Evidence for God from Science

Ed, explain the document's points of congruence with another one. Why is the document evidence false? Forget the Birthers - dismiss the evidence with facts.

Nope. I didn't look at this round of "evidence" and I'm not going to. Birtherism was, is, and will continue to be stupid, divisive, dangerous nonsense and I'm not going to dignify the topic by giving it any of my time.

edwardmurphy wrote: Birtherism isn't conservative, it's crackpot fringe populist.

Thanks for pointing out that the birther lie is not a conservative position.

And I do think it is legitimate to consider the the accuracy of previous claims and ideologies of the people who continue to perpetuate the birther myth (especially after our President Elect claims to have brought an end to birthirism).

As for the two documents in question. It should not surprise anyone that there would be multiple points of congruence between two documents produced within the same environment and within the same time frame. One would expect similarities in the typed portions of the document.

As for the date stamps, there are similarities in the angles of the stamps, but the dates are different, as are the positions of the date stamps within the document itself and in relationship to each other.

The primary flaw in the argument is the data does not support the conclusion that is drawn.
Do these 9 points of congruence between two documents produced in the same environment during the same time frame prove forgery?
No... that is a conclusion drawn by people who support the birther myth.

And Birtherism is not a Conservative position. It is a lie perpetuated by fringe elements of the Alt-Right.

I've only viewed a little of the press conference so far, but it seems that the guy that examined the evidence voted for Obama... twice. Nevertheless he was asked to do the work.

Here's the video (if it starts about 10 min in, just rewind to the beginning):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jk3KRxTfkLM

It is important to understand that it is not BIRTHERS that came to the conclusion this document was altered - but two separate, well-respected document authentication specialist companies - one not even in America. And they did so independently and unbeknownst to each other. So, I don't think a non-technical layperson's views, without having reviewed these specialists' data can simply dismiss them. But again, this does NOT mean Obama wasn't born in the U.S.! It only would mean this document was altered. And IF so, it begs the questions of who and why.

You don't simply dismiss evidence based upon WHO has brought it forward - the evidence itself should either stand on its own or show itself to fail the support of what those promoting it says that it does. Again, I'm agnostic on this, haven't seen a detailed presentation. But it is interesting, per the assertions of the two companies of relevant expertise, that specialize in such analysis. Because these are not merely some birther loons and conspiracy theorists - of which, admittedly, are plentiful.

One company is in Italy. The other is in Honolulu, and it's chief investigator has 25 years experience in document authentication (here's his background: http://www.reedwrite.com/index.php/about/). It is also interesting to note that Reed Hayes (the examiner in Hawaii) voted twice for Obama. As for companies that do such analysis - their bread and butter is their integrity as much as their expertise. Because if any such company were ever shown to have produced sham evidences designed only to please any given client - they'd quickly be put out of business. They HAVE to be seen as objective, independent and of sterling reputations, as they are involved in many legal cases for courts all over.

So, what is the truth of the matter - I dunno, but it is interesting.

And this MIGHT explain how the document is a forgery, but Obama was nonetheless actually born in Hawaii. Perhaps the political pressure to produce documentation that was convincing of Obama's Hawaii birth, that had not been previously forthcoming, had grown to be such a political liability, that certain people put together a sham document. This was and is such an important matter, why didn't Hawaii very publicly release every bit of documentation LONG before? Because rightly or whether just driven by Obama's political opponents, one reason this whole birther thing kept going was that there was no proof presented to confront the accusations of his supposed non-U.S. birth.

I travel among many circles. Some communist, some alt-right, and a lot in between. I can tell you that the birtherism thing is 80% perpetuating a joke, and 20% semi-serious. Like, the birthers pitch a slowball to the other alt-righters, who then keep the meme alive because it's actually still funny because I cannot believe this still hasn't been debunked by now.

If you know about quadratic equations, most memes are funny at first, obviously, or else they wouldn't be memes. Then, the humor stimulus (Y) begins to wane, resulting in an inevitable downward slope of lulz. Then it valleys completely, becoming unfunny. But, like a phoenix rising from the ashes, the meme hath returneth as a "post-unironic meme" that has withstood the rigors of time (X). Why this is? I think it mostly has to do with people dumbfounded that other people still find this funny, thus it becomes re-funny again.

