+ Reply to Thread
Page 16 of 22 FirstFirst 1 6 16 22 LastLast
Results 301 to 320 of 422

Thread: Paul McCartney really is Dead

  1. Link to Post #301
    Scotland Avalon Member greybeard's Avatar
    Join Date
    17th March 2010
    Location
    Inverness-----Scotland
    Language
    English
    Age
    78
    Posts
    13,355
    Thanks
    32,618
    Thanked 68,860 times in 11,838 posts

    Default Re: Paul McCartney really is Dead

    If you look for differences in the face you will see them.
    If you look for similarities you will find them---all light and shade.
    The lips the dimple on the chin the nose--at the very least similar.

    Chris
    Be kind to all life, including your own, no matter what!!

  2. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to greybeard For This Post:

    Mark (Star Mariner) (2nd September 2019), T Smith (2nd September 2019)

  3. Link to Post #302
    Avalon Member T Smith's Avatar
    Join Date
    15th January 2011
    Posts
    1,785
    Thanks
    15,271
    Thanked 11,413 times in 1,676 posts

    Default Re: Paul McCartney really is Dead

    Quote Posted by greybeard (here)
    If you look for differences in the face you will see them.
    If you look for similarities you will find them---all light and shade.
    The lips the dimple on the chin the nose--at the very least similar.

    Chris
    Agreed. Discerning facial features from varying photographs is an exercise of personal validation. I think we would all agree photographs do not provide evidence. I have to assume, however, forensic analysis applies a much more scientific approach that eliminates the subjectivity of the observer and unreliability of commercial computer software. In the case of the cited study, the evidence actually contradicts the subjectivity of the observers (the scientists conducting the study). To my knowledge, this study has never been debunked, which to my way of thinking would be very easy to do if it were flawed or fraudulent. Two other pillars of possible "hard" evidence stick out above the minutia of song lyrics, photographs, album covers, and personal anecdotes. They are:

    1. Paul McCartney's arrest and incarceration in Japan. According to "fictional" Memoirs, the reason so-called Paul McCartney was detained for nine days (seems a little odd for a celebrity of his status), is because biological Paul also had a criminal record in Japan from back in his days as a teen in the early sixties. The fingerprints of the man claiming to be Paul McCartney and the fingerprints of the real Paul McCartney did not match. The Japanese authorities were befuddled by the mystery on their hands and were left only to assume they had detained an imposter or impersonator not only smuggling cannabis, but one claiming to be Paul McCartney. Had all the records aligned, the Japanese government would have released him on bail; the only reason Paul McCartney was eventually released (nine days later) is because the British government intervened. Although this story would be very easy to bury and cover up, it seems to me a persistent researcher should be able to reasonably verify or debunk this claim.

    2. Paul McCartney's 1983 paternity court case. It is well documented that Paul McCartney had a teen-aged lover and fathered a child before he was famous. Years later, when the mother of his child dragged him to court for support, William Sheppard, aka Billy Shears, was forced to submit DNA to "prove" he was the biological father. Which of course he wasn't. The court (and the mother) were shocked. Every single bit of evidence, save for the DNA, indicated McCartney was the father, so much so that McCartney even paid out support to hush the imbroglio. In fact, the evidence was so damming, a separate charge arose some years later accusing McCartney of using a double to submit the DNA. Of course it is possible McCartney's accusers were not really his teen-aged lover and his biological daughter or he really did use a double. This, again, should be easy to reasonably determine, and from the little digging I've done, it stands to reason these women were actually his long-lost teened-aged lover and daughter. This is a very puzzling case indeed, until we factor in the seeming impossible, that the man claiming to be Paul McCartney isn't really Paul McCartney at all...in which case it all falls together and makes perfect sense.

    If I were a PID researcher, I would focus my efforts on getting to the hard evidence in these two cases, as just short of full disclosure, would serve to get to the core of what the hell is going on here....
    Last edited by T Smith; 2nd September 2019 at 14:50.

  4. The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to T Smith For This Post:

    Arcturian108 (25th January 2021), ClearWater (2nd September 2019), Deux Corbeaux (2nd September 2019), greybeard (2nd September 2019), Ivanhoe (28th September 2019), Kryztian (19th January 2021), Le Chat (15th January 2020), Mark (Star Mariner) (2nd September 2019), muxfolder (2nd September 2019), RogeRio (2nd September 2019), Tintin (15th January 2020)

  5. Link to Post #303
    United States Avalon Member Chester's Avatar
    Join Date
    15th December 2011
    Location
    into my third life within this one
    Language
    English
    Age
    66
    Posts
    6,069
    Thanks
    34,011
    Thanked 33,205 times in 5,691 posts

    Default Re: Paul McCartney really is Dead

    Surely there should be an ability to do various DNA tests that could add to the "for or against" arguments?

    If integrity was a primary leading trait for the class level "Paul" has attained, adding this form of proof (either way) to the mix would have been done (or would be soon done), yes?

    But this world is far too complicated and things like authenticity, integrity, honesty, natural transparency are almost non-existent at that level of the various sub divisions based on the (silly IMO, but very real) thing called "class."

    See, if "Paul" is the original Paul, "Paul" might have decided it simply increases all the things he feels he gains from this mystery.

