Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: butterdezillion

Does your analysis hold true if they started the year off 00001 and run consecutive each month. The first August number would be 09943. IIRC, your analysis has them taking numbers from kids born in July which would not be possible if the numbering system started over each year.


114 posted on 01/22/2013 8:42:08 PM PST by 4Zoltan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies ]


To: 4Zoltan

No matter how they started the numbers, if they numbered the August births in Honolulu in consecutive order the Nordykes, born on Aug 5th, could not be numbered before Obama, born on Aug 4th.

No matter how they started they could not get hundreds of Honolulu births into the 2 1/2 hour span between Susan Nordyke and Stig Waidelich when, statistically speaking, there should have been about 2 births between - making Stig’s BC# almost certainly the one that Obama has been given.

And if they numbered the BC’s on the “date filed” as Okubo has said, only a very, very rare case (such as Sunahara’s where she was born in one hospital under one name but died in another the next day and given a death certificate under a different name) a BC numbered on Aug 11th (Obama’s) would get an earlier number than a BC numbered on Aug 8th (the Nordykes)

Those are the kinds of inconsistencies that require an audit of the records.


116 posted on 01/23/2013 2:03:41 AM PST by butterdezillion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson