Moderated Obama birth certificate CT / SSN CT / Birther discussion

[Mojo]

Then they would be seen as being foolish and could be challenged, but in our little case we are discussing no just obvious failure exists in this case.....unless of course you liked to point out what it is

Give us your reason to think there is a vast conspiracy by that part of the government of the State of Hawaii? We've been over this and over this, there is no 'smoking gun'. Why should an independent investigation be made of one persons documents and not others?

Because the COLB scan is not a scan but a digital creation.

The COLB is the form in which the state of Hawaii's normal procedures say the information should be provided.

The state following its normal procedures is not evidence of a conspiracy, and is no reason for any investigation to be launched.

 

[Mojo]

And if the paper copies are not really copies???

The paper copies have been verified by the relevant authority as being accurate copies. What evidence do you have that this is not true?

 

[Tomtomkent]

So, how does a scanner read information that isn't there?

It didn't.

But you know when you turn of the clipping mask and the graphics programme uses pattern recognition to fill in the blanks behind the clipping, like the tools for correcting scratches in photos and the like?

Of course you must. Otherwise you would be making statements at length about a topic for which you are woefully and miserably ignorant.

Well, when the guy turns of the clipping mask, that happens. Exactly as it would for any other clipping mask being turned off.

What is the stumper though is how could you know of which you burbble and STILL insist this had ANYTHING AT ALL to do with the scanner and x-ray visions.

 

[Arus808]

and to put an end to the irrelevant topic of PDF and scanning technology:

John Woodman (author of "Is Barack Obama's Birth Certificate a Fraud?: A Computer Guy Examines The Evidence For Forgery" ) interviewed Ricardo de Queiroz, the man who holds 6 patents on MRC technology. The man by all standards, would know more about scanning technology than all the birthers in the world combined.

the article starts of with the erroneous report by Gary Pappit, one of the "experts" that Joe Arpaio's cold Case posse used to prepare reports that "claimed that the colb was fraudulent".

http://www.obamabirthbook.com/http:...xpert-evaluates-obamas-birth-certificate-pdf/


So can we now just ignore any irrelevant questions about the PDF and scanning technologies now? Remember, it's IRRELEVANT!

 

[Arus808]

Why is it birthers have no concept of law?

Why do you think that their only "lawyers" are the very ones that ignore the law?

Can you provide documentation that Stanley Dunham Obama travelled to Kenya to give birth? Do you have port/airport records that document this? Ship/airline manifests perhaps?

Of course he doesn't. Because no American Citizen returned from Kenya in the year starting June of 1961 to July of 1962 by air (the only possible way for Stanley to get to Kenya and be back in Hawaii a few days after BO II was born - seeing as Abercrombie saw the couple as well as baby Barack at a UH Party)

http://archive.org/stream/annualreportofim1962unit#page/74/mode/1up

 

[Robert Prey]

and to put an end to the irrelevant topic of PDF and scanning technology:

John Woodman (author of "Is Barack Obama's Birth Certificate a Fraud?: A Computer Guy Examines The Evidence For Forgery" ) interviewed Ricardo de Queiroz, the man who holds 6 patents on MRC technology. The man by all standards, would know more about scanning technology than all the birthers in the world combined.

the article starts of with the erroneous report by Gary Pappit, one of the "experts" that Joe Arpaio's cold Case posse used to prepare reports that "claimed that the colb was fraudulent".

And so, your point is?????

 

[Robert Prey]

No, that's completely false. Any birth certificate with information from a Declaration of Birth would say so right on the certificate itself, and wouldn't contain things like hospital name and the signature of the attending obstetrician.

Obama's birth certificate is not noted as being from a Declaration of Birth, and bears the hospital name and the signature of the Kapi'olani obstetrician who delivered him, Dr. David Sinclair.

Therefore, your "explanation" is invalid and inapplicable.

Ah,ah,ah, Fallacious reasoning.You have asserted the very thing you have yet to prove.

 

[Robert Prey]

Why do you think that their only "lawyers" are the very ones that ignore the law?

