Quote from OPTIONAL777:
"but now we know no one in HI does either."
Not a logical conclusion, because a lack of evidence is not evidence of a lack.
You may say that you have never seen a particular birth certificate...but that yields knowledge that someone wasn't born in Hawaii, or that no one in Hawaii knows if Obama was born in Hawaii, or even that the certificate you deem the only worthy piece of evidence does not in fact exist?
Logically...a false, false, false conclusion.
Lousy reasoning...even shoddier use of logic.
you again must not be taking you meds.
At some point you have to sum the situation up.
Before we had people in HI gov't saying they had the Originals and that Obama was born there. So pinheads like you and Maher and Ranger Rover and the dopes on MSNBC thought they had a right to make fun of birther's intelligence.
Now we seem to have no originals. And Obama's relatives are dead.
So far no in the world has produced evidence of his birth. who in HI has evidence of Obama's birth. And don't tell me about an Internet BC that Obama himself has never proffered as proof...
Maybe Obama has proof-- but he is not in HI.
Therefore no one in HI has proof he was born there.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And note lack of originals where the original records must be stored .... is evidence of lack.
If I said there is solider in the tomb of the unkown solider.... lack of a body is evidence of a lack.
If I said there is no original B.C. in the place where the original is stored - that is evidence there is no official birth record which was required to kept and stored in accordance with HI law.
Which might cause the burden of proof of production and proof of birth place to switch.
Bringing a copy of a computer generated B.C. which was generated from data which was made by a notation instead of an official document.... might cause that copy to be deemed unreliable and untrustworthy.