opinions that had been expressed. He is not backtracking a little, he refutes the FNC story. Also note that these opinions have been refuted by sworn testimony. Also note that none of the opinions that you refer to are sworn to. Also note that no expert has provided sworn testimony to counter the numerous sworn testimonies declaring the documents to be fabricated on a computer. They also know the details of the computer, the operating system, and where it is located. They also know the time when the forgery was uploaded to the WH site. They also have a person of interest. Perhaps you could explain why the WH team had two different versions posted on 04/27/2011 at times during the day? Perhaps you could also explain how the WH got confused and at one time posted the wrong short form COLB on their site. They posted one made by one of the fake COLB debunkers that he had made to show easy it was to make a fake COLB like the one online at fakecheck. Soetoro's boys got confused and loaded that homemade version on the WH site. They can't even get their fakes straight from other fakes.
Sorry dude. I am not insane. I am informed, and obviously, you are not.
You also did not even realize that the one link that you provided is to an article debunking the fake BC. If, you are going to provide a link, you should read the article or maybe just read the title, that should have been a clue.
Graphics pros challenge Obama birth certificate
Layers of images found in released computer document raise doubts
Since then, experts have provided sworn testimony that the doc is a forgery made on a computer. This sworn testimony is unchallenged by any sworn testimony, only by bloggers like you. I will believe the experts willing to swear to their opinions.