The best available evidence disputes this.
Whether or not this is an anomaly depends on an exact knowledge of what was actually done in 1961.
Wich makes all the more important to demand full disclosure.
If you actually had a few dozen BC’s from August of 1961 and could show that they should be sequential based on birth date and time then you'd have something.
We don't have a few dozen, but there have been several random BCs posted that show a general sequential numbering system that goes along with the chronological order in which BCs are filed. The procedures as explained by a DOH employee support this numbering pattern, so again, the best available evidence supports the idea that the cert. no. is an anomaly and impossibility. Obama's alleged cert. no. is irrationally out of sequence, and the state of Hawaii REFUSES to affirm that the number belongs to Obama despite having statutory authority to confirm who the number does belong to. Why hide the truth when there's no legal reason to hide it?? So far, you're showing that you're good at making excuses that don't need to be made.
I disagree that this is the case.
“Which makes all the more important to demand full disclosure.”
That would be nice, but you are unlikely to get it.
“We don't have a few dozen, but there have been several random BCs posted that show a general sequential numbering system that goes along with the chronological order in which BCs are filed.”
To demonstrate anything you need a group from a common time period, say a full month. A few here and there over a few years tell you nothing (go read about aliasing). You may as well take the outside temperature at noon once in January, once in May and once in August and insist that temperature increases steadily upward with no fluctuations. Then from that conclude that a claim that it was colder at night on April 3rd than it was during the day on March 29th is clearly false.
“The procedures as explained by a DOH employee support this numbering pattern, so again, the best available evidence supports the idea that the cert. no. is an anomaly and impossibility.”
Claims from folks with no first direct knowledge of how things were done in 1961 do not make other possibilities impossible or irrational.
“Obama’s alleged cert. no. is irrationally out of sequence, and the state of Hawaii REFUSES to affirm that the number belongs to Obama despite having statutory authority to confirm who the number does belong to. Why hide the truth when there's no legal reason to hide it??”
I'm more inclined to think that Hawaii after having tried to make something of a good faith effort, however poorly, figured out that they were dealing with kooks who weren't going to be happy with what they got unless if confirm their presumptions. And that after a point there was no reason to continue the exercise.