    If "Paul" is actually William Shepherd, then I can see Faul making the same decision for much the same reason. We all know everyone loves a good mystery, yes? Why solve it?

    (Earth) Humans... you gotta love 'em, eh?
    Last edited by Chester; 2nd September 2019 at 13:51.
    All the above is all and only my opinion - all subject to change and not meant to be true for anyone else regardless of how I phrase it.

  6. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Chester For This Post:

    Deux Corbeaux (2nd September 2019), T Smith (2nd September 2019)

  7. Link to Post #304
    Avalon Member T Smith's Avatar
    Join Date
    15th January 2011
    Posts
    1,785
    Thanks
    15,271
    Thanked 11,413 times in 1,676 posts

    Default Re: Paul McCartney really is Dead

    Quote Posted by Sammy (here)
    Surely there should be an ability to do various DNA tests that could add to the "for or against" arguments?

    If integrity was a primary leading trait for the class level "Paul" has attained, adding this form of proof (either way) to the mix would have been done (or would be soon done), yes?

    But this world is far too complicated and things like authenticity, integrity, honesty, natural transparency are almost non-existent at that level of the various sub divisions based on the (silly IMO, but very real) thing called "class."

    See, if "Paul" is the original Paul, "Paul" might have decided it simply increases all the things he feels he gains from this mystery.

    If "Paul" is actually William Shepherd, then I can see Faul making the same decision for much the same reason. We all know everyone loves a good mystery, yes? Why solve it?

    (Earth) Humans... you gotta love 'em, eh?
    Yes. This could easily be proved one way or the other with DNA testing. Your analysis as to why it hasn't, one way or the other, is spot on in my estimation.

    Interestingly, this is also one reason why this will never be solved, contrary to information in Memoirs that hints at full disclosure after Paul McCartney passes. If the real Paul McCartney really did die (or was replaced) back in 1966, as claimed, it will go to the grave with William Sheppard. Why would MI5 and Tavistock and the various other social engineers and PTB who enabled and propagated this psyop finally admit to and enlighten the masses as to just how easy it was to dupe them only after Paul dies? That makes no sense. It may be part of their moral code to allow for some "soft" disclosure (like Memoirs), which allows for plausible deniability, but they would never out themselves outright. That puts way too big of a spot light on the social engineering capacity of PTB. Who knows? Replacing JPM may have just been a beta run for potentially replacing/cloning Presidents, Prime Ministers, and other important actors in the "management" class of we earth humans...
    Last edited by T Smith; 2nd September 2019 at 15:35.

  8. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to T Smith For This Post:

    Arcturian108 (25th January 2021), Chester (2nd September 2019), Deux Corbeaux (2nd September 2019), Mark (Star Mariner) (2nd September 2019), Tintin (15th January 2020)

  9. Link to Post #305
    Administrator Mark (Star Mariner)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    15th November 2011
    Language
    English
    Posts
    4,397
    Thanks
    29,154
    Thanked 35,494 times in 4,309 posts

    Default Re: Paul McCartney really is Dead

    Quote Posted by T Smith (here)
    Yes, those look like the same person to me as well. But they both look like like William Sheppard to me (not biological Paul). Do you have the source of the photo on the left and some way to verify the date?
    I was unable to discover exactly when that younger picture was taken, one reference was 1964, but I can't be certain. So more testing was required.

    I did that this afternoon with this same face-comparison software, to put it through its paces to see just how accurate or inaccurate it is. The results were interesting, and pretty conclusive for me. I began with a benchmark, comparing two different people. Paul McCartney and John Lennon.

    The software returns results as such:
    0: It means the same person with probability of 100%.
    1: It means the same person with probability of 80% to 100%.
    2: It means two different people with probability of 80% to 100%.
    3: It means two different people with probability of 100%.

    (Click for larger)
    Click image for larger version

Name:	paul-john_compare.jpg
Views:	87
Size:	202.0 KB
ID:	41492

    Result 3, 100% incongruity, meaning these two faces are not the same person, as it should be.

    Next, more samples of Paul McCartney. Again, it's difficult to put a precise date to the images. With this one, I can only say the first is from the early to mid 60s, compared with another in the late 60s.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	paulmccartney_compare_1964-1967_2.jpg
Views:	85
Size:	130.0 KB
ID:	41493

    Result 0, 100% match.

    This one below was conclusive. The first image is definitely the original Paul, circa early 1960s. The second is from 1969.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	paulmccartney_compare_1964-1969.jpg
Views:	82
Size:	172.2 KB
ID:	41497

    Result 0, 100% match.

    Here's another example of the software, comparing two quite disparate images of John Lennon, one from the mid 60s alongside one from the mid 70s. Anyone can tell at a glance that these are both John Lennon, even though the face is a different shape. In the 60s one, it appears longer, narrower. Also one is black and white, the other colour. In one he has much longer hair, but it compensates for that, as it does for shadow and for ageing. It still provides an accurate result.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	john_lennon_compare2.jpg
Views:	81
Size:	184.9 KB
ID:	41495

    Result 0, 100% match.

    Finally, to illustrate its level of sophistication, here's comparison of two images of two faces that are much alike, but are not the same person. In WWII the British Army employed a man by the name of M.E. Clifton to act as Montgomery's double - to confuse the Germans, particularly on deployments in North Africa. The operation was a success. They are strong lookalikes. But it didn't fool the software.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	general-montgomery-double-compare1.jpg
Views:	74
Size:	209.8 KB
ID:	41496

    Result 2, 80% match, the faces belong to two different people with 80%-100% probability.


