Birthers Lay an Egg

[Missourian]

You're making a huge assumtion...that Obama was actually born on the fourth of August.

Could you tell a 1 day old baby from a week old baby?

Not a chance.

Could he not have been born the 28th of July for example?

Who would know the difference?

Yes, I could tell the difference... and that's not even my specialty.

How?

 

[Emma]

Doubtful...it wouldn't be a scar yet, just a scab.

And I doubt a doctor would be scrutinizing too closely or be in any way suspicious, just routine birth exam to an American mother...10 fingers, 10 toes, yada, yada, yada.

LOL

No, it wouldn't be a "scab".

A pediatrician would most certainly notice the age of the cord stump. And the presence of (or rather lack of) meconium. Just to name a couple of clues they would pick up on if the child were older than stated.

 

[KittenKoder]

You're making a huge assumtion...that Obama was born on the fourth.

Could you tell a 1 day old baby from a week old baby?

Not a chance.

Could he not have been born the 28th of July for example?

Who would know the difference?

i bet a doctor could
there would be scars involved

like from cutting the cord

Doubtful...it wouldn't be a scar yet, just a scab.

And I doubt a doctor would be scrutinizing too closely or be in any way suspicious, just routine birth exam to an American mother...10 fingers, 10 toes, yada, yada, yada.

Wow ... just wow ... two people pointed out that it's possible, I know it's not only possible but extremely easy, a day old wound looks a lot different from a week old wound, and you are talking about an umbilical cord to, which looks very different a week later. Not to mention that there is a lot of "straightening" of bones during the first few days, the most happens in the first day, the skull isn't even "normal" for the first day, and it's easy to spot. Just ... wow, that you would know so little about human infants.

 

[Emma]

And let's not forget Mom, either. If the grandparents are so caring that they'd risk breaking the law to make sure their grandson was made a citizen at birth, you know they got their daughter a postpartum exam. Especially since she gave birth in a third-world country.


And yeah. I can tell the difference there, too

 

[Emma]

i bet a doctor could
there would be scars involved

like from cutting the cord

Doubtful...it wouldn't be a scar yet, just a scab.

And I doubt a doctor would be scrutinizing too closely or be in any way suspicious, just routine birth exam to an American mother...10 fingers, 10 toes, yada, yada, yada.

Wow ... just wow ... two people pointed out that it's possible, I know it's not only possible but extremely easy, a day old wound looks a lot different from a week old wound, and you are talking about an umbilical cord to, which looks very different a week later. Not to mention that there is a lot of "straightening" of bones during the first few days, the most happens in the first day, the skull isn't even "normal" for the first day, and it's easy to spot. Just ... wow, that you would know so little about human infants.

Their appearance, the cord stump, their stools, their shape, their behaviour... a doctor would have spotted a lie about the child's age in a heartbeat.

 

[DiveCon]

Doubtful...it wouldn't be a scar yet, just a scab.

And I doubt a doctor would be scrutinizing too closely or be in any way suspicious, just routine birth exam to an American mother...10 fingers, 10 toes, yada, yada, yada.

LOL

No, it wouldn't be a "scab".

A pediatrician would most certainly notice the age of the cord stump. And the presence of (or rather lack of) meconium. Just to name a couple of clues they would pick up on if the child were older than stated.

and doesnt the babies skin coloring somewhat change after the first day as well?
it would set off all kinds of red flags if someone brought a 3 day old into the hospital and claimed it had just been born at home


at least it SHOULD

 

[KittenKoder]

Doubtful...it wouldn't be a scar yet, just a scab.

And I doubt a doctor would be scrutinizing too closely or be in any way suspicious, just routine birth exam to an American mother...10 fingers, 10 toes, yada, yada, yada.

Wow ... just wow ... two people pointed out that it's possible, I know it's not only possible but extremely easy, a day old wound looks a lot different from a week old wound, and you are talking about an umbilical cord to, which looks very different a week later. Not to mention that there is a lot of "straightening" of bones during the first few days, the most happens in the first day, the skull isn't even "normal" for the first day, and it's easy to spot. Just ... wow, that you would know so little about human infants.

Their appearance, the cord stump, their stools, their shape, their behaviour... a doctor would have spotted a lie about the child's age in a heartbeat.

According to pediatricians, the greatest amount of development happens within the first two weeks, if I remember correctly. Which means a lot of changes, and many are physical. I just can't believe that someone thinks there is not enough of a difference between a day old infant and a week old infant. I wonder if they know what color they are when they are born. It's just annoying that people know so little about their own species.

 

[DiveCon]

Wow ... just wow ... two people pointed out that it's possible, I know it's not only possible but extremely easy, a day old wound looks a lot different from a week old wound, and you are talking about an umbilical cord to, which looks very different a week later. Not to mention that there is a lot of "straightening" of bones during the first few days, the most happens in the first day, the skull isn't even "normal" for the first day, and it's easy to spot. Just ... wow, that you would know so little about human infants.

Their appearance, the cord stump, their stools, their shape, their behaviour... a doctor would have spotted a lie about the child's age in a heartbeat.

According to pediatricians, the greatest amount of development happens within the first two weeks, if I remember correctly. Which means a lot of changes, and many are physical. I just can't believe that someone thinks there is not enough of a difference between a day old infant and a week old infant. I wonder if they know what color they are when they are born. It's just annoying that people know so little about their own species.

gotta wonder if hes ever seen a baby being born

 

[Emma]

Doubtful...it wouldn't be a scar yet, just a scab.

And I doubt a doctor would be scrutinizing too closely or be in any way suspicious, just routine birth exam to an American mother...10 fingers, 10 toes, yada, yada, yada.

LOL

No, it wouldn't be a "scab".

A pediatrician would most certainly notice the age of the cord stump. And the presence of (or rather lack of) meconium. Just to name a couple of clues they would pick up on if the child were older than stated.

and doesnt the babies skin coloring somewhat change after the first day as well?
it would set off all kinds of red flags if someone brought a 3 day old into the hospital and claimed it had just been born at home


at least it SHOULD

Yes, of course. And more so if they brought in an even older child and claimed it was younger.

In the first day or two acrocyanosis (bluish color of hands and feet) is expected/normal.

 

[KittenKoder]

Doubtful...it wouldn't be a scar yet, just a scab.

And I doubt a doctor would be scrutinizing too closely or be in any way suspicious, just routine birth exam to an American mother...10 fingers, 10 toes, yada, yada, yada.

LOL

No, it wouldn't be a "scab".

A pediatrician would most certainly notice the age of the cord stump. And the presence of (or rather lack of) meconium. Just to name a couple of clues they would pick up on if the child were older than stated.

and doesnt the babies skin coloring somewhat change after the first day as well?
it would set off all kinds of red flags if someone brought a 3 day old into the hospital and claimed it had just been born at home


at least it SHOULD

A few color changes in the first day, the first hour they are blue fading to purple then red, then to pink eventually, as the blood finally begins to absorb oxygen on it's own. I don't think "black" babies are black until several hours after, skin pigmentation doesn't usually happen until fully oxygenated. It's like that for all mammals really, though smaller ones go through it much faster (like kittens and puppies, of which I have a ton of experience) though most species fur covers it and you don't notice unless the mother trusts you enough to actually pick them up. Human muscular movements are extremely erratic the first day, almost no control, but after a couple of days they start moving more like they are in little more control. Also the eyes are closed, I think for the first couple of days, a commonality in live births of all species. There are just so many changes that happen which are easy to spot.

 

[Emma]

Wow ... just wow ... two people pointed out that it's possible, I know it's not only possible but extremely easy, a day old wound looks a lot different from a week old wound, and you are talking about an umbilical cord to, which looks very different a week later. Not to mention that there is a lot of "straightening" of bones during the first few days, the most happens in the first day, the skull isn't even "normal" for the first day, and it's easy to spot. Just ... wow, that you would know so little about human infants.

Their appearance, the cord stump, their stools, their shape, their behaviour... a doctor would have spotted a lie about the child's age in a heartbeat.

According to pediatricians, the greatest amount of development happens within the first two weeks, if I remember correctly. Which means a lot of changes, and many are physical. I just can't believe that someone thinks there is not enough of a difference between a day old infant and a week old infant. I wonder if they know what color they are when they are born. It's just annoying that people know so little about their own species.

Well, I posted why his scenario would be unlikely. He countered with the baby being born earlier than August 4th. Which makes it even MORE unlikely, because there are significant changes in that period of time.

 

[Missourian]

Doubtful...it wouldn't be a scar yet, just a scab.

And I doubt a doctor would be scrutinizing too closely or be in any way suspicious, just routine birth exam to an American mother...10 fingers, 10 toes, yada, yada, yada.

LOL

No, it wouldn't be a "scab".

A pediatrician would most certainly notice the age of the cord stump. And the presence of (or rather lack of) meconium. Just to name a couple of clues they would pick up on if the child were older than stated.

Would it be that obvious?

My wife said the little ones cord took 3 weeks to dry up and fall off.

And as to meconium, Wikipedia says "Meconium is normally stored in the infant's intestines until after birth, but sometimes it is expelled into the amniotic fluid prior to birth or during labor and delivery."

 

[Missourian]

Their appearance, the cord stump, their stools, their shape, their behaviour... a doctor would have spotted a lie about the child's age in a heartbeat.

According to pediatricians, the greatest amount of development happens within the first two weeks, if I remember correctly. Which means a lot of changes, and many are physical. I just can't believe that someone thinks there is not enough of a difference between a day old infant and a week old infant. I wonder if they know what color they are when they are born. It's just annoying that people know so little about their own species.

gotta wonder if hes ever seen a baby being born

No I haven't...I was deployed.

 

[Emma]

gotta wonder if hes ever seen a baby being born

Brand-new newborns (especially vaginal delivery) are swollen, lizardy looking things LOL. If only based upon that, I could tell a 1 day old from a 1 week old.

 

[KittenKoder]

Doubtful...it wouldn't be a scar yet, just a scab.

And I doubt a doctor would be scrutinizing too closely or be in any way suspicious, just routine birth exam to an American mother...10 fingers, 10 toes, yada, yada, yada.

LOL

No, it wouldn't be a "scab".

A pediatrician would most certainly notice the age of the cord stump. And the presence of (or rather lack of) meconium. Just to name a couple of clues they would pick up on if the child were older than stated.

Would it be that obvious?

My wife said the little ones cord took 3 weeks to dry up and fall off.

And as to meconium, Wikipedia says "Meconium is normally stored in the infant's intestines until after birth, but sometimes it is expelled into the amniotic fluid prior to birth or during labor and delivery."

First, Wicrapedia is not a reliable source for much more than opinion pieces, even if you had typed the link in correctly. Secondly that has no bearing on what we already pointed out ... so what's your point? You proved nothing. The reason this debate is just so stupid is because of idiotic claims like "he could have been older" ... it's making you sound like ... Terral and Eots denying the moon landing.

 

[Missourian]

LOL

No, it wouldn't be a "scab".

A pediatrician would most certainly notice the age of the cord stump. And the presence of (or rather lack of) meconium. Just to name a couple of clues they would pick up on if the child were older than stated.

Would it be that obvious?

My wife said the little ones cord took 3 weeks to dry up and fall off.

And as to meconium, Wikipedia says "Meconium is normally stored in the infant's intestines until after birth, but sometimes it is expelled into the amniotic fluid prior to birth or during labor and delivery."

First, Wicrapedia is not a reliable source for much more than opinion pieces, even if you had typed the link in correctly. Secondly that has no bearing on what we already pointed out ... so what's your point? You proved nothing. The reason this debate is just so stupid is because of idiotic claims like "he could have been older" ... it's making you sound like ... Terral and Eots denying the moon landing.

Give me a break KK...we can't all be blessed with knowing everything like you.

 

[KittenKoder]

Would it be that obvious?

My wife said the little ones cord took 3 weeks to dry up and fall off.

And as to meconium, Wikipedia says "Meconium is normally stored in the infant's intestines until after birth, but sometimes it is expelled into the amniotic fluid prior to birth or during labor and delivery."

First, Wicrapedia is not a reliable source for much more than opinion pieces, even if you had typed the link in correctly. Secondly that has no bearing on what we already pointed out ... so what's your point? You proved nothing. The reason this debate is just so stupid is because of idiotic claims like "he could have been older" ... it's making you sound like ... Terral and Eots denying the moon landing.

Give me a break KK...we can't all be blessed with knowing everything like you.

Funny, never claimed to know "everything" ... just common knowledge ... which is what this should be. Unless you are not human, you should know how your biology works at least a little bit. Seriously ... no wonder the doctors can scam people out of fortunes so easily.

 

[Missourian]

I've had enough for tonight...I'll get back with you after some sleep.

 

[KittenKoder]

I've had enough for tonight...I'll get back with you after some sleep.

Read a book to, Junior High Biology, please.

 

[Emma]

Doubtful...it wouldn't be a scar yet, just a scab.

And I doubt a doctor would be scrutinizing too closely or be in any way suspicious, just routine birth exam to an American mother...10 fingers, 10 toes, yada, yada, yada.

LOL

No, it wouldn't be a "scab".

A pediatrician would most certainly notice the age of the cord stump. And the presence of (or rather lack of) meconium. Just to name a couple of clues they would pick up on if the child were older than stated.

Would it be that obvious?

My wife said the little ones cord took 3 weeks to dry up and fall off.

And as to meconium, Wikipedia says "Meconium is normally stored in the infant's intestines until after birth, but sometimes it is expelled into the amniotic fluid prior to birth or during labor and delivery."

The cord does take a couple to three weeks to fall of completely, but it changes appearance over that time. There is a big difference in the appearance of the cord on a 1 day old versus a 1 week (or older) child. And a doc would certainly pick up on that (the cord exam is a routine part of the exam for any newborn).

Meconium is normally expelled in the first 2-3 days, and the stools start to change over to yellow after the child starts taking milk. It isn't usually normal for the fetus to expel meconium in utero at birth... that can mean they are in distress. Big time. The baby passing meconium like this prior to birth is NOT a normal situation. It can be an obstetrical emergency.

meconium stained fluid - Google Search

Not only could they be in distress and at risk during labor and at birth, but afterward they are at high risk of respiratory complications (from 'breathing' in the contaminated fluid).

With my youngest, I went into a sudden hard contraction; there was no build up in the strength as is normal---it was literally off the graph and didn't stop. The L&D nurse saved both our lives; she noticed the tonic contraction and the stained fluid and got the doc in immediately for an emergency c-section. I'd had an abruption, where the placenta separates from the wall of the uterus. I was hemorrhaging and my daughter was dying. She ended up in NICU for about a week.

The point of this (sorry to go on) is that if he'd passed meconium prior to birth, he'd have been a sick kid. And there would have been more to come out regardless after the birth.