Breaking it down to the "nitty gritty", I agree.
If we except this as true, then the document presented proffers absolutely no evidentiary value as to his Constitutional eligibility, as we just decided it's not an "official document".
The parents' social security numbers, for starters.
I was born 6 months before Obama, both of my parent's full names, occupations, current address, employers name and address, doctors name, hospital etc. but no SS #
I think we can both agree the cert number was redacted so the validity of the document could not be verified.
Correct. I would not expect any government official or any court to accept a JPEG as evidence. In fact, any photo is admissible as evidence only with the testimony of the person who took it, and is only as credible as the photographer. Whether the general public finds it convincing is a question left to each person who views it.
My employer has a photocopy of my passport; it verifies my place of birth and various other information they want to be able to verify. The photocopy will not get me through Customs. It's good enough for their purposes, because the hiring manager held the actual passport and was convinced of its authenticity.
I think we can both agree the cert number was redacted so the validity of the document could not be verified.
The purpose that seems most obvious to me is so that it couldn't be used to gain access to more information -- including, but not limited to, going into the database to verify it.
Whether or not it could be used for nefarious purpose is irrelevant; all that my hypothesis requires is that someone decided not to post it on his Web site, whether he was misinformed or over-cautious. And as mlo points out, it is easy to find other photos of the document in which the certificate number is not blacked out, so if it was an attempt to thwart verification it was a lame one.