Of course he doesn't. Because no American Citizen returned from Kenya in the year starting June of 1961 to July of 1962 by air (the only possible way for Stanley to get to Kenya and be back in Hawaii a few days after BO II was born - seeing as Abercrombie saw the couple as well as baby Barack at a UH Party)

http://archive.org/stream/annualreportofim1962unit#page/74/mode/1up

"After months of searching, investigators commissioned by Maricopa County, Ariz., Sheriff Joe Arpaio to examine Barack Obama’s eligibility for office found Immigration and Naturalization Service travel records for foreign flights into Hawaii in 1961, only to discover that records for the week of Obama’s birth were missing."

http://politicalvelcraft.org/2012/0...fy-against-obama-fatally-shot-outside-church/

 

[Robert Prey]

The paper copies have been verified by the relevant authority as being accurate copies. What evidence do you have that this is not true?

A logical impossibility without the original to compare, assuming there is an original.

 

[Robert Prey]

You're way off into the realms of non-falsifiability here. If you assume the officials are lying (which would, of course, have to involve a conspiracy going at least as far back as the contemporary publication of the birth notice) then you can say anything.

But you still have no evidence that the officials are lying.

Except for the fraudulent, digitally created COLB, among other things.

 

[Upchurch]

Ah, but the information on the sign is correct. Just as anti-birthers argue the information on the COLB is correct. Never mind that it is a forgery.

So, the altered image of the sign is correct? Fake but true?

Your beliefs are based on nothing but hoaxes and lies?

That would make this:

I would look into it further before confidently accepting this dismissal as conclusive, but if it is in fact false, I have absolutely no objection to its rejection. None whatsoever. I have no objections to the truth, whatever it may be.

A complete load of baloney. You do have objections to the truth, when they disagree with your faith in ideology.

 

[JimOfAllTrades]

And if the paper copies are not really copies???

The appropriate people have spoken, signed, stamped, and in general blessed the copies in every way they can as being copies of the actual, one and only, real life birth certificate that was filed 50 some-odd years ago. And that original certificate has all this time been sitting there completely unused and uncared for until some people who don't like the president needed some straws to grasp at in their attempt to do anything they can to discredit him.

Do you have any evidence at all, any evidence of any kind, anything, really, that shows the original certificate held by Hawaii is not real? I know you want it badly, but do you have any actual evidence other than your want?

 

[Border Reiver]

Ah,ah,ah, Fallacious reasoning.You have asserted the very thing you have yet to prove.

No, Ant's assertions have been proven - to the courts. The Registrar of the State of Hawaii has certified that BHO was born in Hawaii, and that the state's records prove it.

Your fallacious reasoning is that there is something wrong with the certified birth certificate, and use that belief to assert that the certification is flawed.

 

[Straw Man]

"After months of searching, investigators commissioned by Maricopa County, Ariz., Sheriff Joe Arpaio to examine Barack Obama’s eligibility for office found Immigration and Naturalization Service travel records for foreign flights into Hawaii in 1961, only to discover that records for the week of Obama’s birth were missing."

http://politicalvelcraft.org/2012/0...fy-against-obama-fatally-shot-outside-church/

Foreign flights, Robert. There's your problem right there. I'm sure you are aware that there was no direct flight from Kenya to Hawaii. The only foreign flights that were heading for Hawaii came from Canada and Mexico from the west and Sydney and Tokyo from the east, and highly unlikely destination points for the Obamas, if, as Shurf Joe maintains, BHOII was born in Kenya.

The most likely route in that scenario would be Nairobi-Khartoum-Cairo-Rome-London-New York-Los Angeles-Hawaii. It would have been a hard trip too, with the multiple stops. So, the port of entry into the United States would be most likely New York. After that, the flights cease to be foreign.

Has the good Sheriff checked the records for the east coast? The passenger manifests of the airlines? HM Customs in the UK? Kenyan departures?

 

[Straw Man]

A logical impossibility without the original to compare, assuming there is an original.

Not a logical impossibility, a legal impossibility. Can you go compare the birth certificate of any citizen born in Hawaii to the original?

No.

Again, Hawaii have stated that the COLB is genuine. Get over it.

Any luck with COLB's for the list of Presidents supplied?

 

[JayUtah]

A logical impossibility without the original to compare, assuming there is an original.

The copies have been compared to the original. Just not by people you feel like paying attention to.

You have no legal basis for your claim.
You have no factual basis for your claim.

 

[JayUtah]

Except for the fraudulent, digitally created COLB, among other things.

No proof of that whatsoever, or even evidence of it that stands up to opposition from an empty chair.

By all accounts here, your feeble arguments based on the opinions scanner salesmen and Oregon farmers has been addressed, and the resolution of that is that your pseudo-experts have no clue what they're talking about. You asked for a technical debate and then have spectacularly failed over the past three weeks to participate in it. You lost it.

And by all accounts elsewhere, more than 150 law suits have tried to argue this point with the same discredited and ignorant evidentiary claims, and in not one single case has any of this "digitally-created COLB" nonsense risen above the tabloid dreck it started as. You won't read any of those findings, of course.

Nor, as has been laboriously explained to you, does the PDF file have any relevance whatsoever to the question of Obama's eligibility. That question has been settled. You're just wallowing now in irrelevancy because it's the only rhetorical avenue left to the Birther community: try as hard as possible to stay in the "court of public opinion" by grasping at straws.

 

[Robert Prey]

The appropriate people have spoken, signed, stamped, and in general blessed the copies in every way they can as being copies of the actual, one and only, real life birth certificate that was filed 50 some-odd years ago. And that original certificate has all this time been sitting there completely unused and uncared for until some people who don't like the president needed some straws to grasp at in their attempt to do anything they can to discredit him.

Do you have any evidence at all, any evidence of any kind, anything, really, that shows the original certificate held by Hawaii is not real? I know you want it badly, but do you have any actual evidence other than your want?

Excerpt for the proof of the COLB digital forgery, here is what a real copy of an Hawaiian 50 year old birth certificate (one of the Nordyke Twins) looks like copied from the original microfilm. Compare that with the pristine Obama COLB.

 

[JayUtah]

Ah,ah,ah, Fallacious reasoning.You have asserted the very thing you have yet to prove.

No, he provided documentary evidence that refutes your claim. You simply won't acknowledge it.

The original "only a Declaration" claim was made on the basis of the abstract, which -- according to the lawyer's allegation -- could have been made on the basis of an amended, altered, or late certificate (i.e., a declaration rather than a documentation). He tried to argue that Full Faith and Credit should not apply because Hawaii law gives discretion to various bodies to assess for their own purposes the probative value of any such record and did not have to accept them at face value. For example, if a certificate was amended to change the date of birth, such as upon receipt of new information, then the DMV could decided for itself which of the two dates it was going to use to determine whether the presenter was old enough to drive.

The case failed as a matter of law by noting that the federal government is not bound by Hawaii law and may set its own probative standards. It further failed as a matter of fact because the lawyer was unaware that altered, amended, or "late" (i.e., declared) certificates must be noted as such even in abstract form. It finally failed conclusively as a matter of fact when the facsimile copy of the record was produced and certified.

This is now the third time you have brought up this case without respecting how that case was decided. Why must we always look farther than the Birther claims to get the real story? What are they hiding?

 

[JayUtah]

...here is what a real different copy of an Hawaiian 50 year old birth certificate (one of the Nordyke Twins) looks like copied from the original microfilm

FTFY

Your facsimile copy was produced in 1966. Obama's was produced in 2011. What makes you think they should necessarily look exactly the same? Are the same means used today to make facsimile records as were used 45 years ago? Once again the Birthers just make up the rules.

And of course you still don't know what PDF optimization does. I can "pristine" away the city seal from my business licenses using an off-the-shelf optimizer.

I've said it half a dozen times before, but apparently another time is in order. The PDF is irrelevant to Obama's eligibility.