A conservative news and views blog.

Location: St. Louis, Missouri, United States

Thursday, April 28, 2011

Birth Certificate Hockey Stick Graph; Hiding the Decline of Obama

Timothy Birdnow

So finally, Barack Hussein Obama has released his long form birth certificate. After three years of refusing to do so, and after spending several million dollars to resist being compelled to by a court of law, Obama has finally caved. Why? Donald Trump for one; he boldly went where no RINO has gone before, demanding Obama fess up. Also, Jerome Korsi's book on Mr. Obama's birth certificate forced the Bamster's hand.

But did he really? The first thing I noticed when looking at the released document is that Obi Bam Sr. is listed as African under race; a point of criticism for the earlier Certificate of Live Birth because he would have been listed as Negro or Negroid in 1961. Remember, this is an official document and a black person's race is officially Negroid (although they would accept Negro). There are three races of Man; Negroid, Caucasoid, and Mongoloid (the Mongoloids being what we call Orientals today, although it also includes Native Americans.) African would not have been inserted in the race category. Now, I have read arguments that they (Obama's people) wouldn't be so stupid as to make that mistake twice, but they would HAVE to make that mistake twice or risk proving the Certificate of Live Birth released in 2008 is a fake, which would put even more heat on the current document.

In the interest of full disclosure, I am not a "birther" insofar as I do think Obama meets the native born requirement of the Constitution and believe he was likely born in the U.S., but I think he has something else to hide. You simply do not spend the kind of money he has spent for the sake of a joke. I do think it is important for a variety of reasons; read here.

There are other issues as well; the Connecticut social security number, the inability to produce any friends from prior to his college days, the sealing of records, etc.

In fact, one of Obama's first acts as President was to seal presidential records tight via Executive Order 13489. Interesting first move for a guy who promised the most transparent administration in history.

Jerome Korsi explains why the long form birth certificate released by the Anointed adds to the confusion of his hatching, er, birth.

This from a piece at World Net Daily:

"As WND reported, the long-form birth certificates issued by Kapi'olani to the Nordyke twins have certificate numbers lower than the number given Obama, even though the president purportedly was born at the same hospital a day earlier than the Nordykes.

Note, Susan Nordyke, the first twin, was born at 2:12 p.m. Hawaii time Aug. 5, 1961, and was given certificate No. 151 – 61 – 10637, which was filed with the Hawaii registrar Aug. 11, 1961.

Gretchen Nordyke, the second twin, was born at 2:17 p.m. Hawaii time Aug. 5, 1961, and was given certificate No. 151 – 61 – 10638, which was also filed with the Hawaii registrar Aug. 11, 1961.

Yet, according to the Certification of Live Birth displayed by during the 2008 presidential campaign – and now according to the long-form birth certificate the White House released today – Barack Obama was given a higher certificate number than the Nordykes.

Note, Obama was given certificate No. 151 – 1961 – 10641, even though he was born Aug. 4, 1961, the day before the Nordyke twins, and his birth was registered with the Hawaii Department of Health registrar three days earlier, Aug. 8, 1961.
In 1961, the birth certificate numbers were not assigned by the hospitals.

Instead, the numbers were stamped to the birth record by the Hawaii Department of Health at the main office in Honolulu.

This is the only place birth certificate numbers were assigned.

At the last step of the process, the documents were accepted by the registrar general, with the date of registration inserted in box No. 22 on the lower right hand corner of the long-form birth certificate.

The date the birth document was accepted by the registrar general was the date the birth certificate number was stamped on the birth record.

The birth certificate number was stamped on the form by a rubber stamp that automatically increased by one each time a birth certificate was stamped.

The question, therefore, is how was it possible that the Nordyke twins had their birth certificates accepted by the registrar general in Hawaii three days later than the registrar general accepted Obama's birth certificate, when the twins' numbers are lower than Obama's number?

Eleanor Nordyke has speculated that her twins received an earlier birth certificate number because, although she gave birth later than Ann Dunham, she entered Kapi'olani earlier.

Yet, in 1961, birth certificate numbers were not assigned by the hospital, and the date the mother checked into the medical facility was irrelevant to how birth certificate numbers were assigned.

Moreover, no records for Dunham having been a patient at Kapi'olani in 1961, or of Obama having been born at the hospital on Aug. 4, 1961, have been released by the hospital."

End excerpts

In fact, The Smoking Gun (A Turner company, so hardly a right-wing kook site) pointed this out, as well as a few other oddities. See

For example:

"• If the original document was in a bound volume (as reflected by the curvature of the left hand side of the certificate), how can the green patterned background of the document's safety paper be so seamless?

• Why, if Obama was born on August 4, 1961, was the “Date Accepted by Local Reg.” four days later on August 8, 1961?

