‘However, the contemporaneous birth announcement blows those theories out of the water in any case. Remember, Toot didn’t place the announcement. The announcement appears in two separate papers, each containing the same list of babies in the same order.’
Butterdezillion has spent a lot of time studying the birth announcements, and she reports that the lists from the two papers are far from identical:
“The Nordyke twins’ announcement doesn’t appear in the Star-Bulletin anywhere, although they appear in the Advertiser. The lists between the 2 papers are not identical in any way, shape, or form. There are people whose births were announced in one paper 3 weeks after they were announced in the other paper. There are people (like Nordykes) who made it in one paper but not the other.
Based on the analysis I’ve done of all the August births reported, if the Star-Bulletin only published Oahu births (which is the kindest way to explain the numbers in support of the announcements coming from the HDOH office), 26% of the August births on Oahu were not included in the S-B announcements. If you exclude an estimated 100 illegitimate births (There were 1,044 in all of HI for all of 1961 according to the CDC’s 1961 Natality Report) that might not have been reported for embarrassment reasons, that still leaves 18% of all August 1961 births on Oahu unreported. If the papers printed a complete listing of all Hawaii births that percentage would be even higher.
And I may as well say here, also, that there are signs that the microfilm having the Nordyke announcement has been changed out since the first images appeared also. The first images that appeared were sent to somebody by the Hawaii State Library librarian (just like the images for Obama’s announcements), and just like the Obama announcements, marks that were on that image from the librarian are now missing from that microfilm at the HSL. The marks show up even when the actual announcement is placed at the top of the viewer-copier and when it is placed at the bottom, so the marks cannot be from the viewer or copier but from the actual microfilm itself.
So there are not clean-cut lists that show up in both papers identically. The only reason the lists for the Aug 13th Advertiser and Aug 14th Star-Bulletin appear to be identical is because the Star-Bulletin image was enlarged so that the only announcements that showed were the ones that were also in the Advertiser. In reality there were 26 more announcements in the Aug 14th Star-Bulletin that didn’t make it into the Aug 13th Advertiser.
Anybody who actually looked at those microfilms would have easily seen that, which leads me to believe that the Advertiser reporter Will Hoover did not look in the Advertiser’s microfilms and make those copies himself but was given them by somebody else. Either that, or he deliberately lied about the lists being identical in order to claim the lists were from the HDOH office.
The lies we were told were not just about where the images came from. These people were absolutely counting on nobody actually going and checking out the actual microfilms because they pulled so many fast ones on the general public it’s not even funny. Hopefully the truth can eventually come out where even folks like Bill O’Reilly have to grasp it.”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2668269/posts?page=352#355
As the above article points out:
PolitiFact's Robert Farley added that a reporter named Will Hoover checked with newspaper officials and "confirmed those notices came from the state Department of Health," with Hoover explaining, "That's not the kind of stuff a family member calls in and says, 'Hey, can you put this in?'" Farley then pondered, "Take a second and think about that. In order to phony those notices up, it would have required the complicity of the state Health Department and two independent newspapers -- on the off chance this unnamed child might want to one day be president of the United States."