You could really help your argument on this point at least if you could post a link to an Australian Birth doc that did mention book and page.
If my argument is that I have seen a few Australian Birth Docs, not many, but a few, and none have used book and page, and you can find one with book and page, it would tend to weaken my argument.
The “why the match” argument is the strongest for me, leaving book and page aside.
Lavender, Miller and 44B 5733 all match.
Why do they match?
Well, of course because one was copied from the other.
What are the ramifications of the match?
Well, it calls the documents into question.
Who benefits from calling the documents into question?
People who want to see to documents called into question.
It is more likely that the documents were intentionally made to match by people who wanted to call the documents into question than the documents were accidentally or negligently made to match by someone who didn’t want them to match.
(Now that I think of it, that just rules out accidental error in the case of the Kenyan doc. Either the Kenyan doc or the Aussie doc could have been made by someone who wanted to call the doc into question.)
We’ll have to see what happens.
I've been suspicious of the Kenyan document since the night it was posted. And the more I read and learned, my skepticism got bigger, not smaller.
In my mind, the dynamic has been: "It's likely that someone put these numbers on this Kenyan document knowing that they can later be used to reveal it's a fake, thus making those who latch onto it (and their overall questioning of Obama's credentials from that time forward) look bad." A distraction from the real issues.
Now whether that's a good strategy or not, or whether or not it's merely brought the issue to the forefront, is debatable.
I actually couldn't immediately find such a thing, but looks like someone else did in post 372.