If you could get a good enough image off the template form on the photobucket site for the I. B. Aphorgerie form, you might well be able to see the seal where it is here.
I have in my drawer, probably fifty squeeze seals that will print a seal ring without the certificate data if you squeeze properly. I don't think any of that proves anything.
The certificate issue works like this. It is in form and substance a certified representation by a public official that the data on the certificate is representative of the data on the public record.
If this certificate had a number, an observable signed or initialed publication and data reference, and a seal, it would have some credibility even though this information was not clearly readable. None of those things is present on this certificate where they are found on other Hawaii Birth Certificates.
This certificate is defective in that it is not a real certificate and we know it is not a true copy of a certificate also because we can tell that the number is blanked out by digital process rather than redacted by cover; and because Photoedit discloses other deficiencies on the form itself. The purported certificate is a forgery.
When we talk and speculate what a true certificate might show, we are just speculating. Obama is developing near cult status among his supporters. He might be able to get someone in the Hawaii office of Public Records to certify something the records do not reflect. At this point, if a better certificate shows up, in any litigation setting, counsel will seek to obtain access to the real data in the records to which the certificate references.
I tend to doubt they will produce a better fake. They have a problem with the number, even if they know what the proper sequence is because a number in the proper sequence might be someone else's number. Further, there are real civil and criminal penalties for this kind of conduct and even civil servants in Hawaii are likely to be aware of them.
In reflecting on the invasion of the Passport records. There are several possibilities. Obama did it to remove a Birth Certificate that was clearly fake on its face; or was inconsistent with the fake he has now produced; or certified to data other than what appears here. The Clinton's did it to find out what it said. Someone else did it to obtain evidence on the subject.
After thinking about it, Obama's pain when he was complaining about the invasion was evident and real--he would not have needed to acknowledge the invasion at all if he was the instigator. Someone else is now aware what Obama did to produce a passport birth certificate.
David,
“I have in my drawer, probably fifty squeeze seals that will print a seal ring without the certificate data if you squeeze properly. I don’t think any of that proves anything.”
Does the location of the seal in Red Steel’s filtered copy shed any light on this? On all the legal records I have with seals, they are much closer to the margin—else you’d need a seal with an implausibly large handle. If any of your squeeze seals is capable of placing the seal at that approximate location, this would rule out the theory. Admittedly, having zero of 50 seals not be able to come even within 2” of placing a seal that far from the edges doesn’t prove anything definitive, but would cast further doubt on its authenticity.