• What is the significance of the smudges in the box containing the name of the reported attendant?

• David A. Sinclair, the M.D. who purportedly signed the document, died nearly eight years ago at age 81. So he is conveniently unavailable to answer questions about Obama’s reported birth.

• In the “This Birth” box there are two mysterious Xs above “Twin” and “Triplet.” Is there a sibling or two unaccounted for?

• What is the significance of the mysterious numbers, seen vertically, on the document’s right side?

• Finally, the “Signature of Local Registrar” in box 21 may be a desperate attempt at establishing the document’s Hawaiian authenticity. Note to forgers: It is spelled “Ukulele.”

End excerpt.

The comments have been fascinating. For example, there is a fellow who did an analysis of the document using Adobe Acrobat, and he was linked by Drudge. He kept leaving the link at TSG, and it kept disappearing. He hand wrote the link, but then his website went down - permanently. I received a Forbidden Access when I tried to open his site.

Here's an interesting comment:

"Submitted by beijingyank on Thu, 2011-04-28 01:32."In 1961, the hospital Obama was born in was NOT named the Kapiolani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital , as shown on the above certificate. In 1961, the hospital Obama was born in was named the Kauaikeolani Children's Hospital. It did not change its name to the Kapiolani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital until it merged with the Kapiolani hospital system in 1978." FRAUD!!!!!!!!! "

A check on Kapiolani shows that, yes, this may well be an accurate statement.

A sizable number of links provided by commenters were recently deleted. For example

Now, it could be that Obama has doubled down on this; it would fit his style, and we know he was using government agents to pretend to be regular people on the internet, so it could well be that this is a carefully crafted strategy to keep the issue alive. Why? It may be that Obama believes he can push the "kooks" over the edge and get everyone laughing at conservatives. He would not be above such a thing.

But it strikes me as too clever by half, and it would be very dangerous given public sentiment to make this kind of play. This would be a Hail Mary pass from the one yard line with four minutes left and being down by six. It would not be prudent, and I don't believe the people behind BHO are that foolish.

Kurt Nimmo has some interesting analysis at Infowars. For instance:

"Upon first inspection, the document appears to be a photocopy taken from state records and printed on official green paper. However, when the government released PDF is taken into the image editing program Adobe Illustrator, we discover a number of separate elements that reveal the document is not a single scan on paper, as one might surmise. Elements are place in layers or editing boxes over the scan and green textured paper, which is to say the least unusual.

When sections of the document are enlarged significantly, we discover glaring inconsistencies. For instance, it appears the date stamped on the document has been altered. Moreover, the document contains text, numbers, and lines with suspicious white borders indicating these items were pasted from the original scan and dropped over a background image of green paper."


"There are two elements of interest, as shown in the image to the above – both entries for the date accepted by the local registry. This appears to have been modified in an image editing program."


"As points out, it may prove to be significant that two of the boxes appear over both of the “date accepted” boxes, as well as the “Mother’s occupation box.” Was there a need to tamper with the dates on the document or other areas? The recent stamp date and issuing signature of the state registrar also contain an edited layer."


"More to the point, this certificate and others, like the one posted below it, have visible seals. No issuing seal can be seen on the document released today by Obama."


"Infowars will continue to analyze this issue as more information comes in. It is significant that the Obama Administration was pressured into responding to this controversy, whatever the final analysis of this document. However, the administration still needs to release his other records which have been sealed at great expense. Is there an issue with his being naturalized in Indonesia? Why are his college records at Columbia and Occidental sealed, and what do they contain? Did Obama travel to Pakistan on a foreign passport? These questions and many others have not been properly answered."

End excerpts.

Steve Hoft, the Gateway Pundit, consulted some experts who unanimously declared the document a fake.

The argument given for many of these flaws is that the White House had a negative, and had to retouch it to make it legible. Well, why don't they invite, say, Sarah Palin to view the original? Donald Trump? He's the one causing all the flap, after all. How about Jerome Korsi? His book is out any day now. When you alter a document to "prove" you have a document you cause enormous suspicion.

This reminds me of the hockey stick graph and "hide the decline" in Global Warming; a fancy "nature trick" designed to fool the public. It won't fool everyone, but it will fool enough to perhaps allow the marginalization of those who see through it. What Briffa and Mann did with "hide the decline" was toss out data sets that showed a decline in temperatures in 1961, but they managed to cover their tracks. Obama may well have gotten the idea for this from them. To the ordinary bystander this looks legit, and those who will keep after it will appear partisan zealots and kooks. It was a nice trick; it "hides the decline" in Obama's believability.

We are in for a long, hard struggle here, folks!

Weblog Commenting and Trackback by