[philman_36]

Nowhere am I "fighting hard" for this manual if you actually read my comments.
I've read your comments. I also read your original post. Here is what you said...which refers to some of the codes used for birth certificates at that time...
No, the revised manual is about codes used for birth certificates after that time, not at that time.
And you say...so we don't know if this manual or an earlier version was actually used, even if we believe the part of the document on which the codes appear was actually derived from an original 1961 document.
You present the doubt that an earlier manual wasn't used to frame your argument. And common sense generally informs us that no government functionary is going to use a manual that isn't "in use" yet. They - follow - procedure.

But you didn't stop there.

However, attention should also be focused on one of the other coded items: namely, whether the original COLB listed a hospital birth or a home birth.
You went on as if the revised manual was the one used before it's effective date and you based all of your conclusions based on that.
And you pushed it even further later on!

@ The purpose of this thread is to invite comment on the apparent evidence, based on this source document, that Obama’s COLB was originally coded as a “home birth.”

Your whole argument is completely based on the revised manual being the one used despite your noted objections and you have been fighting for that revised manual to be the only basis for any comments offered.

[Fred Garvin-MP]

I agree with your assessment. What I want to know is what are your thoughts on that drawn in question mark in the left margin below and to the left of 7d? It’s outside the bracket where the parents street address it. A clearer picture of it is here.

http://longformfake.webs.com/