Good enough to establish the facts that it contains, nothing more. Not necessarily good enough to determine natural born citizenship.
Also when a forgery is suspected or alleged, the "source document" is a good place to look to corroborate the facts on the derived document.
But you were insisting that it was a "source document", that is copy of an "original birth record". It's not. I'm glad to see you finally understand that point.
That's exactly what I've said. Good. So we agree about that. A birth certificate, like the one there are photos of for Obama, is good enough to establish the facts it contains.
"Not necessarily good enough to determine natural born citizenship."
Being born in Honolulu would make him a natural born citizen. The birth certificate says he was born in Honolulu.
"Also when a forgery is suspected or alleged, the "source document" is a good place to look to corroborate the facts on the derived document. "
But it creates no obligation on someone to produce it. "Suspected or alleged" is pretty loose criteria. It is "suspected and alleged" that JFK is still alive somewhere.
"But you were insisting that it was a "source document", that is copy of an "original birth record". It's not. I'm glad to see you finally understand that point. "
Quote me. I haven't changed my opinion. I've been saying that the document (ignoring forgery allegations) is sufficient legal proof to establish his eligibility. That no other form must be produced.