The Science Of Memes: A Dissertation

Philip wrote:It is important to understand that it is not BIRTHERS that came to the conclusion this document was altered - but two separate, well-respected document authentication specialist companies - one not even in America. And they did so independently and unbeknownst to each other. So, I don't think a non-technical layperson's views, without having reviewed these specialists' data can simply dismiss them.

If Arpaio can only find two authentication specialists in the world to support his position, then I have no problem at all dismissing their conclusions as flawed.

With all the press coverage this birther nonsense has generated, there would be a lot more than two authentication companies jumping on the birther bandwagon if there was any credible evidence to indicate that the long form birth certificate was really a forgery.

This long form birth certificate didn't just appear out of nowhere. It has been in the custody of the Hawaii Health Department since 1961. Why would the Health Department have forged a long form birth certificate for Obama in 1961?
It just doesn't make sense.
The whole birther forgery conspiracy theory is so full of holes that it is easily recognizable as a lie.

Dismiss the assertions presented by the professionals who have sifted the evidence - again, we're repeatedly back to the birther stuff. And THAT is not a rebuttal! Keep saying it over and over - it won't matter. And it's not as if they sent this out to numerous sources, as the analysis is expensive. The companies that analyzed this have nothing to do with the birthers, other than they received in raw data for analysis from them.

Philip wrote:Dismiss the assertions presented by the professionals who have sifted the evidence - again, we're repeatedly back to the birther stuff. And THAT is not a rebuttal! Keep saying it over and over - it won't matter.

And repeating the false assertion that the long form birth certificate is a forgery when it has been in the custody of the Hawaii Department of Health since 1961 doesn't somehow change it into a forgery... even if a couple of 'professionals' are the people making the false assertions.

I don't know if these alleged 'professionals' are deliberately lying or if they are honestly mistaken. But presuming that 9 points of congruence between two documents that were created in the same environment within the same time frame somehow implies forgery goes way beyond what the data actually demonstrates.
And that false conclusion comes into direct conflict with the fact that the Health Department had control over the documents in question since 1961.

We have entered a 'post truth' era where people are barraged with 'fake news' and where lies and conspiracy theories are repeated often enough that people are deceived into accepting lies as truth.
And it is frustrating to see honest and well meaning people getting sucked into these lies.

And repeating the false assertion that the long form birth certificate is a forgery when it has been in the custody of the Hawaii Department of Health since 1961 doesn't somehow change it into a forgery...

I agree, it doesn't NECESSARILY mean it is fake. But if you think that the Dept. of Health was some highly protected vault that this could not have occurred - that isn't likely. Think of just how many people and run-of-the mill clerks have likely had access to that department's documents. There's stuff missing from the National Archives, Library of Congress - really, IF someone was serious about doing this, where it was supposed to have been secure isn't a certainty. However, it doesn't mean this actually happened.

As for the evidence, people who have never used a traditional typewriter may not realize the uniqueness of typed documents - this is where a technical aspect of the assessment sounds plausible. You have multiple issues: Exact left side placement of the paper against the paper guide, the slight vertical/horizontal variability in placing the paper under the roller, where the mechanism stops on a particular paper - there is all considerable variability to these alignments, mostly because they are hand placed upon an analog machine. So, if there are multiple precise replications between key documents - that would be very difficult to easily dismiss.

Again, I don't know the specifics of the actual evidence. But what you brought up by no means proves it impossible to do, if someone had been so motivated. But the question is, DID they, and do the evidences truly show that this occurred - really, if you haven't seen the evidence, then you're playing probabilities and speculation, and relying heavily upon your (understandable) mistrust of the Birther conspiracy loonies (although a small percent have asked some reasonable questions). And ANY professional examiner had to know, by the time they were called in on this, that to float some ridiculous, sloppy technical assessment that they KNEW so many organizations and professionals would also carefully assess their findings and machinegun countless obvious holes in it - really, they'd put themselves out of business, as credibility and rigorous standards are why they are in business to begin with, and their name would be posted far and wide as being connected to some ridiculous birther sideshow. I find that very unlikely, just from just a business standpoint.

DBowling wrote:

Philip wrote:Dismiss the assertions presented by the professionals who have sifted the evidence - again, we're repeatedly back to the birther stuff. And THAT is not a rebuttal! Keep saying it over and over - it won't matter.

And repeating the false assertion that the long form birth certificate is a forgery when it has been in the custody of the Hawaii Department of Health since 1961 doesn't somehow change it into a forgery... even if a couple of 'professionals' are the people making the false assertions.

I don't know if these alleged 'professionals' are deliberately lying or if they are honestly mistaken. But presuming that 9 points of congruence between two documents that were created in the same environment within the same time frame somehow implies forgery goes way beyond what the data actually demonstrates.
And that false conclusion comes into direct conflict with the fact that the Health Department had control over the documents in question since 1961.

We have entered a 'post truth' era where people are barraged with 'fake news' and where lies and conspiracy theories are repeated often enough that people are deceived into accepting lies as truth.
And it is frustrating to see honest and well meaning people getting sucked into these lies.

And I suppose the New World Order doesn't exist either, right... because that's a conspiracy theory too

Seems like you could find something better to freak out over. Let's assume for a second that Obama is actually a Kenyan citizen (which he isn't) - so what? His terms up in a couple weeks and he's not running again. What the hell difference does it make at this point?

Actually, scratch that. I just figured it out. The same folks who brought us the current fact-free zone are looking to rewrite history. Still, that's no reason for a rational guy like you to follow them down the rabbit hole, Phil.

If you want to get outraged there are plenty of things going on that ought to get you there. For example, there are now laws on the books preventing citizens from suing megacorporations for damages, even if the corporation is clearly at fault. Robots are taking our jobs and the fat cats who own them are pocketing the extra profits without doing a thing for the workers who are getting canned. (The next big one will be self-driving vehicles eliminating the need for cabbies, truckers, and delivery drivers.) The new president spent the entire campaign railing against Goldman Sachs and then put a bunch of Goldman Sachs execs in his cabinet. Kim Kardashian is still making headlines. Half of Republicans believe that Trump won the general election, even though he lost by almost 3 million votes. The Seattle Seahawks new uniforms make them look like highlighter markers. The MLB All-Star game no longer gets the winning league home field advantage in the World Series.

Any of those things would be more worthwhile to concern yourself with than Birtherism, and I bet I can come up with a hundred more.

I agree with Ed, the man has 4 weeks of power left before he leaves the White House (but by no means is he leaving Washington; might even retire there)

I mean, you guys still want to talk about a 9 year old meme? What about the Christians being plowed over in Germany with a heavily-armed Islamist still on the loose, or the assassination in Turkey which some are referring to as an Archduke Ferdinand moment?

Guys are asleep this week

Ed: Still, that's no reason for a rational guy like you to follow them down the rabbit hole, Phil.

By no means. I'm merely interested in what has been technically asserted by independent, credible testing entities. Was it possible to do! Unquestionably. Would multiple points of congruence be the same on two different documents created by hand/analog machines. No! Is it true? I'm agnostic on it. Are not many of the birthers nuts, or just exceptionally biased? Of course! Yes, Obama, wherever he was born, is a mute point - least now. Does Obama himself know where he was born? Course not - other than per old documents which seem to indicate so, and what various people assert.

The problem with Birtherism is that it's incredibly damaging to our political process. There's nothing wrong with attacking an opponent's ideas - that's politics - but Birtherism doesn't do that. Brothers ignore the real issues that we face as a society and focus on convincing people that the President is not just wrong, but illegitimate. They're not seeking stability, compromise, or progress, they just want to do damage and deepen the divide. When a rational person even implies that they're worth listening to to exacerbates the problem.

Brothers and their one Big Idea belong in the same category as the 9/11 Truthers, Sandy Hook deniers, and the lunatics who insist that the moon landing was faked, Elvis is alive, and the Holocaust never happened. They don't deserve the benefit of the doubt.

That's actually the main reason I hate Trump - he used that lie to advance his own agenda and took Birtherism mainstream in the process. I hate that that worked.