What Happens When The Planets Align

Welcome back.

Once again, I promise you that this piece has information not posted anywhere else before.

UPDATE 10/27/2012 – Thank you American Thinker, for the link.  Please know that this particular “post” is only a “scratch-pad” of sorts for the research I did on the Barack Obama newspaper birth announcements.  The main piece of information that resulted is that in the ten day period included in the original study – later expanded to a two month range – is that the ONLY time both newspapers published the birth notices in exact matching order, only one day apart, occurred on the dates that obamas’ birth was announced.  If you have time please read the original article at the pink link below – there is so much more there.  Thank you for reading.

Here are the graphs featuring the two sister publications, the Honolulu Star Bulletin and the Honolulu Advertiser,  showing the frequency of the two papers cross-publishing birth announcements.  This was done, as I stated in my last post, (a must read,) “Extra, Extra, Announcing obama’s Birth”,  https://myveryownpointofview.wordpress.com/2010/05/28/extra-extra-announcing-obamas-birth/ in a ten day sample size, covering Aug. 08,1961 to Aug. 18, 1961.   obama’s birth announcement fell roughly in the center of that ten day range.

Final installment also up, 7/09:

https://myveryownpointofview.wordpress.com/2010/06/09/wheres-sherlock-holmes-when-you-need-him/

Recall:

“It has been advanced that both papers printed identical lists as the general rule.  As I mentioned before, this was pointed out to add more “weight” to the (ahem) proof these newspaper birth announcements lend to obama’s birth story.  As it turns out it was done more or less sporadically.   You see, when I decide to research something I don’t do a half- assed job of it.  So I pulled a sample size of ten days from each paper.  I began the splendidly tedious process of comparing the incidence of the same birth announcements being listed in both papers.  Mainly with an eye towards how often they matched in exact order.The only time this occurred in that particular way within the ten days that I researched, was on the dates that had obama’s birth announcements.

And I even took the extra steps of comparing editions to a three day range (edition before, same date, edition after) of the sister publication.  So, I tried to cover all the bases in a fair comparison.”

HERE ARE THE RESULTS:

Bar graphs show the date of the publication (Honolulu Star Bulletin) and the number of announcements that were cross published in the Honolulu Advertiser over a three day range, (represented in the blue bars) and  the number of announcements that were NOT cross published at all.  This is a basic bar graph and does not indicate how many of these matches were in the EXACT same order in both papers.  That information is provided below the graph section, in percentages.  Also the “raw data” that was worked from will be posted below that.

.

Aug. 8th Honolulu Star Bulletin had a total of 56 births listed.

.

Aug 9th Honolulu Star Bulletin had a total of 4 births listed.

.

No birth announcements were found in the 8/10/61 or 8/11/61 Honolulu Star Bulletin

No birth announcements were found in the 8/11/61 or 8/12/61 Honolulu Advertiser

.

Aug. 12th Honolulu Star Bulletin had a total of 17 births listed.

.

Aug. 13th Honolulu Star Bulletin had a total of 21 births listed.

.

Aug. 14th Honolulu Star Bulletin had a total of 57 births listed.

.

Aug. 16th Honolulu Star Bulletin had a total of 18 births listed.

.

Aug. 17th Honolulu Star Bulletin had a total of 129 births listed.

NEXT:

Percentages of EXACT matches, in the same EXACT descending order, in the same starting point in the birth announcements.

Honolulu Star Bulletin Data % of exact matches:

8/08/61- 56 births. to 8/08 Hono. Adv. ((which has a total of 50 births)) – 0%

to 8/9 Hono. Adv. ((which has a total of 76 births)) – 0%

to 8/10 Hono. Adv. ((which has a total of 82 (?) births)) – 0%

8/09/61- 4 births. No matches to 8/08, 8/09, 8/10 Hono. Adv. – 0%

8/12/61– 17 births. to 8/14 Hono. Adv.((which has a total of 48 births)) – 0%

8/13/61- 21 births. No matches to 8/10, 8/13,8/14. – 0%

8/14/61- 57 births. The first twenty-five match (in exact same order)  ALL twenty-five announcements in the  8/13 Hono. Adv.,

So, although the Star Bulletin does not have a 100% match (it is 43.9%, reason: there were only 25 announcements total in the Hono. Adv.) THE HONOLULU ADVERTISER, HAS A 100% MATCH TO THE 8/14/61 STAR BULLETIN, in the same descending order. This is the one and only time this occurred in the ten day sample range. Remember that the first obama birth announcement was found in the HONOLULU ADVERTISER.  On a few other dates, there is a full match, but not in exact order.   And those are not located in the same place within the column of announcements.

8/16/61- 18 births. to  8/17 Hono. Adv. ((which has a total of 203 births)) – 0%

8/17/61- 129 births. to 8/16 Hono. Adv. ((which has a total of 67 births)) – 0%

to  8/17 Hono. Adv.  ((which has a total of 203 births)) – 0%

So, we can safely surmise that when Lori Starfelt, the person who claims to have been the first to discover obama’s Honolulu Advertiser birth announcement, made this statement:

“In 1961, the hospitals would take their new birth certificates to Vital Records. At the end of the week, Vital Records would post a sheet that for the news paper to pick up that contained births, deaths, marriages and divorces. The Advertiser routinely printed this information in their Sunday edition. This is not a paid announcement that his grandmother could arrange. This is information that comes from Vital Records – we know this because this particular section reflects those records”

SHE WAS EITHER GROSSLY MISLED OR OUTRIGHT LIED!

Overall percentages of cross published birth announcements:

Honolulu Star Bulletin to the Honolulu Advertiser

8/08/61 – 8/08 – 10.7%

– 8/09 – 32.1%

– 8/10 – 14.3%

No match in range – 42.9%

8/09/61 – 8/08 – 0%

– 8/09 – 0%

– 8/10 – 0%

No match in range – 100%

8/12/61 – 8/09 – 0%

– 8/10 -0%

– 8/13 – 0%

No match in range – 100%

8/13/61 – 8/10 – 0%

– 8/13 – 0%

– 8/14 – 0%

No match in range 100%

8/14/61 – 8/13 – 43.9%

8/14 – 56.1%

So, a 100% match between the two dates.

8/16/61 – 8/15 – 0%

8/16 – 0%

8/17 – 100%

No match in range – 0%

8/17/61 – 8/16 – 10.9%

8/17 – 26.4%

8/18 – o%

No match in range – 62.7%

RAW DATA that the graphs and percentages were developed from:

Honolulu Star Bulletin Data:

8/08/61– 56 births. Six are cross posted (not in exact order) in the 8/08 Hono. Adv.((which has a total of 50 births))

Eighteen (not in exact order) are posted in the 8/9 Hono. Adv. ((which has a total of 76 births))

Eight are posted (not in exact order)  in the 8/10 Hono. Adv.((which has a total of 82 (?) ))

8/09/61– 4 births. No matches to 8/08, 8/09, 8/10 Hono. Adv.

8/12/61- 17 births. All seventeen match (not in exact order) 8/14 Hono. Adv.((which has a total of 48 births))

8/13/61– 21 births. No matches to 8/10, 8/13,8/14.

Three match (not in exact order) 8/17 Hono. Adv.((which has a total of 203 births))

8/14/61– 57 births.  The first twenty-five match (in exact same order) to the twenty-five announcements in the  8/13 Hono. Adv., the remaining thirty-two match (NOT in exact same order) to the 8/14 HA ((which has a total of 48 births)).

8/16/61– 18 births.  All match (not in exact same order)  to the 8/17 Hono. Adv. ((which has a total of 203 births))

8/17/61– 129 births. Twenty-one match (not in exact order) to the 8/16 Hono. Adv. ((which has a total of 67 births))

Thirty-four match (not in exact order) to the 8/17 Hono. Adv.  ((which has a total of 203 births))

Please allow for a slight margin of unintentional error.  This project was done in my spare bits of time!

Just another coincidence? 

.Above is a film box photo in a library in Hawaii – sent by a traveler, below is the film box containing the same date/newspaper, but at the Library of Congress.  I took the picture below while I was collecting the copies for my research.  This was the only box out of several dozen that I handled which had  the original numbers obscured.

I WISH TO STATE THAT I AM NOT MAKING A CLAIM THAT I HAVE FACTUAL PROOF THESE MICROFILMS CONTAINING BIRTH ANNOUNCEMENTS FOR obama ARE TAMPERED WITH.   I HAVE DISPLAYED ON THIS BLOG, OVER FOUR SEPARATE POSTS, A PORTION – THAT MOST DIRECTLY RELATING TO obama’s BIRTH ANNOUNCEMENTS – OF THE MATERIAL THAT I HAVE COLLECTED.  I HAVE DIRECTLY SHARED COPIES AND PDF’S OF MY RESEARCH WITH OTHERS WHO ARE INTERESTED IN DOING THEIR OWN RESEARCH, THEIR CONCLUSIONS AND OR CLAIMS ARE HOWEVER, THEIR OWN.

~ by ladysforest on June 6, 2010.