By agreeing with the expert? That seems like a strange way to "argue around" it.
The expert did not say it was a forgery. What the expert said would apply just as well to a perfectly valid birth certificate, which was scanned, redacted, and posted on the internet.
Instead of arguing just to be contrary, you can prove this wrong by citing a single instance of the expert endorsing any specific allegation of forgery.
The expert did not say it was a forgery.
***The expert said it was not reliable.
Instead of arguing just to be contrary, you can prove this wrong by citing a single instance of the expert endorsing any specific allegation of forgery.
***Why would I go down any idiotic rabbit holes that you set up? Moving the goalposts. Obfuscation. Probably several other classical fallacies as well, but from your past postings it looks like you won’t catch on to the importance of avoiding fallacies.