    There are more images, more tests. But for some infuriating reason I can only post 5 pics in a post, so this is all I can show.

    This theory can't turn to photographic evidence to back it up. Visually, Paul McCartney has remained the same person through the years. As for the forensic analysis, which you say hasn't been debunked T Smith, it has to my knowledge at least been countered, and with a pertinent observation:

    "Whilst Carlesi is a specialist in craniometry and odontology, Gavazenni is actually a computer scientist with no special qualification in facial anthropology.

    Forensic science itself is somewhat of a misnomer, it is not a hard science but a highly subjective one heavily dependent on the interpretation of the individual specialist. Any high profile murder trial will have two teams of forensic experts testifying to often tangentially opposite conclusions based on the same evidence. Clearly, at least 50% of them must be wrong."
    source

    That same article makes a good number of highly reasonable counter-arguments, and cites this at the end, whether taken as read or not.

    In 1966, the year the first Paul is Dead whispers emerged, his contemporary Bob Dylan was at the centre of a very similar story that he had died in an horrific motorbike crash and replaced with a imposter less critical of US involvement in Vietnam.

    The origins of many of these rumours are obscure, if not a mix of garbled misreporting and chinese whispers then perhaps somebody's idea of a joke. And in almost all cases they quickly fizzled out after it became apparent the star in question was indeed alive and well.

    What sets Paul is Dead apart is how enduring it has proven to be, even today subject of hundreds of youtube videos and internet articles, many of them produced by people who weren't even born when the speculation first spread like wildfire through college campuses in 1969.

    Crucially, it also differs from most of the earlier rumours by having a very clear provenance. We can trace most of the Paul is Dead stories back to their source, and by doing see an obvious urban legend being constructed.

    The canonical version of the story, that during the recording of Sgt Pepper in late 1966 Paul McCartney died in a car crash and was replaced by a look-alike, was largely made up by a 21 year-old student journalist at Michigan University called Fred LaBour.

    LaBour had been amused by talk on local radio about supposed backward messages hidden on the Beatles records and decided, as a creative exercise, to run with the idea and spin out the whole incredible tale.

    Little did he know what he had intended to be a joke would become one of the greatest conspiracy fables of all time. Most of the purported facts in LaBour’s October 14th Michigan Daily news article weren't even rumours he heard, but things he simply invented to add more colour to his article.

    It was LaBour who devised the idea of a look-alike named William Campbell (Shepherd in other versions of the story) replacing McCartney, and LaBour who invented the much repeated idea that the Walrus, as in ‘The Walrus was Paul’ is a Greek symbol for death. Outside of the writer's imagination, it isn't.

    The young writer was astonished when his little spoof quickly exploded out of the confines of his student paper and started being covered as a serious story by national media giants like Time and Life. LaBour had inadvertently created a monster, which was now trampling its way around the global press.

    As the frenzy erupted, LaBour was invited onto the RKO TV special in which the theory was subjected to a mock trial led by lawyer F. Lee Bailey, but by this point he had become somewhat daunted by how his joke had seemingly taken on a life of its own.

    “I told Bailey during our pre-show meeting that I’d made the whole thing up”, LaBour told Michigan Today in 2009. “He sighed, and said, ‘Well, we have an hour of television to do. You’re going to have to go along with this.’ I said OK.”

    LaBour remains philosophical about the fact many of the things he’d made up as a college student 50 years ago are now reported on the internet as fact. “Like it or not, the rumor will be with us as long as the Beatles are with us.”

    All four of the Beatles repeatedly rubbished any idea that had put these secret references in their albums, putting it down to the overactive imagination of their fans. Paul himself still has to regularly field questions about whether he is dead or not, including an appearance on the Letterman Show in 2009 where he laughed off the theory as down to “the fame and the craziness”.

    Lennon, whose lyrics are central to many of the Paul is Dead theories, admitted on many occasions he was simply making it all up. “I threw the line in - the Walrus was Paul - just to confuse everybody a bit more”, he explained in a 1980 interview with Playboy. “I was having a laugh because there'd been so much gobbledygook about Pepper - play it backwards and you stand on your head and all that.”


    Scouse humour. You need to get it, in order to get it.

    I honestly believe there's nothing to this at all.
    "When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace."
    ~ Jimi Hendrix

  10. The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to Mark (Star Mariner) For This Post:

    9ideon (9th August 2022), Chester (2nd September 2019), Constance (4th April 2020), DaveToo (27th January 2021), Deux Corbeaux (2nd September 2019), greybeard (2nd September 2019), Karen (Geophyz) (25th January 2021), Lyran.Sun (8th October 2019), muxfolder (2nd September 2019), T Smith (2nd September 2019), Tintin (15th January 2020)

  11. Link to Post #306
    Administrator Mark (Star Mariner)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    15th November 2011
    Language
    English
    Posts
    4,397
    Thanks
    29,154
    Thanked 35,494 times in 4,309 posts

    Default Re: Paul McCartney really is Dead

    Some interesting photo comparisons of McCartney here, each between 1964 and 1967. Can't embed however.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bp7UGzr7Z5w

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gO3OkMqdu8Q

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQvXnu-cEkY
    "When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace."
    ~ Jimi Hendrix

  12. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Mark (Star Mariner) For This Post:

    Chester (2nd September 2019), Karen (Geophyz) (25th January 2021), Tintin (15th January 2020)

  13. Link to Post #307
    Scotland Avalon Member greybeard's Avatar
    Join Date
    17th March 2010
    Location
    Inverness-----Scotland
    Language
    English
    Age
    78
    Posts
    13,355
    Thanks
    32,618
    Thanked 68,860 times in 11,838 posts

    Default Re: Paul McCartney really is Dead

    Maybe we could start on "Elvis lives" now.
    I think Star Mariner really has the present topic covered.
    All respect due--the time taken to state the point that this just a conspiracy theory.
    The Beatles well known for their sense of humour.
    Chris
    Be kind to all life, including your own, no matter what!!

  14. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to greybeard For This Post:

    Chester (5th September 2019), Mark (Star Mariner) (2nd September 2019), snoman (3rd September 2019), T Smith (2nd September 2019), Tintin (15th January 2020)

  15. Link to Post #308
    Avalon Member T Smith's Avatar
    Join Date
    15th January 2011
    Posts
    1,785
    Thanks
    15,271
    Thanked 11,413 times in 1,676 posts

    Default Re: Paul McCartney really is Dead

    Quote Posted by greybeard (here)
    Maybe we could start on "Elvis lives" now.
    I think Star Mariner really has the present topic covered.
    All respect due--the time taken to state the point that this just a conspiracy theory.
    The Beatles well known for their sense of humour.
    Chris
    At the end of the day, yes. There is not much more to discuss and it may indeed just be a "conspiracy theory". At this point we are going around and around hashing out the absurd without yielding too much more insight.

    I've been aware of this particular "conspiracy theory" (as much as I loath employing the term) for almost forty years now. I never gave it -- just like "Elvis lives" -- a second thought until evidence came to light in the context of mass mind control, which these days I don't dismiss so readily as I once did, summed up nicely in the article Star cites:

    "...There is, however, a far more sinister variation on the conspiracy theory. Is the continued cover-up about Paul’s death because it was a psyop of some kind, perhaps designed to steer our popular culture in a certain direction or shape young people's attitudes to drugs [among other things we know not what]?

    If that is the case then the abilities of the dark forces that create our reality are all encompassing. If they can replace prominent public figures and keep an airtight cover-up about it for 50 years, then it is a truly scary prospect as to what else they might be doing to manipulate our perceptions of the world."
    source

    Emphasis/insertion in brackets my own. The details and degrees of plausibility--whether they be a lifetime Paul McCartney imposter or an Elvis sighting in Vegas--are all secondary.

    Given what I know about these forces at play, it's much harder for me to dismiss its scope and influence on our collective understanding of reality, even when applied to the obvious. Whether or not these forces are at play in any significant way here or whether this is simply another "conspiracy theory" in the vein of the fully-intended context of the pejorative, we should do well to dismantle everything we think we already know and rebuild from there in a Descartesian way if our minds and perceptions are themselves an integral part of the psyop.

    Sometimes that can be an exasperating exercise...

    (That being said, let's not move on to Elvis Lives )
    Last edited by T Smith; 2nd September 2019 at 20:34.

  16. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to T Smith For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (27th September 2019), Chester (5th September 2019), Deux Corbeaux (3rd September 2019), greybeard (4th September 2019), Inaiá (28th September 2019), Karen (Geophyz) (25th January 2021), Mark (Star Mariner) (2nd September 2019), Tintin (15th January 2020)

  17. Link to Post #309
    Administrator Mark (Star Mariner)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    15th November 2011
    Language
    English
    Posts
    4,397
    Thanks
    29,154
    Thanked 35,494 times in 4,309 posts

    Default Re: Paul McCartney really is Dead

    I wouldn't be a bit surprised if these forces were, as you say, centrally involved with this Paul conspiracy, and many others, if not in pushing it out to sea in the first place, then keeping the wind in its sails all these years.

    If anything I understand is true, these co-called elites love to distract, confuse, bluff, and double bluff, with everything, so people hardly know what's up or down any more. A number of notable quotes that attest to this come to mind, chiefly Kissinger's:

    "When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace."
    ~ Jimi Hendrix

  18. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Mark (Star Mariner) For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (27th September 2019), Chester (5th September 2019), Deux Corbeaux (3rd September 2019), Karen (Geophyz) (25th January 2021), T Smith (2nd September 2019), Tintin (15th January 2020)

  19. Link to Post #310
    Canada Avalon Member TomKat's Avatar
    Join Date
    23rd September 2017
    Posts
    2,616
    Thanks
    2,694
    Thanked 13,330 times in 2,365 posts

    Default Re: Paul McCartney really is Dead

    Quote Posted by foxtastic (here)
    I just watched a new documentary that really got me thinking titled "Paul McCartney Really is dead". I'm 31 years old so I'm too young to remember when the story was big, a long time ago. It was a very interesting Doc, but I definitely don't believe everything in it (like most things, I take what feels right and leave the rest). This case in particular really has me "scratching my head". I always thought of Paul (Faul, fake Paul) as kinda of the more nefarious of the 4, but never thought that he might be a body double!!! I was wondering if any of the members have researched this topic before (especially some of the older members) , and if so what is your take on the story?

    I found a copy of the torrent on a fantastic search engine i discovered the other day concen.org. This is an engine that is primarily dedicated to conspiracy research, and i recommend everybody become a member.

    Thanks alot Dan
    He's not dead. I researched it, but have no more time for the subject. Suffice to say that if you start with a conclusion and work backwards to prove it, you can probably prove anything to the satisfaction of many people.

  20. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to TomKat For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (27th September 2019), Chester (5th September 2019), DaveToo (27th January 2021), greybeard (4th September 2019), James (27th September 2019), Karen (Geophyz) (25th January 2021), Slipstream (8th October 2019), Tintin (15th January 2020)

  21. Link to Post #311
    United States Avalon Member Chester's Avatar
    Join Date
    15th December 2011
    Location
    into my third life within this one
    Language
    English
    Age
    66
    Posts
    6,069
    Thanks
    34,011
    Thanked 33,205 times in 5,691 posts

    Default Re: Paul McCartney really is Dead

    I think he's alive... within Billy Shears!
    All the above is all and only my opinion - all subject to change and not meant to be true for anyone else regardless of how I phrase it.

  22. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Chester For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (27th September 2019), Karen (Geophyz) (25th January 2021), T Smith (21st October 2019), Tintin (15th January 2020)

  23. Link to Post #312
    United States Avalon Retired Member
    Join Date
    24th September 2019
    Age
    40
    Posts
    198
    Thanks
    865
    Thanked 456 times in 143 posts

    Default Re: Paul McCartney really is Dead

    Last edited by Lyran.Sun; 8th October 2019 at 10:18.

  24. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Lyran.Sun For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (25th January 2021), Karen (Geophyz) (25th January 2021)

  25. Link to Post #313
    Canada Avalon Member
    Join Date
    4th November 2012
    Posts
    3,020
    Thanks
    5,475
    Thanked 13,120 times in 2,678 posts

    Default Re: Paul McCartney really is Dead

    People are assymetrical, particularly in the head and face area. And the more funny looking you are, the more likely you have more asymmetry. Take a look at pics of Marlena Dietrich taken using light and shadow to the greatest effect. Same with Greta Garbo. Part of their magic was knowing exactly how light shadow and the camera interacted with their facial characteristics. They looked quite different without all of these effects.

  26. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to AutumnW For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (25th January 2021), Karen (Geophyz) (25th January 2021), Tintin (15th January 2020)

  27. Link to Post #314
    Avalon Member Kryztian's Avatar
    Join Date
    16th September 2012
    Posts
    3,487
    Thanks
    23,704
    Thanked 29,413 times in 3,425 posts

    Default Re: Paul McCartney really is Dead



    Have been looking for a translation of the Wired Italia article for year, and although this is not this not it, it seems like a good synopsis of the article with some of the backstory. And while the article seems trustworthy, I took exception to some of the very anti-semetic comments at the end, saying that this is a Jewish conspiracy.

    Quote Posted by enfoldedblue (here)
    I would definitely say there has been some illuminati tinkering here. All is definitely not as it seems. I had always dismissed this as a silly rumour (as I had been socially programmed to) but when you really bother to look into it, it is quite amazing to note how obvious it is....and thus how willing we are to simply accept the "truth" as it is dished out to us.

    The following is an excerpt from a very interesting article:

    The cover-story Chiedi chi era quel «Beatle» for the July 15 2009 issue of Wired Italia, the Italian edition of the US magazine Wired, describes the analysis of the McCartney conspiracy theory conducted by two Italians, Gabriella Carlesi and Francesco Gavazzeni (the man and woman in the photo).
    Their purpose for analyzing this conspiracy theory was to provide indisputable, scientific evidence that would put an end to the persistent rumors that Paul McCartney had died in a car accident in 1966. However, the results of their analysis surprised them. Instead of putting an end to the rumors, their analysis provides scientific evidence that the Paul McCartney of today is not the same man as the Paul McCartney prior to 1966.

    By coincidence, on that same day that this article appeared in Italy, Paul McCartney was at the Ed Sullivan theater in New York City to appear on the David Letterman television show and to give a free, outdoor performance on top of the marquee of the Ed Sullivan theater. He and Letterman laughed about the silly rumor that Paul McCartney had died in 1966. We could interpret McCartney's appearance in New York City as an attempt to distract Americans from the publication of the Italian article, and to encourage Americans to laugh at the McCartney conspiracy theories.


    more: http://www.erichufschmid.net/TFC/Fro...y-Italian.html

  28. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Kryztian For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (14th January 2020), Karen (Geophyz) (25th January 2021), Sue (Ayt) (14th January 2020), Tintin (15th January 2020)

  29. Link to Post #315
    Canada Avalon Member TomKat's Avatar
    Join Date
    23rd September 2017
    Posts
    2,616
    Thanks
    2,694
    Thanked 13,330 times in 2,365 posts

    Default Re: Paul McCartney really is Dead

    Until someone does a DNA comparison between Paul McCartney and his brother, the myth will live on. Correction: even IF a DNA test proves they're brothers, the myth will still live on, because people want to believe it.

