original, has no business debating the subject.
 
fullflavormenthol said:
Being certified as authentic by State of Hawaii makes its natural state authentic. Meaning that the burden of proof falls on the person claiming that it is fake. It is just liking being on trial for a crime, your natural state is innocent until the state provides proof of guilt. The fact the burden of proof is trying to be shifted shows how pathetically weak the birther argument really is.
Click to expand...

Without the original, no one can make any claims.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom