The only possible evidence you could submit would be Obama’s alleged birth certificate. Are you unaware that it would be challenged? For one thing, it doesn’t match the description of the three people who actually saw Obama’s birth records prior to the appearance of the LFBC. For another thing, you’d need to answer the simple question, why was a home residence listed for Stanley Ann at which she and the baby never resided?
Obama himself can competently testify as to the facts concerning his own birth even though he had no means of acquiring personal knowledge of those facts. See Rule 804(b)(4). That evidence alone will beat you unless you can identify a witness who can testify that he/she witnessed the birth at some other location.
The birth records are admissible as well. See Rules 803(9)(19)and/or(24). See also Rules 901(1)(2)and/or(4). Those records, too, all by themselves, will be more than enough to beat you.
I know that there are other records from the newspaper, etc. but there really shouldn't be any need for them. There might also be some people who remember (but did not actually witness) the Hawaiian birth.
And, I suppose you could call any witness who actually saw him born in some other location. Unfortunately, there are no such people. So, what do you have other than doubts that you have nurtured about this or that?