Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Babagounj" data-source="post: 1031371" data-attributes="member: 12952">WND EXCLUSIVE&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; Obama eligibility odds: 1 in 62.5 quintillion&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; Lord Monckton crunches numbers on &#039;mistakes&#039; in White House birth certificateComputer imaging experts have found it to be fraudulent and the&nbsp; conclusion of an official law enforcement investigation assembled by&nbsp; Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio is that it is just not real.&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; <ul>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul"></li>
</ul>&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;But it wasn’t until now, through the work of the <a href="http://www.wnd.com/author/cmonckton/" target="_blank">Christopher Monckton of Brenchley,</a> that the world was informed just exactly what the odds are against all of those anomalies occurring naturally.&nbsp;One in 62,500,000,000,000,000,000. (That’s 62.5 quintillion)&nbsp;Or, if one prefers, the chances are 0.0000000000000000000016 that those curious developments happened by accident.He cites:&nbsp;<ul>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">The fact that the registrar’s signature-stamp on the electronic form can be moved about: 100:1 against. </li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Registrar’s date-stamp ditto: 100:1 against. </li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Multiple 1-bit monochrome layers and one 8-bit color layer: 60:1.&nbsp; (Experts twice found no such pattern in 600 file-optimization programs: I&nbsp; allow for 10 anomalous programs to exist.) </li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">“Lavishly funded bureaucracy uses wonky typewriter:” 10:1 </li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Human error: Certificate number out of sequence: 25:1 </li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Incorrect birth date of father: 40:1 </li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Use of “African” contrary to written form-filling rules and 20 years before the term came into common use: 25:1 </li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Miscoded statistical data: 25:1 (official government estimate). </li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">White halo around letters: 10:1 </li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Chromatic aberration absent: 100:1 </li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Other identity documents: Anomalously worded abstract on short-form birth certificate: 100:1 </li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Two-digit year on selective service stamp against DoD written rules:&nbsp; 100:1 (actually impossible: no two-digit example other than that of&nbsp; Kenya’s “son of the soil” is known) </li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Non-citizen of Connecticut holds Connecticut social security number: 100:1. </li>
</ul>“There are many other errors, but these suffice. Defenders of Mr.&nbsp; Community Organizer say each error could have just happened by accident.&nbsp; I mean, it’s government form-filling, right?,” he wrote. “But here’s&nbsp; where the math comes in. If each error is a genuine accident, the errors&nbsp; are independent events, so the probabilities of each error are&nbsp; multiplied together to determine the probability that all occurred in&nbsp; one document.&nbsp;“Thus the odds against all of these errors occurring in a single&nbsp; document except by design are 1 in 100 x 100 x 10 x 10 x 25 x 40 x 25 x&nbsp; 25 x 10 x 100 x 100 x 100 x 100. Accordingly, the probability that Mr.&nbsp; Obama’s birth narrative is in substance true is no better than 1 in&nbsp; 62,500,000,000,000,000,000, or 0.0000000000000000000016.”&nbsp;He wrote, “Don’t be misled by the simplicity of the method. It’s simple but sound.”</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Babagounj, post: 1031371, member: 12952"] [B]WND EXCLUSIVE[/B] [B]Obama eligibility odds: 1 in 62.5 quintillion[/B] [B]Lord Monckton crunches numbers on 'mistakes' in White House birth certificate[/B] Computer imaging experts have found it to be fraudulent and the conclusion of an official law enforcement investigation assembled by Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio is that it is just not real. [LIST] [/LIST] But it wasn’t until now, through the work of the [URL="http://www.wnd.com/author/cmonckton/"]Christopher Monckton of Brenchley,[/URL] that the world was informed just exactly what the odds are against all of those anomalies occurring naturally. One in 62,500,000,000,000,000,000. (That’s 62.5 quintillion) Or, if one prefers, the chances are 0.0000000000000000000016 that those curious developments happened by accident. He cites: [LIST] [*]The fact that the registrar’s signature-stamp on the electronic form can be moved about: 100:1 against. [*]Registrar’s date-stamp ditto: 100:1 against. [*]Multiple 1-bit monochrome layers and one 8-bit color layer: 60:1. (Experts twice found no such pattern in 600 file-optimization programs: I allow for 10 anomalous programs to exist.) [*]“Lavishly funded bureaucracy uses wonky typewriter:” 10:1 [*]Human error: Certificate number out of sequence: 25:1 [*]Incorrect birth date of father: 40:1 [*]Use of “African” contrary to written form-filling rules and 20 years before the term came into common use: 25:1 [*]Miscoded statistical data: 25:1 (official government estimate). [*]White halo around letters: 10:1 [*]Chromatic aberration absent: 100:1 [*]Other identity documents: Anomalously worded abstract on short-form birth certificate: 100:1 [*]Two-digit year on selective service stamp against DoD written rules: 100:1 (actually impossible: no two-digit example other than that of Kenya’s “son of the soil” is known) [*]Non-citizen of Connecticut holds Connecticut social security number: 100:1. [/LIST] “There are many other errors, but these suffice. Defenders of Mr. Community Organizer say each error could have just happened by accident. I mean, it’s government form-filling, right?,” he wrote. “But here’s where the math comes in. If each error is a genuine accident, the errors are independent events, so the probabilities of each error are multiplied together to determine the probability that all occurred in one document. “Thus the odds against all of these errors occurring in a single document except by design are 1 in 100 x 100 x 10 x 10 x 25 x 40 x 25 x 25 x 10 x 100 x 100 x 100 x 100. Accordingly, the probability that Mr. Obama’s birth narrative is in substance true is no better than 1 in 62,500,000,000,000,000,000, or 0.0000000000000000000016.” He wrote, “Don’t be misled by the simplicity of the method. It’s simple but sound.” [/QUOTE]

Verification