No, but since no one I know of has seen anything other than a computer image of the document, which computer imaging specialists have analysed as fraudulent, neither you nor I have any way of knowing whether the real COLB (either long or short form) lists Honolulu as the place of birth.
Physical copies have been made available to some media outlets. Factcheck has photographs of the original. Factcheck may not be completely free of bias, but I seriously doubt the University of Pennsylvania would allow itself to be associated with overt fraud:
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html
which computer imaging specialists have analysed as fraudulent,
One internet blogger using a fake name and claiming a fake Ph.D. claims it's fake. I'm sorry, but that isn't particularly convincing.
neither you nor I have any way of knowing whether the real COLB (either long or short form) lists Honolulu as the place of birth.
I suppose neither you nor I would know for sure unless we held an offically certified physical copy of the thing in our hands. Of course, that would be an impossible standard of proof, as it would be absurd to provide every single voter a physical copy. That means that no matter what he does, no matter what proof he offers, you're going to have to trust someone who examined the physical document. I don't see any reason not to trust the University of Pennsylvania.
Then look at the evidence and ask yourself whether it is really plausible that a sitting Senator would risk impeachment and possible criminal charges and create a fraudulant copy of a birth certificate. Not a single person in a campaign staff of thousands leaked out any evidence of the fraud. Is that really plausible, given the ubiquity of leaks in modern politics? Next you have to believe an institute affiliated with an Ivy League university would abet that fraud, and finally, the Hawaii health department would further abet the fraud by falsely confirming obama's birth in Hawaii.
And yes, they did in fact confirm his Hawaiian birth. I know, I know, their original statement could be interpreted as merely confirming the existence of his vault copy, and not his Hawaiian birth, but they clarified it later:
http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/11/obama_hawaaianborn_citizen_for.html
Sum up all the evidence, and you're really far into tinfoil hat terrirtory if you believe Obama wasn't born in Hawaii.
Then just think of the sheer implausibility that a pregnant 18 year old student of the University of Hawaii, in 1961, would choose to fly halfway around the world, at a time when air travel was very expensive and difficult, to third world country without modern medical facilities, just to give birth to her child. Why?
Then you would have to believe her husband, who was concealing bigamy from her, would choose to take her to the village where his other wife and children were living, and to his parents who strongly disapproved of his marraige.
Oh, and then, just in case her son would later decide to run for president, she phoned in his birth announcement from Kenya to the local paper.
Doesn't that strike you as just a little absurd?