The best available evidence is the birth announcements from the newspapers in 1961. Assuming those are legitimate announcements, then this rules out the paternity options.
Another possibility for the original birth certificate is that it is not signed by a doctor, but perhaps only signed by the mother or maybe only by the grandmother. If so, then the reliability of the claimed birth information is immediately questionable.
And one other possibility is that Obama was born ‘en route,’ meaning on a ship or airplane. The place of arrival, for such births, is listed as the place of birth. So if SAD sailed from Kenya or Indonesia to Hawaii when she was pregnant or soon after delivering the baby, she might said the baby was born en route, even though it may have actually been born in Kenya or Indonesia (remember that DOH Spokesbabe Okubo said if Obama was born in Bali, his COLB should say Bali?). A certificate for a baby born en route would probably have to be signed by a witness. In the absence of such a signature, then the certificate has no reliability. IOW, the original birth certificate might say Obama was born en route, and is registered as born in Honolulu, but is not signed by a witness and is not legal proof of birth. Years later, Obama files supplemental paperwork to “verify” he was born in Hawaii and is issued a new, but amended COLB. The likelihood is that he doctored the parts of the COLB showing he was born en route and can’t let anyone see the original certificate that is lacking proper authentification entries.
The birth announcements aren’t from newspapers. They’re from microfiche/microfilm. I have never seen any claim from anyone to have seen the REAL newspaper.
Then you start with the “possibilities” and my post said anything is possible.
There is no hard evidence supporting the circumstances of Obama’s birth — absolutely none.