  30. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to TomKat For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (25th January 2021), Karen (Geophyz) (25th January 2021), Le Chat (15th January 2020)

  31. Link to Post #316
    Avalon Member Kryztian's Avatar
    Join Date
    16th September 2012
    Posts
    3,487
    Thanks
    23,704
    Thanked 29,413 times in 3,425 posts

    Default Re: Paul McCartney really is Dead

    Here are links to two more blog posts by Tina Foster, who has spent a decade researching this story of fake Paul, or "Faul" as he is often referred to, when people compare the pre and post 1966 versions:

    #1 Her synopsis of Wired Italia's article Chiedi chi era quel «Beatle». She goes into the detail of the anomalies found by Gabriella Carlesi, a prominent Italian forensic pathologist. Also discusses Faul's DNA test to deflect a paternity suit.
    Comment on CHIEDI CHI ERA QUELL BEATLE? / Ask Who Was the Beatle?

    #2 The Beatle's were becoming increasingly politicized and Paul became quite interested in the JFK Assassination. He met the Mark Lane, a New York state legislator and author of the best selling book "Rush to Judgement" which questioned the Kennedy Assassination. The book was going to become a movie and Paul was thinking about writing the music, which would have made the movie tremendously popular with Beatle's fans.
    Paul McCartney (JPM) Hoped to Expose JFK Assassination Lies

    Tina Foster is also about to publish her book "Plastic Macca: The Secret Death and Replacement of Beatle Paul McCartney." She is interviewed by by Michael W. Hall "The Paranormal Lawyer" in the video below. She present a new view of when and why Paul was killed. The most frequently heard explanation heard came from a mysterious audiotape the contains a voice that sounds like George Harrison, which relates a story of how Paul died in an auto accident and his agent and other replaced him with someone who just happened to sound like him. This may just be a "cover conspiracy story" to distract from the real one. That the plan to replace Paul with "Faul" was some time in the making the original, real Paul was probably last seen in performance in Seattle. It's quite a compelling story .


    And of course, the message has to be embedded in a song. Per Foster it is:

    I haven't heard this song in decades until yesterday, when Onawah posted a video about the octopus in this post. There are always interesting synchronicities at work when you research conspiracies!

  32. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Kryztian For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (25th January 2021), Constance (4th April 2020), Deux Corbeaux (15th January 2020), Karen (Geophyz) (25th January 2021), onawah (15th January 2020)

  33. Link to Post #317
    Canada Avalon Member TomKat's Avatar
    Join Date
    23rd September 2017
    Posts
    2,616
    Thanks
    2,694
    Thanked 13,330 times in 2,365 posts

    Default Re: Paul McCartney really is Dead

    For anyone who entertained the idea that Paul McCartney died in 1966, this interview will probably dispel that notion:


  34. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to TomKat For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (25th January 2021), Constance (4th April 2020), Karen (Geophyz) (25th January 2021), Le Chat (1st April 2020)

  35. Link to Post #318
    Avalon Member Kryztian's Avatar
    Join Date
    16th September 2012
    Posts
    3,487
    Thanks
    23,704
    Thanked 29,413 times in 3,425 posts

    Default Re: Paul McCartney really is Dead

    Paul McCartney Wired Auto complete “interview” of 2018

    Note: The term “Paul McCartney I” refers to the person we know 1942 to some time in 1966, and “Paul McCartney II” refers to that public persona afterwards. You can decide if “I” and “II” are really the same person.


    In 2018, Paul McCartney II did an “interview” for “Wired” based on questions generated from Google’s “auto complete” function, basically the most popular questions typed into Google searches. This “interview” may have had several objectives:
    1) To answer frequently asked questions for his fans.

    2) To promote his new album, Egypt Station, that had been released.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egypt_Station

    3) To defuse and confuse some of the unresolved issues the believers in the PID (“Paul Is Dead”) conspiracy. This may not seem obvious if you don’t know what those issues are, but this is definitely a hidden subtext to the video.
    I use the word “interview” in quotes because this is not McCartney II talking off the top of his head, but instead a well prepared and structured, or should I say “scripted” talk, with much sleight of hand to make it seem like his answers are all impromptu. He pulls a label off a board with questions, to make it look like he is seeing the question for the first time. Then, without pause, he gives his answers looking straight into the camera, without pauses, “umms” and “let me think” or any interjection like that. Although he is usually talking about the past, his eyes do not drift up or down much, as if he were trying to remember events and impressions. This is obviously a well planned and edited production. Just from the way his question boards magically appear in his hands, and then he is hands free again, you can see how much this video is edited.

    McCartney II has been accused of telling stories that do not jive with his verifiable past history, or he just gets the chronology wrong and forgets when things happen. For example: he wasn’t even sure if he was Irish (his family had a rich, proud Irish heritage), he didn’t know the name of his father’s band. He claimed he was lent a guitar the first time he played with Lennon, but in fact he brought his own Zenith acoustic guitar. He claims he botched a guitar solo in 1957 and would never play lead guitar again, and yet he did play lead guitar on several songs including “Drive My Car” (1965), “Ticket to Ride” (1966) and “Paperback Writer” (1966). All the Beatles were in the same room when George Harrison lost his virginity in Hamburg, Germany in 1961, and when McCartney II was asked about the story he replied lukewarmly “I guess it’s true.” In 1984, McCartney II talked about how he was doing his first film score, forgetting that he did write the score for “The Family Way” in 1966. The are numerous discrepancies between the stories he told about which songs he wrote and which ones Lennon wrote, and where the inspiration for these songs came from. Many times he botched up the story about how the band was formed and how it evolved from a band Lennon had formed. And these are just a few of the many, many incidents where Paul McCartney II botched the details of the life that Paul McCartney lived. (See pages 142-169 in Tina Foster’s book “Plastic Macca).

    The Wired interview addresses this issue extensively, but not in an obvious way, by asking Paul numerous “when” questions (starting at 2:05), and other questions about his past, and he can’t remember many details, both for events as McCartney I (before 1967) and as McCartney II (1967 and after). Each time he does this (at 2:05, 3:18, 4:15, 5:38, 14:50) he rambles on extensively about how he is not good with dates but you should ask his fans, because they know. Of course, this is a planned, rehearsed, edited, concise interview, and even if he memory of his life were that bad, someone in the studio could remind him “You were knighted in 1997" and he could simply state that, but instead he rambles on about his memory. I would say a good 2 minutes of the 15 minute interview is spent meandering on the topic of McCartney II’s bad memory, while the rest of the “interview” he addresses all the other topics in a concise, efficient manner.

    Here are a few other ways in which this interview addresses the PID conspiracy theory:
    • At 0:38 he “is asked” why he was wearing an “OPP” badge on the cover of the Sargent Pepper album, although he does not mention the significance of this question to anyone familiar with PID. The badge he wears on the cover is not fully visible, and it might be read as “OPD”, the British abbreviation for “Officially Pronounced Dead” (similar to the American “DOA” for “Dead on Arrival”.) It was taken by many fans to be a clue that Paul had died - perhaps one of the other Beatles had placed in on his uniform. As it turns out, the last letter was a “P”, not a “D”, and it was the badge of the Ontario Provincial Police. In the “interview”, Paul never mentions that the badge was erroneously understood to be “OPD” or offers no insight as to where it came from and why it was there, but just another statement of his lack of knowledge. Why does he even address this issue?

    • At 3:30 he talks about the inspiration for the song “Yesterday”. In a May 1965 interview, McCartney I talked about being in Portugal:

      Quote I remember mulling over the tune 'Yesterday', and suddenly getting these little one-word openings to the verse. I started to develop the idea ... da-da da, yes-ter-day, sud-den-ly, fun-il-ly, mer-il-ly and Yes-ter-day, that's good. All my troubles seemed so far away. It's easy to rhyme those a's: say, nay, today, away, play, stay, there's a lot of rhymes and those fall in quite easily, so I gradually pieced it together from that journey. Sud-den-ly, and 'b' again, another easy rhyme: e, me, tree, flea, we, and I had the basis of it.
      However, in 1968, McCartney II said the tune came to him without words, and the first time he added words to the tune, they were “scrambled eggs”. In 1984 he said that the tune came to him fully formed, wordlessly.

      In this interview, McCartney II gives us the latter story again, but in a version not quite so contradictory to the 1965 version of the story.

    • Many advocates of the PID theory believe that Paul (and the rest of the Beatles) grew their hair out (head and facial hair) just as the McCartney II phase started. If there were a new McCartney and he was still getting extensive plastic surgery on his face, this would have helped conceal many of the scars and the parts of the face that had not yet been addressed in what would have been many operations. It was believed that McCartney II was wearing a mustache because the hair growth about his lip was not that thick, and it was proven that a company by the name of “Wig Creations”. In this “interview”, McCartney II confuses the issue by addressing the question if “he wears a wig”. (9:22)

    • After stating numerous times, how bad his memory is and that he defers to his fans for many of the details of his life, at 6:50 he talks about the discrepancy between his story and Ringo’s about meeting Elvis. In complete contradiction to the other incidents, Paul insists that his recollection of the even it better than Ringo Starr’s.

    • At 0:54 he talks about the inspiration of the song “Let It Be” and talks about a mystical experience where “his mother” visited him in a dream. This would be a truly mystical experience, and yet I have a hard time believing that is what is being related here. Instead of being in awe of this wonderful, healing apparition, he tries to write if off to his use of alcohol at the time. This looks like a poorly acted performance on his part.

    • If you don’t think this “interview” is 100% scripted, go to 1:50, where he knows ahead of time not to show the question and then puts forth a ham acting performance. Presumably, he is being asked about PID.

    Although it is clearly not obvious, this interview is an attempt to “answer” many of the questions put out there by the PID conspiracy. I don’t think it succeeds, and if you look closely at it in the context of PID, it has nothing to offer.

  36. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Kryztian For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (25th January 2021), Journeyman (25th January 2021), Karen (Geophyz) (25th January 2021), Mark (Star Mariner) (27th January 2021)

  37. Link to Post #319
    Avalon Member Kryztian's Avatar
    Join Date
    16th September 2012
    Posts
    3,487
    Thanks
    23,704
    Thanked 29,413 times in 3,425 posts

    Default Re: Paul McCartney really is Dead

    Gabriella Carlesi and Francesco Gavazzeni, forensic scientists, and conducted a biometrical analysis of Paul McCartney from ages both before and after 1966. While plastic surgery can alter many of the details of the face, one can not alter the shape and size of the cranium, and it is very difficult to alter the teeth. They were hoping to disprove the PID ("Paul Is Dead") conspiracy theory, but their scientific results proved something completely different. They published their results in the article " Chiedi chi era quel 'Beatle'" in the August 2009 Italian edition of Wired Magazine.

    You can find a not very readable machine translation of the article here: https://plasticmacca.blogspot.com/20...-paul-was.html

    You can find a good synopsis of the article here: https://plasticmacca.blogspot.com/20...mments-on.html

    The images below are from the magazine.

















    Last edited by Kryztian; 2nd February 2021 at 16:46.

  38. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Kryztian For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (25th January 2021), ClearWater (26th January 2021), Constance (25th January 2021), Karen (Geophyz) (25th January 2021), muxfolder (25th January 2021)

  39. Link to Post #320
    Avalon Member Kryztian's Avatar
    Join Date
    16th September 2012
    Posts
    3,487
    Thanks
    23,704
    Thanked 29,413 times in 3,425 posts

    Default Re: Paul McCartney really is Dead

    Mike asks some really good questions in this post. I will try and address them as best I can.

    Quote Posted by Mike (here)
    not only would the replacement have to be able to sing and play left handed bass (excellently by the way)
    Paul McCartney II, (I use "II" to refer to that person from 1967 onwards, the question is whether or not he is the same person as "McCartney I" from 1942 to some time in 1966) said he was not a great guitarist. He did once says he would not play lead guitar because he screwed up some solo work in the 1950's, "forgetting" that McCartney I played lead guitar on such songs as “Drive My Car”, “Ticket to Ride”and “Paperback Writer” (all 1965-66). The Beatles stopped touring in 1966 (he allegedly disappeared between August and November 1966) and only did studio recordings after that. The next time he was seen in concert playing a guitar was 1969 where he was on a roof top and hardly anyone could see who was even playing. The first time he was really seen publicly playing left handed guitar was in 1972 in a concert tour of "Wings", six years after his alleged replacement.

    Six years is a lot of time to learn to place left handed guitar, and to do it to mediocre standards.

    Quote and compose brilliant hit songs in the exact manner of the original Paul,
    I have a hard time believing the composer of “Yesterday” is the same person who wrote “Ebony and Ivory”.

    Quote he'd also have to ... be the same height,
    McCartney II is about two inches taller. Madam Tussaud’s Wax musuem did wax figures from data compliled before 1966, and Paul is not the tallest Beatle. But he is now, two inches taller.

    Quote have the same eye color
    That has change from brown to green.

    Quote and, on top of that, he'd have to be the world's most brilliant actor.
    If he were that brilliant and had studied his role perfectly, there wouldn't be these conspiracy theories that have evidenced a different personality, a man who is often unsure of his own history, his families history, conflicting stories about the source of inspiration for his songs, etc.

    As for being a full time actor, there are a lot of people who do this. Sadddam Hussein and Manuel Noriega both employed many doubles to impersonate them, many of whom have studies his habits, gestures and have had extensive plastic surgery to look like him. Let me guess these were not the best jobs in the world. Meanwhile, if you replace Paul McCartney, you are, full time, enjoying his wealth, fame, privilege and share it with none. If there are people who would take on the Hussein job, there are many who would take on this job.

    Quote he'd have to have an inexhaustible, near god-like focus to play the character of Paul for 53 years without ever slipping up in public.
    In 1966, he really withdrew from the public. It wasn't until the 1980s that he began to do interviews again. At that point 15 years had passed and differences could be attributed to age. But he slipped MANY times.

    Quote ...and also one hell of a historian, because he'd have to memorize a library of biographical information on "original Paul".
    He's screwed up many times on this manner. Different stories about how he created songs. He wasn't even sure if his family was from Ireland, yet this was very much a part of their identity. In his 2018 Wired Magazine “Interview” he talks about how bad his memory and how his die hard fans know his life’s history better than he does himself.

    Quote he'd have to fool everyone around him...all the time. endlessly and without break.

    stop a moment and think of all the people that Paul knew intimately back in 1966. he'd either have to:

    A) fool all of them indefinitely
    or
    B) let them in on the thing and hope they didn't tell anyone.
    That is the question with most conspiracies - many people would have to know and would have to remain silent. When you start looking at the JFK Assassination or 9/11, one realizes that these were large operations and many people would have to know at least bits and pieces of what happened.]

    I think many people were told something like this: Paul died in a car crash, and millions of crazed fans would be distraught and some would commit suicide. The Beatles wanted to go on and they just happen to know someone who looks “just like Paul.” Would you go on with the cover up if you had known the real Paul? What if there were a financial incentive? What is you were threatened if you didn’t go along?

    Look at the Manhattan Project in the 1940's - over a hundred thousand people participated in it and yet it was a complete surprise to the world when the atomic bomb was developed. Can secrets be kept and managed? Yes.

    Quote When rich and famous people get older, they have plastic surgery.
    People also do it when they go into hiding, or need to change their identity.

  40. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Kryztian For This Post:

    Arcturian108 (27th January 2021), ClearWater (26th January 2021)

+ Reply to Thread
Page 16 of 22 FirstFirst 1 6 16 22 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts