Paul McCartney is dead. [Archive] - Page 7 - David Icke's Official Forums

View Full Version : Paul McCartney is dead.

Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 13

socrates

09-07-2009, 01:32 AM

Oh please, you're absolutely full of it.

I think you've ran out of lamp-posts and hands to post, right? You've provided NOTHING of any contradictions to this topic other than pure nonsense, you're also guilty of not addressing points we've made.

Not to mention being incredibly rude and obnoxious, and the usual "that's been debunked" line, without sourcing said debunking.

No sir, it is you with the tired and tried round and circles with no real point.

The topics actually a lot better when you don't show up.

Also, how do you know that Elvis pic is doctored... it says there are few pictures, and all were taken outside... maybe Paul unbuttoned his jacket?

Even then, WTF does Elvis have to do with this... it's clearly Paul and Elvis so there's been no tampering with the faces anyway, another distracting straw-man?

Yawn................

Didn't take you long to wade in, did it? You've hardly posted in this thread since us sceptics stopped posting. Your last post before today was the 4th July.

Yet low and behold - soon as Fireman and me post you're in here like a shot. :rolleyes:

Let's face it, this thread is only kept alive by us sceptics. Poor faulcon has been posting largely to herself over the last few days... LOL.

Also, how do you know that Elvis pic is doctored...

Because no photos were taken INSIDE Elvis's property.

"It lasted for about two or three hours and there were no cameras taken -- no pictures whatsoever. People say there's pictures. No recordings, nothing like that. The only pictures of that meeting were outside taken by fans and photographers."
Joe Esposito - Elvis' right hand man
http://www.elvis.com.au/presley/elvis_meets_the_beatles.shtml

it says there are few pictures, and all were taken outside...

And Elvis never went outside his property! The Beatles left in their limo. Look at the bloody photos! :rolleyes:

You think Elvis and the Beatles kinda sauntered outside where all the fans were and happily posed for piccies? :eek:

And I suppose all the fans just stood there nice and quiet and never got hysterical and mobbed the hell out of them?

Er, okaaaay....

maybe Paul unbuttoned his jacket?

WTF?! :eek: Elvis is clearly wearing a different SHIRT because his COLLAR is OUTSIDE his jacket in Faulcon's doctored photo. It's not in the others.

Unbelievable. You PIDers will argue black is white, won't you? We have Elvis's best friend saying there were no photos of Elvis and the beatles taken - apart from those taken by fans OUTSIDE the property.

Yet you're arguing differently to someone who was actually there?! :eek:

Despite CREDIBLE evidence to the contary, you argue that Elvis and Paul happily posed for a photo together.

Give me a break....

Intensive security arrangements were worked out, and it was agreed that no press would be involved and no pictures would be taken or recordings made
of whatever happened......

In the years since that August night, just a few unofficial photos have emerged—shots taken at the Perugia gates, most likely by a fan, as the Beatles appear to be leaving. The encounter lives on as a cherished memory for those lucky enough to have been there, but Esposito has come to question the occasion’s no-photo policy. “At the time, it seemed like the right thing not to have pictures or recordings, to let these guys just be themselves. But now I kind of wish we could have had some pictures taken, because it really was a helluva night.
http://www.latimes.com/features/la-mag-june072009-beatles-meet-elvis,0,4792510.story

Faulcon's photo is a FAKE - plain and simple.

The topics actually a lot better when you don't show up.

I'll happily leave you to it then. :D

ar20

09-07-2009, 01:47 AM

Yawn................

Didn't take you long to wade in, did it? You've hardly posted in this thread since us sceptics stopped posting. Your last post before today was the 4th July.

Yet low and behold - soon as Fireman and me post you're in here like a shot. :rolleyes:

Let's face it, this thread is only kept alive by us sceptics. Poor faulcon has been posting largely to herself over the last few days... LOL.

Because no photos were taken INSIDE Elvis's property.

And Elvis never went outside his property! The Beatles left in their limo. Look at the bloody photos! :rolleyes:

You think Elvis and the Beatles kinda sauntered outside where all the fans were and happily posed for piccies? :eek:

And I suppose all the fans just stood there nice and quiet and never got hysterical and mobbed the hell out of them?

Er, okaaaay....

WTF?! :eek: Elvis is clearly wearing a different SHIRT because his COLLAR is OUTSIDE his jacket in Faulcon's doctored photo. It's not in the others.

Unbelievable. You PIDers will argue black is white, won't you? We have Elvis's best friend saying there were no photos of Elvis and the beatles taken - apart from those taken by fans OUTSIDE the property.

Yet you're arguing differently to someone who was actually there?! :eek:

Despite CREDIBLE evidence to the contary, you argue that Elvis and Paul happily posed for a photo together.

Give me a break....

Faulcon's photo is a FAKE - plain and simple.

I'll happily leave you to it then. :D

Why would I post in a topic that hadn't had any replies in it since Michael Jackson croaked? Are you on crack?

Regardless it wouldn't matter if that photo was taken, inside, outside, on the moon - fake or not, you've just circle jerked another straw-man into the mix.

You do it all the time, and you just left out a great deal of my posts un-addressed - STILL.

Keep it up.

ar20

09-07-2009, 01:52 AM

My last post was actually:

02-07-2009, 09:13 AM #1470
ar20

And I'm still waiting on that post being addressed by culprit Fireman and the other one, toty. Who just ignore mine and Faulcons points.

I posted on the 2nd, then the 4th... so I post here every 2 days on average.... what... am I meant to be in here constantly all the time? The MJ topics had this topic down a bit on the board. I also post when there are replies, such as Faulcon or anybody else. Literally is just me, Faulcon, you, fireman, and toty, and maybe orbandsceptre... so when someone replies I'll try and post, it's nothing to do with you all chiming in.

ar20

09-07-2009, 02:08 AM

Also your mind slips you, mind that MJ post that got derailed to the rant-room for you being obnoxious and swearing? You probably got a warning for that, glad to see someones pushing your buttons that much.

By the way, you clearly have no comprehension. You asked why I made that topic about PID.

Did you read the OP's post?

"Michael Jackson was replaced after the burn accident"

He came up with an entirely unprovable theory, and I pointed him towards the PAUL/FAUL stuff, so it was inline with the topic, it was to do with replacements, then you go and throw a hissy fit because someone mentioned something you can't tolerate (but can't keep away from).

Ever notice how you just seem to appear and steer away all the important points we've made, then build straw-mans with.... lamp-posts, hands, and Elvis -- or saying it's been debunked, or it's "OH NOES NOT THE PLASTIC EAR AGAIN :rolleyes:"?

If you don't like the topic or the fact that "it's been debunked" in your case, why don't you just... not show up, or post? You have that choice but clearly you love being antagonising to the point of making yourself and your replies idiotic and almost a non-issue... Troll of excellence.

By the way, I apologised to you earlier in whatever topic concerning the doctored photos. They are from Faulcons, and they are doctored. I highlighted the doctoring, they have the same small bogey in their nose as I've stated -- go back and read that response, so stop bringing that up.
It's as doctored as the Elvis one.

My point to you was to provide me with some other anomaly like that, some other FRONTAL FULL FACE NO BEARD EXACT POSE/LIGHTING PICTURE, which you can't seem to produce.

faulconandsnowjob

09-07-2009, 02:44 AM

Are you on crack?
That might explain why Socrates has such poor powers of observation :D

your mind slips you, mind that MJ post that got derailed to the rant-room for you being obnoxious and swearing?
So, Socrates managed to kill that thread? That's a good way to end discussion & keep people from seeing the truth. Good tactic. Don't let him do it here.

toty1994

09-07-2009, 09:42 AM

The MJ topics had this topic down a bit on the board. I also post when there are replies, such as Faulcon or anybody else. Literally is just me, Faulcon, you, fireman, and toty, and maybe orbandsceptre... so when someone replies I'll try and post, it's nothing to do with you all chiming in.

To be fair I think you're right here, ar20.

The thread would become more interesting if more/different people posted wouldn't it - whichever side of the fence they're on. I'm surprised there're only a handfull of regular posters.

accuracy

09-07-2009, 10:57 AM

accuracy

09-07-2009, 11:00 AM

To be fair I think you're right here, ar20.

The thread would become more interesting if more/different people posted wouldn't it - whichever side of the fence they're on. I'm surprised there're only a handfull of regular posters.

Where is your PROOF that Paul ( not Faul) McCartney is ALIVE? instead of knocking this thread.:rolleyes:

accuracy

09-07-2009, 11:14 AM

Yawn................

Didn't take you long to wade in, did it? You've hardly posted in this thread since us sceptics stopped posting. Your last post before today was the 4th July.

Yet low and behold - soon as Fireman and me post you're in here like a shot. :rolleyes:

Let's face it, this thread is only kept alive by us sceptics. Poor faulcon has been posting largely to herself over the last few days... LOL.

Because no photos were taken INSIDE Elvis's property.

And Elvis never went outside his property! The Beatles left in their limo. Look at the bloody photos! :rolleyes:

You think Elvis and the Beatles kinda sauntered outside where all the fans were and happily posed for piccies? :eek:

And I suppose all the fans just stood there nice and quiet and never got hysterical and mobbed the hell out of them?

Er, okaaaay....

WTF?! :eek: Elvis is clearly wearing a different SHIRT because his COLLAR is OUTSIDE his jacket in Faulcon's doctored photo. It's not in the others.

Unbelievable. You PIDers will argue black is white, won't you? We have Elvis's best friend saying there were no photos of Elvis and the beatles taken - apart from those taken by fans OUTSIDE the property.

Yet you're arguing differently to someone who was actually there?! :eek:

Despite CREDIBLE evidence to the contary, you argue that Elvis and Paul happily posed for a photo together.

Give me a break....

Faulcon's photo is a FAKE - plain and simple.

I'll happily leave you to it then. :D

And MORE snoring tales.................snore, snore.

toty1994

09-07-2009, 11:53 AM

Where is your PROOF that Paul ( not Faul) McCartney is ALIVE? instead of knocking this thread.:rolleyes:
Eh? I thought I was being quite reasonable and friendly there. Oh well.

ar20

09-07-2009, 01:01 PM

Yea yea yea, you are STILL jerking off your weany for gods sake.!

Why are YOU still hounding this thread, got nothing to say positive, fuck off then is all i can say.

I'm confused, is that directed at me or... what?

ar20

09-07-2009, 01:06 PM

To be fair I think you're right here, ar20.

The thread would become more interesting if more/different people posted wouldn't it - whichever side of the fence they're on. I'm surprised there're only a handfull of regular posters.

I'll agree with this.

That's the reason for the comps and the continual posting by me and Faulcon.

We've had lurkers message us saying they can now see it.

Think about it, a lot of people aren't going to wade through 100's of pages, they'll maybe view the first and last of it. So by constantly posting what's been done a lot of new people get to see it, and if it's interesting enough they'll backtrack over it and research it.

We don't post for the benefits of Socrates or anyone else who's convinced in their own debunking. It's like I said, if your confident in that -- be done with the topic, we'll continue posting our stuff.

I'd like to see a few more people in it from both sides, a lot more would be discussed and that overall is the point of this -- hearty debate. And isn't it interesting? Be honest, we're sticking to our senses and convictions here.

There are actually people who believe one of the most recognisable musicians was replaced vs. nothing happened it was a hoax in the 60's.... but it's not like we're just making it all up out of thin air or for the good of it -- I genuinely see two guys.

ar20

09-07-2009, 04:37 PM

http://img514.imageshack.us/img514/8889/faulr.jpg

faulconandsnowjob

09-07-2009, 06:19 PM

There are people who just cannot give up the illusion that Faul is Paul. And that's what it is - an illusion. We have shown that, after 1966, "Paul" has different colored eyes, a different shaped nose, different eyebrows, a higher forehead, different ears & is about 2 inches taller. If people hadn't been trained to see Faul as Paul, it would seem very ridiculous to suggest it was the same guy. Paul was imposter-replaced. I know some people can't or won't accept that, but it's true. Their refusing to face facts doesn't change anything.

I'm confused, is that directed at me or... what?
That would be hard to imagine, b/c you & accuracy are on the same side. Plus, you've posted some great comps, ar20.

socrates

09-07-2009, 07:04 PM

My last post was actually:

02-07-2009, 09:13 AM #1470
ar20

Never let the facts get in the way of your bull, eh?

As I TRUTHFULLY stated, you're last post before the 8th was on the 4th:

There is a noticable voice difference.

Take "I'm looking through you" and compare it with Hey Jude.

http://i30.tinypic.com/dz8sah.jpg

I posted on the 2nd, then the 4th

Yeah - the FOURTH, which is what I stated! Good grief!

Why would I post in a topic that hadn't had any replies in it since Michael Jackson croaked? Are you on crack?

You're the one on crack, FFS. Faulcon asked you a question on the 4th - which you have never replied to:

What do you think about "Mother Nature's Son?" Paul or Faul?

I also post when there are replies, such as Faulcon or anybody else.

:rolleyes:

am I meant to be in here constantly all the time? ... so I post here every 2 days on average

Funny you're nearly always on here straight after Fireman or me has posted.

Also your mind slips you, mind that MJ post that got derailed to the rant-room for you being obnoxious and swearing?

No. The reason it went into the rant room was nothing to do with me. Keep dreaming.... :rolleyes:

You probably got a warning for that

LOL. Warning for what?

My point to you was to provide me with some other anomaly like that, some other FRONTAL FULL FACE NO BEARD EXACT POSE/LIGHTING PICTURE, which you can't seem to produce.

What's the point? You'll only come up with the usual crap that it's been doctored or some other silly excuse, or just skirt over it completely. That's all you PIDers ever do.

For example, Fireman posted this great comp:

Thanks for pushing my point! Are you converting to PIA, ar20?

same guy!
http://img199.imageshack.us/img199/1018/faulpaul3.png

where is the difference?

do you really see any?

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/nose.gif

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/nose2.gif

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/mouth1.gif

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/mouth2.gif

His mouth is opened a little bit in the second one, plus he has the scar from the moped accident in the first one..

And your response?

Well seen you pick apart 1 of 9 images, and it happens to be the one where there's debate of tampering.

See?

By the way, I apologised to you earlier in whatever topic concerning the doctored photos.

Didn't stop you accusing me of doctoring them in the MJ thread, did it?

They are from Faulcons, and they are doctored. I highlighted the doctoring, they have the same small bogey in their nose as I've stated

So somebody doctored a photo so they could put a bogey up Paul's nose? :eek:

Okaaay... :rolleyes:

If you're going to peddle the usual PID excuse of doctored photos, then show us the original or offer some credible evidence to support your accusation.

I did with Faulcon's doctored Elvis photo.

Expecting us to believe that someone doctored a photo so they could put a bogey up Paul's nose is plain insulting!

faulconandsnowjob

09-07-2009, 07:23 PM

So, if someone were to go to a jury & try to convince them that the perpetrator was the defendant, even tho he had difft colored eyes, was taller, had difft shaped eyebrows, difft ears, etc, how successful do you think that would be? Actually, if that were the case, that defendant wouldn't even be sitting there b/c there'd be no probable cause to think it was the same person. It's just ridiculous to keep insisting they're the same. :rolleyes:

They have different colored eyes.

http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc205/thebeatlesfour/paul/peeking.jpg
http://i366.photobucket.com/albums/oo110/faulconandsnowjob/SFF_green_eyes.jpg

faulconandsnowjob

09-07-2009, 07:43 PM

socrates

09-07-2009, 08:21 PM

There are people who just cannot give up the illusion that Faul is Paul.

No, there are people who have been brainwashed by a 40 year old hoax and refuse to see reality.

We have shown that,

You have shown nothing which hasn't already been explained.

after 1966, "Paul" has different colored eyes,

http://img259.imageshack.us/img259/5508/get6.jpg

a different shaped nose,

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/nose2.gif

a higher forehead,

http://i30.tinypic.com/2qk72as.jpghttp://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/6667-1.gif

different ears

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/PID%20stuff/12.jpg

I'll have some of what you're smoking Faulcon....

http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j294/thidarat2006/Feb07/pauldead.jpg

http://img39.imageshack.us/img39/3074/fpisback.gif

Hang on! That last photo of Paul.... Hey.... It looks kinda familiar..... Yeah... I remember.... Faulcon's doctored photo.....

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/Elvis_JPM.jpghttp://i31.tinypic.com/25fu9zk.jpg

LOL. Faulcon couldn't spot a 'real' doctored photo if it bit her on the ass.

Trust a PIAer to point out reality to her. :D

socrates

09-07-2009, 08:25 PM

Just suppose I were an under-aged kid who wanted to go out drinking. I borrow an ID from an older friend. The ID shows someone w/ different colored eyes, difft eyebrows, difft ears, a higher forehead, & on the face of the license, it says I'm 5'10" when I'm really not even 5'8". When I show that license to a cop, what do you think he's going to do? I think I'd be looking at a minor in possession charge, don't you?

So how the hell does 'Faul' use his passport ID then?

"Er........."

:rolleyes:

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/Paulislive.gif http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/pp12_fade_still.gif
http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/6723962_b4865592c5-1.gif

Anyway... It's been nice catching up with you all in this thread of total delusion and utter tomfoolery, but I gotta get out of here again.

I just can't stand this craziness like I used to....

I'll leave faulcon to ramble on about different coloured eyes and false noses and AR20 claiming that photos of Paul have been doctored so a bogey can be put up his nose....

faulconandsnowjob

09-07-2009, 08:26 PM

So, just imagine that you're a prosecutor. You have an eyewitness who says the perpetrator was about 5'11", had brown eyes, a round face, & a high-arching right eyebrow. You even have a photo of this person. The police bring in a guy w/ a long, thin face, green eyes, & is about 6'1". Are you going to file charges? Let me remind you that a prosecutor must have probable cause to think that the defendant did it.

fireman

09-07-2009, 08:34 PM

I tried to come here, to proof a point.
But Faulcon and ar20 (the only PIDers left) are resistent to arguments. (and yes, ar20, i did answer your post. to that about the ears for example, but since it was ignored, i stopped replying)

Thanks Socrates, for your brilliant posts, showing the people who come here how poor the PID arguments really are!
Great Post:

No, there are people who have been brainwashed by a 40 year old hoax and refuse to see reality.

You have shown nothing which hasn't already been explained.

http://img259.imageshack.us/img259/5508/get6.jpg

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/nose2.gif

http://i30.tinypic.com/2qk72as.jpghttp://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/6667-1.gif

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/PID%20stuff/12.jpg

I'll have some of what you're smoking Faulcon....

http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j294/thidarat2006/Feb07/pauldead.jpg

http://img39.imageshack.us/img39/3074/fpisback.gif

Hang on! That last photo of Paul.... Hey.... It looks kinda familiar..... Yeah... I remember.... Faulcon's doctored photo.....

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/Elvis_JPM.jpghttp://i31.tinypic.com/25fu9zk.jpg

LOL. Faulcon couldn't spot a 'real' doctored photo if it bit her on the ass.

Trust a PIAer to point out reality to her.

socrates

09-07-2009, 08:38 PM

So, just imagine that you're a prosecutor. You have an eyewitness who says the perpetrator was about 5'11", had brown eyes, a round face, & a high-arching right eyebrow. You even have a photo of this person. The police bring in a guy w/ a long, thin face, green eyes, & is about 6'1".

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/6667-1.gif

http://img130.imageshack.us/img130/170/tknowgv0.gif

socrates

09-07-2009, 09:03 PM

Thanks Socrates, for your brilliant posts, showing the people who come here how poor the PID arguments really are!
Great Post:

Cheers dude. But yours are just as good.

Guess we can leave the PIDers - well, the two that are left - to talk amongst themselves. This thread only comes alive when a sceptic posts, but I can only dip my toes into this thread every once in a while, now.

Everything has already been discussed. This thread has run its course. The PIDers have nothing new to say, yet they keep trotting out the same tired, old, debunked arguments over and over again.

Why? Just to keep this thread alive?

How desperate! LOL. :D

faulconandsnowjob

09-07-2009, 09:34 PM

Socrates & Fireman, I really hope you're not prosecutors, b/c you wouldn't last long. Actually, I know you're not, b/c you can't evaluate evidence AT ALL.

http://i30.tinypic.com/2qk72as.jpg
That picture of Paul on the left has been tampered w/. That's SO obvious. Paul had a round face.

socrates

09-07-2009, 09:37 PM

Socrates & Fireman, I really hope you're not prosecutors, b/c you wouldn't last long. Actually, I know you're not, b/c you can't evaluate evidence AT ALL.

Oh, and YOU can?

Do me a favour!

You think these are two different men:

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/6667-1.gif

http://i30.tinypic.com/2qk72as.jpg
That picture of Paul on the left has been tampered w/. That's SO obvious.

Says the 'lawyer' who was totally fooled by a doctored photo of Paul next to Elvis Presley! :rolleyes:

Therefore, I don't think your opinion on doctored photos is particularly credible. :rolleyes:

Merely saying a pic is doctored doesn't make it so. Your argument has as much weight as a feather.

Where's the UNDOCTORED photo, then? Same place as those Surgery Scar photos you promised to get for humito about 2 months ago that he's still waiting for? :rolleyes:

Paul had a round face.

Not when he was younger...

http://i32.tinypic.com/71rbsg.jpg

:rolleyes:

http://img37.imageshack.us/img37/8570/paulgameover.jpg

faulconandsnowjob

09-07-2009, 09:46 PM

socrates

09-07-2009, 10:02 PM

Imagine Socrates & Fireman were prosecutors. A witness comes in w/ this picture of a suspect:

http://i80.photobucket.com/albums/j178/lilis678/DB1005_BEATLES_6.jpg

The police bring in this guy (who also happens to be 2 inches taller):

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/1973_JPMShow_02.jpg

Apparently, Socrates & Fireman would prosecute. lol Well, I for one am glad they are not prosecutors. But even if they were, they wouldn't last long b/c they'd never get a conviction. They might also be looking at sanctions for prosecuting someone w/ NO probable cause.

There's no way you a a real lawyer.. Showing photos of a man taken YEARS apart.... What planet are you on?

When shown these two pics - taken months apart - your ridiculous 'case' falls apart:

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/6667-1.gif

:rolleyes:

I can't stand this nuttiness any more from someone who pretends to be a lawyer.

I'm off...

faulconandsnowjob

09-07-2009, 10:09 PM

faulconandsnowjob

09-07-2009, 10:21 PM

I can't stand this nuttiness any more from someone who pretends to be a lawyer.

I can't stand this nuttiness any more from someone who pretends to be able to see. :rolleyes:

socrates

09-07-2009, 10:25 PM

^ Good riddance.

This picture the PIA'ers use to "prove" Paul & Faul are the same has been tampered w/. Paul's face (on the left) has been stretched to look like Faul's. Paul's face was actually round.

http://i30.tinypic.com/2qk72as.jpg
http://i366.photobucket.com/albums/oo110/faulconandsnowjob/memphis_66_paul.jpg

So you use a photo of Paul's round face taken when he was in his TWENTIES as evidence to prove a pic of Paul in his TEENS has been doctored to make his face thinner?

You're not a lawyer - you're a comedian.

I suppose these photos of Paul in his TEENS - showing him with a thinner face - have been doctored too, huh?

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/rare%20paul%20photos/z12-1.jpghttp://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/rare%20paul%20photos/14.jpghttp://i32.tinypic.com/71rbsg.jpg

:rolleyes:

http://img37.imageshack.us/img37/8570/paulgameover.jpg

faulconandsnowjob

09-07-2009, 11:22 PM

I thought you were going to leave this thread. Why don't you stop standing in the way of the Truth?

BTW, your name is really presumptuous. I bet the real Socrates wouldn't have been so easily fooled. I bet he wouldn't have just believed whatever he was told like you apparently do. :rolleyes:

dream9

09-07-2009, 11:49 PM

With the evidence presented on this thread, the jury would definitely see the difference in the two "Pauls". It's not the same when you don't want to believe your celebrity hero was replaced compared to actually having to make a decision in a court of law. You gotta go with the evidence which in this case is in the form of many, many pictures showing two different men.

faulconandsnowjob

10-07-2009, 12:31 AM

It's not surprising that a taller guy would have bigger feet. Paul wore an 8 shoe. Faul wore a 9.5.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VVdV_opgzZQ

http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b375/Cavern61/paul_coconuta.jpghttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v419/TheFaker/Faulinshorts.jpg

ar20

10-07-2009, 12:47 AM

Think this topics dwindling a bit, so here's a few more comps.

http://i215.photobucket.com/albums/cc97/thebeatlesband/animationsandcartoons/paulwinker.gif

http://img265.imageshack.us/img265/1113/faulpaul1.png
http://img357.imageshack.us/img357/4423/faulpaul2.png
http://img199.imageshack.us/img199/1018/faulpaul3.png
http://img15.imageshack.us/img15/1566/faulpaul4.png
http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/9370/faulpaul5.png
http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/6284/faulpaul6.png
http://img396.imageshack.us/img396/3425/faulpaul7.png
http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/4793/faulpaul8.png
http://img229.imageshack.us/img229/7978/faulpaul9.png

I'm posting this again to make a point with you Socrates.

I claim he picked apart one, and you state that I don't address it because I say it's tampered with.

PRECISELY WHAT I'M SAYING.

You don't address the rest of these? Why? Because in your guts you know they look nothing alike side-by-side... you can't do your little nose comparisons or eye comparisons or fuck all.

You only do it with photos, we've stated, have been tampered with... then you think I'm somehow ignoring you?

I'm ignoring you because you ignore the bulk of my posting, and Faulcons comparisons.

Your rebuttals are entirely selective with photos.

I can sit here posting pre-66/post-66 all day, and there's only a few you can pick apart for comparisons and fades which happen to illustrate my point.

I also don't care when who or what posts... what the hells the point in bringing that up? Isn't this a public forum, I'll post whenever and whatever I damn well please as long as it's to do with the subject.

Add something new to this topic or GTFO.

faulconandsnowjob

10-07-2009, 01:30 AM

Add something new to this topic or GTFO.
Socrates adds doctored photos, which are actually quite useful in showing how people have been deceived. :p

astrochicken

10-07-2009, 03:50 AM

I'm still here too..

Paul is dead and was replaced by a talentless imposter.

Anyone looking at the comparisons with an open mind can see
that something is amiss.

fireman

10-07-2009, 08:20 AM

I'm still here too..

Paul is dead and was replaced by a talentless imposter.

Anyone looking at the comparisons with an open mind can see
that something is amiss.

Talentless?

You go and write those songs! :p

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/67comp.gif?t=1247205700

Who changed most? ;)

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/cvomp-2.gif?t=1247206079

30 years later, same guy!

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/another-comp1.gif?t=1247206070

beard or no beard, same guy!

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/PID%20stuff/Comparison-1.gif

Paulie as a kid and as a man!

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/2-2.gif

same guy, left he is 27 yo, right he is 23..

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/PID%20stuff/fade1.gif

this is an very old comparison from maccafunhouse, but its still good!

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/PID%20stuff/Paul_comp1.jpg

so is this! same guy!

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/forfaulc2.jpg

so he is here!

I could go on forever.. these are all comparisons i made a while ago. maybe if i find the time, i'll adress ar20s request for debunking his comparisons!

faulconandsnowjob

10-07-2009, 09:01 AM

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/forfaulc2.jpg
That doesn't look anything like Paul. :p You can't tell the eyebrows are difft & Penny Lane Faul looks to be in his mid-30's & NOT 25, which he supposedly was :p But I like the comp. I think I'll use it.

Sorry, but some people will obviously believe whatever the mainstream media tells them, no matter what the evidence.

Oh, & I totally agree that Faul is a total hack compared to Paul, who was a genius, imo.

aya_rei

10-07-2009, 10:25 AM

I would love to see ad hominem attacks become a bannable offense some days. It would certainly make it difficult for some to argue their point of view.

Paul's eyes certainly look different to me now. They went from being a pleasant almond shaped set of dark brown to hazel colored eyes, which also seem to 'sag' at the corners.

Doesn't prove that he was replaced, but if we look at all the circumstantial evidence, the possibility is definitely there.

accuracy

10-07-2009, 11:29 AM

I'm confused, is that directed at me or... what?

A huge misjudgement ar20, from my behalf and i am very sorry.

I did NOT see your earlier posts.

accuracy

accuracy

10-07-2009, 11:37 AM

Any news on our heroine truthseeker49 ??

accuracy

10-07-2009, 11:39 AM

Any news on our heroine truthseeker49 ??

Please let me know......

tonyst@iprimus.com.au

accuracy.

humito

10-07-2009, 12:01 PM

Please let me know......

tonyst@iprimus.com.au

accuracy.

probably in the process of being replaced :p

toty1994

10-07-2009, 12:11 PM

Oh dear, things have been getting a little heated. Let's have a musical interlude!

Just discovered this, the only song I've ever heard about PiD.

'Paul is Dead' by Luke Powers.
http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&VideoID=42762051

fireman

10-07-2009, 01:45 PM

faulconandsnowjob

10-07-2009, 06:23 PM

Accuracy, truthseeker is doing pretty well. She's just slowed down a little & is sticking to her forum, PID Miss Him. I will pass on the message. I'm sure she will be glad to hear from you :-)

Add this one to the list of differences: Faul's freckles. This is where they're located on his face:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/FaulConstellation.jpg

The freckles were removed when "Strawberry Fields Forever" was colorized, but you can see them in the black & white version.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/FaulCompare01.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/FaulCompare02.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/SSFTampering_01-2.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/SSFTampering_03-1.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/SSFTampering_11-1.jpg

Paul didn't have those freckles.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/Paul19.jpg

The devil is in the details, huh? lol

socrates

10-07-2009, 09:44 PM

Paul didn't have those freckles.

Lol!

Yes he does.....

http://i265.photobucket.com/albums/ii220/truecolors112/part%203/82202321.jpg http://img40.imageshack.us/img40/2967/copyofbigbrowneyes2.jpg

Now let's compare those piccies....

http://img199.imageshack.us/img199/3843/82202321.jpghttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v419/TheFaker/cheezeymoustache3.jpg

http://img17.imageshack.us/img17/2967/copyofbigbrowneyes2.jpghttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v419/TheFaker/68wlp3.jpg

Lets zoom in on those 'freckles' in the first comp and compare...

http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/6497/screenhunter38.jpg http://img146.imageshack.us/img146/9188/screenhunter41.jpg

Match up the angles of those bottom 3 'freckles' as best as possible...

http://img268.imageshack.us/img268/1420/screenhunter40.jpg

AMAZING! Clearly the same 'freckles'!

Thanks Faulcon - you've done PIA a great service by refering to those 'freckles'!

http://www.lifeshore.com/smiley/data/media/3/3D_emoticon_S202.gif

BRILLIANT evidence that Paul is alive and they are the same man!

The devil is in the details, huh? lol

Sure is!

supertzar

10-07-2009, 10:04 PM

What is there to say but that faulcon & co. are true believers. Every objective confirmation that McCartney is alive is proof to them that everyone else is deluded. The only problem with this that I can see is that the credibility of the forum could suffer.

There is one question I would like to ask fc & co. which is "Do you agree that photographs are ephemeral in nature, capturing fleeting moments subject to all manner of factors such as lighting, equipment, angles and the incredible range of expression of which human beings are capable of?"

faulconandsnowjob

10-07-2009, 10:14 PM

Socrates, you can't even tell the difference btw Faul & Paul, so how would you know if one had freckles but the other didn't? They're both jumbled up in your head.

This is a good analogy of Socrates' mind. Pics of Paul & Faul all mixed up:

http://www.freewebs.com/thefabfourgalleries/paulmccartney.htm

faulconandsnowjob

10-07-2009, 10:20 PM

Every objective confirmation that McCartney is alive is proof to them that everyone else is deluded.
I have yet to see any such "proof." I haven't seen a pic or video of Paul since Aug or Sept 1966. Just b/c SIR Paul says he's Paul doesn't mean he actually IS Paul. You really shouldn't believe EVERYTHING you see on TV or read in the papers. You have heard of a little affair called the Gulf of Tonkin incident, right? But yeah, I do think people are buying into the illusion.

There is one question I would like to ask fc & co. which is "Do you agree that photographs are ephemeral in nature, capturing fleeting moments subject to all manner of factors such as lighting, equipment, angles and the incredible range of expression of which human beings are capable of?"
I agree w/ US federal law, which states that photos can be used to identify people b/c they capture "immutable characteristics" and "identifying particulars." So, if you don't like the fact that photos can be used to establish identity, then take it up w/ the US judicial system.

[T]he term "record" means any item, collection, or grouping of information about an individual that is maintained by an agency, including, but not limited to, ... other identifying particular assigned to the individual, such as a finger or voice print or a photograph... 5 USCS § 552a(4).

[T]he term "means of identification" means any name or number that may be used, alone or in conjunction with any other information, to identify a specific individual, including any--
...
(B) unique biometric data, such as fingerprint, voice print, retina or iris image, or other unique physical representation; ...

United States v. Hawes, 523 F.3d 245, 249 (3d Cir. Pa. 2008); United States v. Mitchell, 518 F.3d 230 (4th Cir. S.C. 2008).

... [T]he district court found that duty titles were not comparable to captured immutable characteristics such as finger or voice prints or photographs. The district court reached these conclusions because an individual's duty title changes over time, because multiple people can concomitantly have the same or similar duty titles, and because each individual has predecessor and successor holders of the same duty titles. We agree with the reasoning and conclusions of the district court. In circumstances where duty titles pertain to one and only one individual, such as the examples of identifying particulars provided in the statutory text (finger or voice print or photograph), duty titles may indeed be "identifying particulars" as that term is used in the definition of "record" in the Privacy Act. For the reasons detailed by the district court, however, the [**9] duty titles in this [*188] case are not "identifying particulars" because they do not pertain to one and only one individual.

Pierce v. Dep't of the United States Air Force, 512 F.3d 184, 188 (5th Cir. Miss. 2007).

I think someone just got slammed hard - ouch :D I really fear for the credibility of this forum :D

socrates

10-07-2009, 10:31 PM

Socrates, you can't even tell the difference btw Faul & Paul,

For the simple reason that a "difference" doesn't exist. It's the SAME freaking man. :rolleyes:

so how would you know if one had freckles but the other didn't?

LOL!!! I know PAUL has freckles in those photos because I can see them:

http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/6497/screenhunter38.jpg

They're both jumbled up in your mind.

No - your mind is jumbled up with PID nonsense.

Those comps of Paul having the same freckles as 'Faul' proves it's the same man.

Can you rebutt this evidence with a SENSIBLE argument? No "doctored" baloney (unless you can provide the undoctored pic) or 'Faul had those freckles implanted'.....

Those freckles comps are concrete evidence staring you in the face, yet you refuse to accept it because it is unpleasant for you to believe that Paul is alive.

Why don't you open your eyes to the TRUTH and embrace your own sig:

Reality is always hard to accept whenever it is unpleasant... We don't want to believe our own eyes and ears. Instead of accepting the truth as it is when it disturbs us, we try to deny its existence.

:rolleyes:

socrates

10-07-2009, 10:34 PM

I agree w/ US federal law, which states that photos can be used to identify people b/c they capture "immutable characteristics" and "identifying particulars."

http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/6497/screenhunter38.jpg http://img146.imageshack.us/img146/9188/screenhunter41.jpg

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

faulconandsnowjob

10-07-2009, 10:37 PM

socrates

10-07-2009, 10:54 PM

But haven't you ever asked yourself why Paul is the only person in the history of the world who has to have his picture taken in just the right lighting at just the right angle to look like himself? The funny thing is, Paul looks like himself up until the end of 1966. Then he doesn't look like he did before, but he does look the same after that. Gee, what could possibly account for that?
There's no such thing as doubles, & the media would never lie to us. lol

Why are you suddenly changing the subject and rambling on?

Why don't you address these pics which prove they are the same guy?

http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/6497/screenhunter38.jpg http://img146.imageshack.us/img146/9188/screenhunter41.jpg

As ar20 pointed out, Paul looks like Paul & Faul looks like Faul, but they don't look like each other.

Yet they have exactly the same freckles, same eyes, same nose, same chin, same forehead, same iris paterns, same hairy arms, same teeth, same hands..... :rolleyes:

Faulcon, you are so blatently in denial.

faulconandsnowjob

10-07-2009, 10:57 PM

Socrates, you have said time & again that you cannot distinguish between Paul & Faul, so it's obviously a confusing mess of pictures of "Paul" in your head. Why are you arguing w/ that? Or are you saying that you can discern differences between them now?

socrates

10-07-2009, 11:19 PM

Look faulcon, FOR THE LAST TIME.....

You were the one who came on here and posted photos and a claim that Paul didn't have freckles and 'Faul' did. This 'fact', you infered, proved that Paul was replaced.

Now I have posted photographic evidence which completely demolishes your false claim, and proves that Paul has not only the same freckles as 'Faul' - but in exactly the same places - you completely ignore this evidence and start rambling on about completely irrelevant things in an effort to quickly change the subject.

This is the behaviour of somebody who doesn't want to face inconvenient truths and is in denial.

Why don't you rebutt my evidence? After all, it was you who came on here making claims about the freckles in the first place!

Now all of a sudden you don't want to talk about them and completely ignore my requests for a discussion about my rebuttal. :rolleyes:

Carry on sticking your head in the PID sand, Faulcon. :(

Paul is alive....

http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/6497/screenhunter38.jpg http://img146.imageshack.us/img146/9188/screenhunter41.jpg

socrates

10-07-2009, 11:40 PM

What is there to say but that faulcon & co. are true believers. Every objective confirmation that McCartney is alive is proof to them that everyone else is deluded.

Great point.

faulconandsnowjob

11-07-2009, 12:28 AM

Socrates, I know you can't tell the difference, but just FYI, those freckles are on Faul's face, & not Paul's.

You say this theory is "nutty," & yet you keep slamming this thread. Why? Are you afraid someone might be able to tell the difference? I guess we wouldn't want people to wake up to the truth about how they've been mindf***ed for all these years. :D

faulconandsnowjob

11-07-2009, 12:35 AM

What is there to say but that faulcon & co. are true believers.
Yes, we are "true believers" just like we're true believers that the earth is round. It's been proven time & again that they're difft people. I don't know how some people can keep insisting they're not w/ such a long list of differences. It boggles the mind. :eek:

toty1994

11-07-2009, 12:42 AM

This 'freckles' business is hilarious. Faulcon brings it up as some great new PiD evidence, Socrates debunks it in the very next post. What should happen next is that faulcon says 'ok, you got me on that one'....But no, faulcon replies as if her original post on the subject never existed in the first place!

faulconandsnowjob

11-07-2009, 01:01 AM

Faul had freckles. Paul did not. What more is there to say? No matter what differences we point out, some people are absolutely incapable of exercising free thought & accepting that they're 2 different people they're looking at. Some people have been completely blinded by the illusion.

Here's the full quote. I think this is very apropos to this topic:

Reality is always hard to accept whenever it is unpleasant. Our minds play tricks and tell us it just cannot be. We don't want to believe our own eyes and ears. Instead of accepting the truth as it is when it disturbs us, we try to deny its existence.
~ Dr. P. Beter

I guess all these differences that appeared after Aug 1966 were just "coincidences." lol

Paul: brown eyes
Faul: green eyes
Paul’s eyes were set farther apart than Faul's
Paul had thick eyelashes

Faul's head is larger than JPM's
Bill has a larger chin and forehead
Paul's hair grows from left to right and his bangs are very thick
Bill's hair grows from right to left, and his bangs are thin
Bill has a cowlick
Paul was bow-legged

Bill's natural ears are much smaller than Paul's
Paul's earlobes are attached and his ears stick out far from his head
Bill's natural ears, and even many of his fakes ears have unattached earlobes, and are set closer to his head
Bill's ears vary because he wears prosthetic ears
Faul was caught on film wearing an obviously fake ear, with a wedge missing. Ears are unique identifiers for a person, and it is necessary for a doppleganger to hide or disguise his or her ears in some way. Look at video for “Mary Had a Little Lamb” on YT

Paul had high arching eyebrows
Bill had thick eyebrows with little arch. Fillers are used to pump up his eyebrows, and therefore they've varied over the years
Paul had Bell's Palsy in the left side of his face, which caused it to droop in some pictures
Bill never had this condition and no pictures show signs of Bell's Palsy
Paul always stayed clean shaven and wore short sideburns
Bill has had three moustaches (1966-67, 1974 & early 1976), beards (1969, 1970-72), and various long sideburns
Paul was a legendary bassist and seldom looked down at his fingers while playing
Bill has always needed to look at his fingers while playing guitar, even on simple chord changes. Ditto for bass
Paul was left handed
Bill is right handed and had to learn to play guitar left handed
Paul had more body hair than Faul
Paul rarely stared directly into video cameras while performing
Bill often gazes into video cameras for long periods while performing
Paul was masculine
Bill's portrayal of Paul has been very effeminate
Bill is around 2.5 inches taller than Paul, and has a larger frame
Plastic surgery is most noticeable from 1967-1969
Cheek fillers most noticeable in 1970
Faul’s feet are longer & are shaped differently from Paul’s. For ex: hammer toes
Photo doctoring and retouching has taken place to make Faul look more like Paul and vice versa.
Different hand-writing
Faul - 5 freckles on his left cheek by his nose. Paul - none

Paul's voice was lower register, deeper, and had more resonance and vibrato than Faul's voice
Faul's singing voice is higher and thinner than JPM's, and his Liverpudlian accent is noticeably less thick and consistent than JPM's
Dr. Henry M. Truby of the University of Miami used samples from three Beatles songs sung by Paul McCartney ("Yesterday," "Penny Lane," and "Hey Jude") and produced three very different sonagrams.

Hey, go ahead & believe whatever you want. Some of us prefer a little something called "reality." :D

socrates

11-07-2009, 01:56 AM

Faul had freckles. Paul did not. What more is there to say?

That you're talking absolute, total poop. :mad:

That you are in total denial and refuse to see what any normal person can clearly see with their own eyes.

I could go on.... But here's some more photos showing Paul with freckles:

http://img27.imageshack.us/img27/3157/blueeyes3.jpg http://img5.imageshack.us/img5/1566/faulpaul4.png
http://img132.imageshack.us/img132/6750/screenhunter44.jpg................................ ................................................. http://img132.imageshack.us/img132/8003/screenhunter43.jpg

http://img22.imageshack.us/img22/4903/paulie1.jpg http://img41.imageshack.us/img41/217/screenhunter45.jpg

How the hell you can sit there and insist that Paul 'didn't' have freckles - despite PROOF to the contary beggars belief!

Incredible - just freaking incredible! :eek: :eek:

Hey, go ahead & believe whatever you want. Some of us prefer a little something called "reality."

http://www.nullcode.org/dump/facepalm.jpg

socrates

11-07-2009, 01:59 AM

faulconandsnowjob

11-07-2009, 03:16 AM

I think I've been too generous. I've been thinking people have been blinded to reality b/c they've been conditioned into seeing Faul as Paul b/c they've been told he is for so long. Now I'm starting to think that some people are just stupid (I'm looking at you, Socrates)

faulconandsnowjob

11-07-2009, 03:39 AM

PIA'ers:

STAY ASLEEP.
OBEY.
DO AS YOU'RE TOLD.
BELIEVE WHATEVER THEY TELL YOU - oh, wait, you already do. lol :p

faulconandsnowjob

11-07-2009, 04:11 AM

PID in a vintage magazine from 1969. They concluded he'd been replaced:
http://james-paul-mccartney.150m.com/pid_on_magazine.html

The Paul McCartney Death Clues:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A277328

toty1994

11-07-2009, 04:58 AM

I guess all these differences that appeared after Aug 1966 were just "coincidences." lol

Paul: brown eyes
Faul: green eyes
Paul’s eyes were set farther apart than Faul's
Paul had thick eyelashes

Faul's head is larger than JPM's
Bill has a larger chin and forehead
Paul's hair grows from left to right and his bangs are very thick
Bill's hair grows from right to left, and his bangs are thin
Bill has a cowlick
Paul was bow-legged

Bill's natural ears are much smaller than Paul's
Paul's earlobes are attached and his ears stick out far from his head
Bill's natural ears, and even many of his fakes ears have unattached earlobes, and are set closer to his head
Bill's ears vary because he wears prosthetic ears
Faul was caught on film wearing an obviously fake ear, with a wedge missing. Ears are unique identifiers for a person, and it is necessary for a doppleganger to hide or disguise his or her ears in some way. Look at video for “Mary Had a Little Lamb” on YT

Paul had high arching eyebrows
Bill had thick eyebrows with little arch. Fillers are used to pump up his eyebrows, and therefore they've varied over the years
Paul had Bell's Palsy in the left side of his face, which caused it to droop in some pictures
Bill never had this condition and no pictures show signs of Bell's Palsy
Paul always stayed clean shaven and wore short sideburns
Bill has had three moustaches (1966-67, 1974 & early 1976), beards (1969, 1970-72), and various long sideburns
Paul was a legendary bassist and seldom looked down at his fingers while playing
Bill has always needed to look at his fingers while playing guitar, even on simple chord changes. Ditto for bass
Paul was left handed
Bill is right handed and had to learn to play guitar left handed
Paul had more body hair than Faul
Paul rarely stared directly into video cameras while performing
Bill often gazes into video cameras for long periods while performing
Paul was masculine
Bill's portrayal of Paul has been very effeminate
Bill is around 2.5 inches taller than Paul, and has a larger frame
Plastic surgery is most noticeable from 1967-1969
Cheek fillers most noticeable in 1970
Faul’s feet are longer & are shaped differently from Paul’s. For ex: hammer toes
Photo doctoring and retouching has taken place to make Faul look more like Paul and vice versa.
Different hand-writing
Faul - 5 freckles on his left cheek by his nose. Paul - none

Paul's voice was lower register, deeper, and had more resonance and vibrato than Faul's voice
Faul's singing voice is higher and thinner than JPM's, and his Liverpudlian accent is noticeably less thick and consistent than JPM's
Dr. Henry M. Truby of the University of Miami used samples from three Beatles songs sung by Paul McCartney ("Yesterday," "Penny Lane," and "Hey Jude") and produced three very different sonagrams.

It really shouldn't need pointing out anymore but I may as well...everything above is a mixture of personal opinion, wild conjecture and the thoroughly debunked.

faulconandsnowjob

11-07-2009, 05:14 AM

I forgot to add this difference to the loooong list of differences btw Paul & Faul:

Paul - size 8 shoe
Faul - size 9.5

faulconandsnowjob

11-07-2009, 05:58 AM

everything above is a mixture of personal opinion, wild conjecture and the thoroughly debunked.
Maybe in Bizarro World, where you, apparently, live.

accuracy

11-07-2009, 06:14 AM

brainfreeze

11-07-2009, 09:10 AM

PIA'ers:

STAY ASLEEP.
OBEY.
DO AS YOU'RE TOLD.
BELIEVE WHATEVER THEY TELL YOU - oh, wait, you already do. lol :p

I hope you feel better now. I guess you deserved that, considering us who don't believe he's dead think you guys who do are off your freakin' heads.

fireman

11-07-2009, 10:44 AM

For the simple reason that a "difference" doesn't exist. It's the SAME freaking man. :rolleyes:

LOL!!! I know PAUL has freckles in those photos because I can see them:

http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/6497/screenhunter38.jpg

No - your mind is jumbled up with PID nonsense.

Those comps of Paul having the same freckles as 'Faul' proves it's the same man.

Can you rebutt this evidence with a SENSIBLE argument? No "doctored" baloney (unless you can provide the undoctored pic) or 'Faul had those freckles implanted'.....

Those freckles comps are concrete evidence staring you in the face, yet you refuse to accept it because it is unpleasant for you to believe that Paul is alive.

Why don't you open your eyes to the TRUTH and embrace your own sig:

Reality is always hard to accept whenever it is unpleasant... We don't want to believe our own eyes and ears. Instead of accepting the truth as it is when it disturbs us, we try to deny its existence.

:rolleyes:

Socrates, i really think you did it with the freckles thing! :)

toty1994

11-07-2009, 11:56 AM

Maybe in Bizarro World, where you, apparently, live.
...and yet, on top of everything else, your list of 'facts' also included your new pet theory..Faul - 5 freckles on his left cheek by his nose. Paul - none even though it had just been shown to be utterly wrong. That's pretty 'bizarro' if you ask me. Your only answer to the 'freckles' debunking appeared to be
'you cannot distinguish between Paul & Faul, so it's obviously a confusing mess of pictures of "Paul" in your head.' What does that even mean, and how does it debunk the debunking?

PIA'ers:

STAY ASLEEP.
OBEY.
DO AS YOU'RE TOLD.
BELIEVE WHATEVER THEY TELL YOU - oh, wait, you already do. lol

Are you a robot programmed to spout cliched conspiracy theorist insults every time your argument hits the buffers? That's how it comes across. Ironic, really.

fireman

11-07-2009, 02:45 PM

Faul had freckles. Paul did not. What more is there to say?

LOL

Paul had the EXACT SAME freckles as "Faul" (or aged Paul).

Socrates has prooven that!

Here are even more photos where the dots on (his) left side of the nose are clearly visible:

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/pre67/freckles3.jpg

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/pre67/freckles2.jpg

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/pre67/freckles1.jpg

:)

socrates

11-07-2009, 03:43 PM

Great finds, Fireman! :D

This is another good comp because the photo quality is good:

http://img196.imageshack.us/img196/1566/faulpaul4.pnghttp://img196.imageshack.us/img196/7830/cheezeymoustache3.jpg

http://img194.imageshack.us/img194/5506/screenhunter49.jpg

CLEARLY, ABSOLUTELY, WITHOUT QUESTION......

The SAME freckles!

Of course, Faulcon can't see Paul's freckles....

http://www.hitting50.co.uk/info/uploads/userpics/hitting50/Woman%20covering%20eyes%20with%20hands.gif

:)

supertzar

11-07-2009, 03:50 PM

I have yet to see any such "proof." I haven't seen a pic or video of Paul since Aug or Sept 1966. Just b/c SIR Paul says he's Paul doesn't mean he actually IS Paul. You really shouldn't believe EVERYTHING you see on TV or read in the papers. You have heard of a little affair called the Gulf of Tonkin incident, right? But yeah, I do think people are buying into the illusion.

I agree w/ US federal law, which states that photos can be used to identify people b/c they capture "immutable characteristics" and "identifying particulars." So, if you don't like the fact that photos can be used to establish identity, then take it up w/ the US judicial system.

I think someone just got slammed hard - ouch :D I really fear for the credibility of this forum :D

I know photos can be used to identify people. Is that how you interpreted the meaning of my question?

socrates

11-07-2009, 03:54 PM

Hey, ho... Faulcon's already started the excuses as to why Paul has freckles...

Over at PID Miss Him, where 'Frecklegate' first originated, Faulcon posted this yesterday:

http://img528.imageshack.us/img528/9546/screenhunter50.jpg

WTF?! :eek:

Here's the thread - the freckles topic begins right near the bottom of the page:

http://only1rad.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=plastic&thread=1399&page=1#17711

Faulcon's excuse is drivel.

The photos of Paul with freckles were taken off PID MIss Him! :D

This, from SEPT 08, has a few comps of Paul and Faul and you can clearly see the same freckles in some comparisons! ;D

http://only1rad.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=faker&action=display&thread=165&page=7]

For example:

http://img179.imageshack.us/img179/9193/screenhunter46.jpg

It's HILARIOUS! There they are, comparing pics that 'prove' they're different guys - when the same freckles are evident in both pics!

supertzar

11-07-2009, 03:59 PM

Why would someone do all this "PID" business? It's the most moronic thing I've ever seen, seriously. And that is saying a lot.

socrates

11-07-2009, 04:49 PM

Are you a robot programmed to spout cliched conspiracy theorist insults every time your argument hits the buffers? That's how it comes across. Ironic, really.

http://img63.imageshack.us/img63/4869/wwwmyemoticonscomgigglexh7.gif http://img130.imageshack.us/img130/6962/thumbs20upoe4.gif

socrates

11-07-2009, 04:51 PM

Why would someone do all this "PID" business? It's the most moronic thing I've ever seen, seriously. And that is saying a lot.

I think it's because it makes them feel special in thinking they have uncovered some great conspiracy that only they can see. It gives their lives some kind of excitement, I guess.

More freckle comps that prove Paul is alive:

http://img216.imageshack.us/img216/3843/82202321.jpghttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/SSFTampering_01-2.jpg

http://img216.imageshack.us/img216/3843/82202321.jpghttp://img134.imageshack.us/img134/2436/freckles01.jpg

http://img127.imageshack.us/img127/5559/freckles3.jpghttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/SSFTampering_01-2.jpg

http://img127.imageshack.us/img127/5559/freckles3.jpghttp://img134.imageshack.us/img134/2436/freckles01.jpg

http://img18.imageshack.us/img18/1118/freckles1.jpghttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/SSFTampering_01-2.jpg

socrates

11-07-2009, 05:34 PM

http://img18.imageshack.us/img18/1118/freckles1.jpghttp://img134.imageshack.us/img134/2436/freckles01.jpg

faulconandsnowjob

11-07-2009, 05:50 PM

I hope you feel better now. I guess you deserved that, considering us who don't believe he's dead think you guys who do are off your freakin' heads.

Off our heads? I don't know what world you live in, but in MY world, people don't change their eye color, transform their faces & grow 2 inches in their mid-20's. I think you people who don't believe this are unobservant, ignorant, naive & rather stupid. "Brainfreeze" is pretty much on target. Thank God for people like you, or else TPTB wouldn't be able to get away w/ what they do. They can switch someone out & you'd never notice. It's one thing not to notice b/c you're not looking for it, but when all the differences have been pointed out to you, & you still can't see it... Well, that's just pathetic.

faulconandsnowjob

11-07-2009, 05:54 PM

It is amazing how they pulled this one off. Lucky for them most people are asleep at the wheel.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/1966_Goodbye_08.jpghttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/Dec66_06.jpghttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/Far02.jpghttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/Pen03.jpghttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/Billy_Life_13.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/Paul1964Bill1968.jpg

fireman

11-07-2009, 06:38 PM

low quality pictures and low quality vcr video stills proove nothing!

no comment on the freckles?:p

:D

socrates

11-07-2009, 07:29 PM

They can switch someone out & you'd never notice. It's one thing not to notice b/c you're not looking for it, but when all the differences have been pointed out to you, & you still can't see it... Well, that's just pathetic.

http://img22.imageshack.us/img22/4310/paulfaul.jpg

http://img18.imageshack.us/img18/6348/screenhunter55.jpg

.......................http://www.lifeshore.com/smiley/data/media/3/3D_emoticon_S84.gif ........................................... .................................................. http://www.lifeshore.com/smiley/data/media/3/3D_emoticon_S84.gif

...........http://img362.imageshack.us/img362/4705/dejensucomentario1kike0.gif .................................................. ......... http://img362.imageshack.us/img362/4705/dejensucomentario1kike0.gif

http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/6497/screenhunter38.jpg http://img146.imageshack.us/img146/9188/screenhunter41.jpg

http://img37.imageshack.us/img37/8570/paulgameover.jpg http://www.lifeshore.com/smiley/data/media/2/3D_emoticon_255.gif

dream9

11-07-2009, 09:35 PM

http://img22.imageshack.us/img22/4310/paulfaul.jpghttp://img18.imageshack.us/img18/6348/screenhunter55.jpg

My favorite Paul is dead comparison.

faulconandsnowjob

11-07-2009, 11:14 PM

http://img18.imageshack.us/img18/6348/screenhunter55.jpg

^ One of my fave comps, too. The nose, eyes, & shape of the face are completely different. Of course, some people are incapable of noticing such details. lol

toty1994

12-07-2009, 08:14 AM

^
It may be one of your fave comps, but it's funny that you posted the version highlighting freckles you claim Paul doesn't have!

dream9

12-07-2009, 10:30 AM

^
It may be one of your fave comps, but it's funny that you posted the version highlighting freckles you claim Paul doesn't have!

It's funny how one can notice the freckles but completely ignore how different the rest of the face looks.

fireman

12-07-2009, 12:18 PM

It's funny how you fake label the picture with "Faul 1967"!

Another hoaxer strategy.. That is by far NOT 1967. It's at least 1975, so a good ten years later. Plus the angle is totally different. And i wouldn't be surprised if it's strechted a little bit, to make the face appear more different.

After all this is a comparison by the famous hoaxer Sunking, who also tries to sell us that Paul suffered from explosive diarreah, wore diapers and was replaced by a 95 year old female spy! :D (he really tries to push that theory!)

Very serious buisness this PID thing... :rolleyes:

humito

12-07-2009, 01:30 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5gWvBXS2t4A

http://images.mirror.co.uk/upl/m4/jan2009/4/9/9E236099-C8D2-BC49-9BFBC2000571A2D1.jpg

at 3mins in ............" illuminati /robot/magician/reptillian overlord" mc cartney dabs white foam on Michael Jacksons face !!!

he shortley turned into this :eek:

http://mystarbucks.files.wordpress.com/2007/10/creepy_jacko_mask_halloween_mask_ebay.jpg

a ploy to get his claws on the beatles rights?

SAY SAY SAY ................666 perhaps?

also micheal dressed up as sgt pepper!.............mmmmmmmmmmmmm

http://blog.masslive.com/entertainment/2009/06/large_michael-jackson-glove-1984.jpg

LOL.....................I am sure this will all shortly be prooved true by Faulcon ..............:D have fun

noewhan

12-07-2009, 01:55 PM

It's funny how one can notice the freckles but completely ignore how different the rest of the face looks.

Listen to yourself.

Everyone who thinks Paul is a clone or whatever...

How many expressions & variations there of, do you think are possible?

And then add that, the possible variations of angles & shades of light there are too.

I just see it as too far fetched to say he's dead or a clone etc.

Not to mention, Paul writes songs about love & such. I don't see how he serves as a manipulative pawn.

socrates

12-07-2009, 03:30 PM

http://img9.imageshack.us/img9/914/screenhunter56.jpghttp://img200.imageshack.us/img200/4286/screenhunter57.jpg

http://img27.imageshack.us/img27/7200/face5big.jpg

While particular facets of a face may look different in different photographs because of aging, angles, lighting, facial expressions etc - ONE thing will remain constant - spots/freckles. :)

They are not subject to the above variables anywhere near as much.

If the photo quality is good enough, you will see them!

While Faulcon and co. ramble on about their SUBJECTIVE opinion that the faces don't 'look' the same, the sensible observer will agree that the exact same freckles/spots appear on both Paul's and 'Faul's' face.

Yet Faulcon still insists Paul never had freckles:

Faul had freckles. Paul did not......
Faul - 5 freckles on his left cheek by his nose. Paul - none

How utterly deluded can you be? How can anybody take her claims seriously if she so blatently denies reality in this way?

And she has the audacity to write:

Hey, go ahead & believe whatever you want. Some of us prefer a little something called "reality." :D

Just freakin UNBELIEVABLE!

The freckles comps are OBJECTIVE, hard-line proof that they are the same man.

The freckles comparisons are yet another nail in the PID coffin!

http://gickr.com/results/anim_e9fc087d-03c8-5624-2d88-5b936877b94c.gif

Let Faulcon and co. carry on ignoring this crushing evidence against PID. Let them continue rambling on about the noses being different, the eyes being different.... etc. That's all been debunked too.

They don't want to accept reason and objectivety. They want to live in their fantasy land.

Faulcon and co. are so strongly brainwashed by PID that they will never admit they are wrong.

Simply - they are away with the fairies......

.... And they don't want to come back.

http://www.raysmart.com/boyds/fairies.gif

socrates

12-07-2009, 03:32 PM

Listen to yourself.

Everyone who thinks Paul is a clone or whatever...

How many expressions & variations there of, do you think are possible?

And then add that, the possible variations of angles & shades of light there are too.

I just see it as too far fetched to say he's dead or a clone etc.

Not to mention, Paul writes songs about love & such. I don't see how he serves as a manipulative pawn.

Well said. But the PIDers don't understand those explanations. They have been pointed out to them time and time and time again, yet they refuse to see sense.

socrates

12-07-2009, 05:17 PM

Did I mention the same chin marking too? :)

http://gickr.com/results/anim_51ff29cd-fd53-8fd4-d9ea-69997ea22918.gifhttp://img170.imageshack.us/img170/5508/get6.jpg

http://gickr.com/results/anim_fdf41ae2-f6bb-1854-e10e-c451ba4ab928.gifhttp://img440.imageshack.us/img440/5508/get6.jpg

http://img157.imageshack.us/img157/1402/scar2op.jpg

And now for a freckles and chin combo!

Drum roll please.....

http://www.globesl.com/MNY/drumroll.gif

http://img249.imageshack.us/img249/7597/screenhunter54.jpg

:)

faulconandsnowjob

12-07-2009, 06:57 PM

Some people just can't accept they've been duped by a double. :rolleyes:

Anyway, some background info on how to detect doubles:

... A German forensic pathologist studied hundreds of Hussein photos and videotapes, concentrating on his mustache and eyebrow measurements.

Then he used computer software to locate specific points such as the tip of his nose and the cheekbone creating a face print which was compared to the Hussein photographs.

His conclusion: that there are three Hussein impersonators, all with small, distinct differences.

CIA: Man On Tape Is Saddam
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/03/20/eveningnews/main544812.shtml

In 2003, German television network ZDF broadcast claimed that Iraq's former president Saddam Hussein was frequently replaced with doubles for TV appearances. This analysis was based on sophisticated measuring techniques, which detected discrepancies in the position of Hussein's facial features and blemishes from appearance to appearance. It was supported by the opinion of Jerrald Post, the man who created the CIA's Psychological Profile Unit.[22] ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_decoy

Is Kim Jong Il dead? Yes, North Korea’s “Dear Leader” is no more, having passed away in the fall of 2003, writes Waseda University professor Toshimitsu Shigemura in Shukan Gendai...

In the spring of 2006, says Shigemura, American spy satellites succeeded in photographing Kim. An analysis of the photographs led to an astonishing conclusion: Kim had grown 2.5 cm!...

N Korea's Kim died in 2003; replaced by lookalike, says Waseda professor
http://www.japantoday.com/category/kuchikomi/view/north-koreas-kim-died-in-2003-and-was-replaced-by-lookalike-says-waseda-profesor

faulconandsnowjob

12-07-2009, 07:23 PM

May 1966 vs. February 1967

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/Paperback03.jpghttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/Billy_Life_08.jpg

fireman

12-07-2009, 07:51 PM

Your comparisons are again really low quality!

Why don't you go to court with them. Really, you should go and talk to one of your lawyer friends about that! They will tell you that you just don't have a case there.

Paul always stayed the same:
http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/scan0fade_edit.gif

These two pics are taken nearly 10 years appart:
http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/new2.jpg?t=1247420780

Same guy!

Also see the freckles and scar posts by Socrates above! Same freakin' guy!

:cool:

socrates

12-07-2009, 08:15 PM

May 1966 vs. February 1967

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/Paperback03.jpghttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/Billy_Life_08.jpg

http://www.lifeshore.com/smiley/data/media/2/3D_emoticon_194.gif http://www.lifeshore.com/smiley/data/media/2/3D_emoticon_40.gif

dream9

12-07-2009, 09:10 PM

May 1966 vs. February 1967

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/Paperback03.jpghttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/Billy_Life_08.jpg

Great comp faulcon.

faulconandsnowjob

12-07-2009, 10:45 PM

Some PIA'ers are so stupid, they don't even realize they're using doctored photos of Faul in their comps:

http://img233.imageshack.us/img233/2438/pepperfym6.gif

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/Peppermiddle1.jpg

What Faul really looked like (on right):
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/james_paul_bill.jpg

socrates

12-07-2009, 11:21 PM

Some PIA'ers are so stupid, they don't even realize they're using doctored photos of Faul in their comps:

There is also a pic of Paul w/ Elvis.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/Elvis_JPM.jpg

http://www.government-mortgage-relief.com/lawyers/images/flashing_arrow_l.gif http://i31.tinypic.com/25fu9zk.jpghttp://img37.imageshack.us/img37/4286/screenhunter57.jpghttp://www.geocities.com/themole7/m-ani.gif

faulconandsnowjob

13-07-2009, 01:01 AM

Some PIA'ers claim that this comp has been debunked. They say the CD inlay picture is stretched.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v506/DarkHorse1/paul-faulfade1-1.gif

I suppose all the pictures of Faul have been stretched - even the videos.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/james_paul_bill.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/Bill_Sheppard_Mal_Evans_1966_05.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/FamilyWay.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/Dec66_09.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/Far07.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/SSFBill.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/Billy_Life_13.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/1967Early.jpg

Looks like the same long, thin face to me. Paul had a round face.

http://i366.photobucket.com/albums/oo110/faulconandsnowjob/memphis_66_paul.jpg

socrates

13-07-2009, 01:05 AM

Some PIA'ers are so stupid, they don't even realize they're using doctored photos of Faul in their comps:

What Faul really looked like (on right):
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/james_paul_bill.jpg

Whose the "stupid" one?

The photo you say shows how "Faul really looked" is the one that has been doctored! :D :D

It's from the CD cover. And yes - despite what you claim - you're wrong yet again. It has been stretched.

:rolleyes:

http://www.tlcgraphic.com/images/sgt_paul.gif http://www.tlcgraphic.com/images/Sgt_Paul_An.gif

The photo at left is from the original gatefold in the 1967 record album cover. If you don't believe the CD picture was stretched, watch it fade in over the pic from the original album gatefold at right.

See how the face grows longer and wider even though the eyes remain lined up perfectly throughout the fade. The artwork for the CD was poorly handled and is very disappointing to someone like me who works with graphic designs on a regular basis.
http://www.tlcgraphic.com/paul2.html

Here's the ORIGINAL album cover:

http://www.ispauldead.com/mediac/450_0/media/beatles-rare-sgt-a-lg.gif

Some PIDers are so, er,... http://www.tlcgraphic.com/images/StupidAn.gif :)

socrates

13-07-2009, 01:21 AM

Faulcon insists that Paul never had freckles.

Faul had freckles. Paul did not.

Guess these two are both 'Faul' then. :D

http://img9.imageshack.us/img9/4046/screenhunter58.jpghttp://img200.imageshack.us/img200/4286/screenhunter57.jpg

http://img39.imageshack.us/img39/5213/dropdeadgorgeus.jpg

socrates

13-07-2009, 02:23 AM

Looks like the same long, thin face to me. Paul had a round face.

http://i366.photobucket.com/albums/oo110/faulconandsnowjob/memphis_66_paul.jpg

Guess this must be Faul then:

http://img170.imageshack.us/img170/9292/z121.jpg

http://i366.photobucket.com/albums/oo110/faulconandsnowjob/memphis_66_paul.jpghttp://img170.imageshack.us/img170/9292/z121.jpg

Looks like the same long, thin face to me. Paul had a round face.

:rolleyes:

faulconandsnowjob

13-07-2009, 02:59 AM

dream9

13-07-2009, 04:30 AM

Yep, the truth is coming out alright. My guess is that within 20 years this will be public knowledge.

faulconandsnowjob

13-07-2009, 07:29 AM

20 yrs? :eek: I hope it doesn't take that long!

astrochicken

13-07-2009, 02:39 PM

Yep, the truth is coming out alright. My guess is that within 20 years this will be public knowledge.

It'd be nice to see it happen sooner.

1. Ridicule
2. Vehemently oppose
3. Self-evident

How anyone can seriously entertain the notion that the man that wrote
yesterday and eleanor rigby could stoop as low as "hope of deliverance"
or "spies like us". You don't go from being a song-writing genius with a knack
(and ear) for pretty melodies to churning out shite. whoops.. i meant SHITE.

faulconandsnowjob

13-07-2009, 06:35 PM

Paul's brilliance was evident from the beginning on "Please Please Me," imo. "I Feel Fine" was supposedly written in 1959. The man was a genius.

socrates

13-07-2009, 08:55 PM

You guys are not going to be able to prevent the truth from coming out about this.

We're not trying to prevent any truth from getting out. We just point out all the big gapping holes in your claims and the outright untruths you come out with.

And besides, there is no 'truth' to get out because Paul isn't dead.

socrates

13-07-2009, 09:00 PM

Yep, the truth is coming out alright. My guess is that within 20 years this will be public knowledge.

LOL!!!

The Paul is dead conspiracy came out 40 years ago! It's been public knowledge for that long.

And what credible evidence has ever been produced to support PID during that time? Nothing.

That's why 99.9% of the population think it's a crock of poop.

So what's going to change that? A few obsessive PIDers posting photos of Paul Mccartney on internet forums?

I don't think so. Keep dreaming....

supertzar

13-07-2009, 09:08 PM

It'd be nice to see it happen sooner.

1. Ridicule
2. Vehemently oppose
3. Self-evident

How anyone can seriously entertain the notion that the man that wrote
yesterday and eleanor rigby could stoop as low as "hope of deliverance"
or "spies like us". You don't go from being a song-writing genius with a knack
(and ear) for pretty melodies to churning out shite. whoops.. i meant SHITE.

I went from:

1. Completely open to the possibility
2. Closer examination
3. 99.9999...% sure McCartney is alive

So a totally different trajectory than the phases of truth. Maybe cuz...it's not true?

There aren't many musicians who churn out consistent work throughout their career. Look at Aerosmith. They were awesome in the 70's with songs like Dream On and Sweet Emotion. Then the 80's came around and it was pure suckitude with "Love in an Elevator" and songs like that.

Chris Cornell of Soundgarden was the shit back in the day. Have you ever heard early Soundgarden like Screaming Life? Now he is just tooling around trying to get something, anything going. God knows Audioslave was going nowhere. Why? Because they sucked. Why did they suck? Probably because Chris Cornell shot his wad with Soundgarden and had nothing left. It happens all the time.

socrates

13-07-2009, 09:24 PM

http://img269.imageshack.us/img269/8062/screenhunter61.jpghttp://img149.imageshack.us/img149/8458/screenhunter64.jpg

http://img9.imageshack.us/img9/4046/screenhunter58.jpghttp://img196.imageshack.us/img196/6771/screenhunter65.jpg

http://img208.imageshack.us/img208/4461/dropdeadgorgeush.jpg http://img149.imageshack.us/img149/4958/screenhunter62.jpg

I agree w/ US federal law, which states that photos can be used to identify people b/c they capture "immutable characteristics" and "identifying particulars."

Then the Federal law would accept those photos, above, as evidence it's the same man. :)

"Case closed. Paul McCartney is alive and well. Court dismissed!"

:D :D :D

faulconandsnowjob

13-07-2009, 09:35 PM

This is an interesting story:

From jokester to jailbird
http://www.thestar.com/News/article/213298

Former Saturday Night Live star Tony Rosato has languished behind bars for two years with no trial
May 13, 2007
Dale Anne Freed

He started out as a gifted improv comic at Toronto's Second City. From there, Tony Rosato took his zany writing and performing style to the small screen, winning fame on SCTV and later on Saturday Night Live...

According to his Toronto lawyer, Daniel Brodsky, Rosato was arrested after repeatedly complaining to police that, in a scenario reminiscent of the film Invasion of the Body Snatchers, the actor's wife and their infant daughter had gone missing, having been replaced by imposters...

Rosato steadfastly maintains that he is sane, and innocent. "I'm not pleading guilty – I'm fighting injustice" has been his mantra in phone calls with show business friends...

rodsky explains that the Crown's expert prison psychiatrist, Dr. Duncan Scott, has told him and the Crown "that Tony Rosato is certifiable." Scott's diagnosis, says Brodsky, is a mental illness called Capgras syndrome.

Named for its discoverer, French psychiatrist Jean Marie Joseph Capgras, the syndrome is characterized by the delusion that a person or people have been replaced by doubles or impostors...

But if the Crown sees Rosato as mentally ill, then why has he been languishing in jail for two years instead of being moved to a hospital? ...

Rosato's legal woes began after his wife left him on Jan. 17, 2005, fleeing their Broadview Ave. apartment with their daughter, who was born the previous September, and eventually returning to her hometown of Kingston.

"She left him a note," says Tony's devoted mother, 77-year-old Maria Rosato. "Tony phoned me crying and sobbing. He thought maybe she'd been kidnapped." ...

A letter Rosato wrote from jail on June 5, 2005, a month after his arrest, gives his version of what happened after the departure of Leah and the baby. It documents what he perceived as evidence that he was the victim of a "fraudulent hoax" – that his wife and daughter had been replaced by doubles.

The CD wedding photos Leah left behind, Rosato wrote, proved the woman in the pictures was not his real wife but a "twin." His real wife had obviously been replaced by a duplicate who was "dressed identically" to his wife.

Rosato wrote that he went to Toronto and then Kingston police to tell them that his wife had been switched with an imposter...

In the letter from his cell, Rosato wrote, "Please, I beg of you, look into this before I become like Jessica Lange, in Frances," referring to the film made about actress Frances Farmer, who was placed in a psychiatric institution...

Rosato's letter indicated that he visited Kingston police again after supervised visits with his baby in March and April 2005. The first visit led him to complain in the letter that his daughter was "clearly suffering from emotional and physical abuse," while during the second, he protested, he was presented with the wrong baby. As evidence, he brought police a photo of a "wife look alike" and of the baby from the second visit...

The wife "left him." He thought she'd been kidnapped. Maybe she was. How long were they married? I'm assuming long enough to be able to recognize her.

Only people who don't know about doubles prattle on about "Capgras Syndrome." I find it offensive to suggest that someone wouldn't know his own wife & child.

Why is the concept that people are replaced so difficult for some people to grasp? TPTB really have it figured out, tho. If it happens to you & you say anything, you'll get stuck in a psych ward where they get total control over your mind. No doubt they will drug & electro-shock that poor man into submission.

"The Changeling" sounds pretty similar to what Rosato is saying...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QuO_jns7IsY

Frances wouldn't conform... so they destroyed her.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TcaT7L9Xj04

fireman

13-07-2009, 09:53 PM

Here is another interesting find from the WWW:

REVIEW OF PAUL IS DEAD EVIDENCE:

http://rgarypatterson.com/my_review_of_the_new__paul_is_dead__evidence_23917 .htm

I am not a forensic expert and I didn't shell out $145.00 for a copy of "The Forensic Analysis of the Skull." As a matter of fact, I didn't spend the night before the show at a Holiday Inn Express either. However, knowing my limitations, I searched for an expert opinion in the field. In this case someone who had undergone the proper training and was employed in the proper field. Luckily, I had a contact who arranged a conversation with a member of the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation who had trained in forensics at the world famous "Body Farm" in Knoxville, Tennessee. This contact was very helpful and arranged a number of contact numbers of forensic experts throughout three states. I asked for an opinion that I could post on this site that would include internet site sources for readers to make their own explorations. The text is as follows:

"The resolution of the pictures is not comparison quality- different angles
are not a scientific way to examine photographs especially to back up an
argument. Different angles are there to give an overall view only but not
for comparison. It has to theoretically be an exact of the one you are comparing it against.

*Changes in muscle movements in various photographs cannot be seen with the
naked eye but can change measurements if you are comparing only photographs.
That is why unless you can see beneath the skin to the actual muscle-then
you cannot say precisely what a facial measurement is especially using two photographs that are that dissimilar in expression for comparison.

*Facial identification and reconstruction is a very complicated process
which requires measurements using actual human skeletal remains not
photographs. Even anthropologists have difficulty sometimes reconstructing
the depth of tissue around the eyes and nose to fully determine the person's
weight. This website has attempted to take photographs and apply scientific
principles in forensics that are just not applied that way.

:cool:

faulconandsnowjob

13-07-2009, 09:55 PM

I can see right through your plastic Mac :D

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/p8869993.jpg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNEsRQwhQ-Q

faulconandsnowjob

15-07-2009, 12:15 AM

"Paul Is Dead" (2000): German movie by Hendrik Handloegten
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0232293/

My summary:

Tobias sees the white VW Beetle, license plate LMW 28IF, of Abbey Road driving in the city. A British guy is driving it. He goes into a store and drops a cigarette package w/ a number on it in the trash. Tobias picks it up & follows the car around.

Tobias listens to a Beatles special on the radio hosted by Allen Banks. The quiz question is: “What does John say at the end of Strawberry Fields?” Tobias goes to a music store b/c the owner (Roger) speaks English. Roger tells him about PID, but that he isn’t allowed to tell anyone. He seems to be worried about the driver of the Beetle finding out.

Tobias tells his friend, Helmut. Tobias thinks what happened is that on Nov. 6, 1966, Paul left the studio after fighting w/ the others. He got into his Aston Martin & drove off. At Abbey Road & Wellington, he got into an accident w/ this white Beetle. Paul was crushed & beheaded. Nothing happened to the guy in the Beetle. Brian Epstein kept it a secret & replaced him w/ a double.

Tobias shows his friend the height differences, the OPD (OPP) patch, the P?/violin bass on Sgt Pepper, the grave, the hands over Paul’s head, John’s sign of the beast on Yellow Submarine, the black flower on “Your Mother Should Know,” the Abbey Rd funeral procession, Faul being barefoot (b/c the Mafia does that), Faul smoking w/ his right hand, and 28IF licence plate - Paul would’ve been 28 if he had lived. They also notice the guy on Abbey Rd by the police van.

They call the number on the cigarette pack, which is answered by the caretaker of their school. They stake him out, but that seems to go nowhere - it’s a false lead.

Tobias gets the idea to listen to records backwards - they don’t really go into that.

Tobias tells his brother that Billy Shears is the double. Billy was a young musician from Liverpool who played w/ the Beatles at the Kaiserkeller in Hamburg on 6 Oct. 1960. He had a big nose, & got made fun of for it. On 17 Nov. 1960, he’d had enough, & set fire to the room that Paul & Pete Best were staying in. The cinema burned down. Paul & Pete were arrested, & all the Beatles were deported back to Liverpool. After Paul died, Brian Epstein remembered Billy, and paid to get him a new nose.

The radio announcer on the Beatles special talks about the Russ Gibbs 1969 radio show that started the rumor that Paul was dead. Then says the story is stupid b/c Paul would’ve been 27, not 28 when Abbey Road came out, and b/c John said “cranberry sauce,” not “I buried Paul.”

Tobias’ brother is at a bar & tells Roger about his brother & the PID story. Roger takes off right away. Tobias goes to Roger’s flat looking for him. He crawls in a window. The white Beetle drives up w/ Roger & the mysterious Brit driver. Tobias hides in a closet. They come in, & the Brit starts shooting gun in the flat at random things. Tobias freaks & runs out. The two chase him. Togias gets to his house before they catch up to him, & they drive off.

Tobias is at school, when they are introduced to their new English teacher - Mr. Billy Reash (“Shear” backward). He just happens to be the mysterious Brit Beetle driver - & he’s from Liverpool. He goes right up to Tobias & asks him his name. When Tobias doesn’t answer, he says, “I think I will call you ‘Paul.’” Tobias freaks, but nothing ends up happening to him.

At the end, his brother wakes him up to tell him John has been killed. Tobias says, “Billy!”

socrates

15-07-2009, 12:17 AM

Will the PIDers please shut the door on their way out of this thread.....

http://img34.imageshack.us/img34/8030/screenhunter72.jpghttp://img339.imageshack.us/img339/8885/screenhunter73.jpg

http://img34.imageshack.us/img34/8030/screenhunter72.jpghttp://img339.imageshack.us/img339/1583/screenhunter70.jpg

http://img34.imageshack.us/img34/8030/screenhunter72.jpghttp://img119.imageshack.us/img119/7976/screenhunter71.jpg

Bye, bye!

http://www.lifeshore.com/smiley/data/media/2/3D_emoticon_216.gif http://www.lifeshore.com/smiley/data/media/2/3D_emoticon_216.gif http://www.lifeshore.com/smiley/data/media/2/3D_emoticon_216.gif

faulconandsnowjob

15-07-2009, 12:45 AM

Interesting scene from "The Magic Christian":

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=guRrEamqZ_M
www.youtube.com/watch?v=guRrEamqZ_M

This scene is reminiscent of the train scene in AHDN. The guy w/ the bowler gets switched out w/ a lookalike a couple of times. Paul wore a bowler hat in AHDN.

socrates

15-07-2009, 12:59 AM

Interesting scene from "The Magic Christian":

www.youtube.com/watch?v=guRrEamqZ_M

This scene is reminiscent of the train scene in AHDN. The guy w/ the bowler gets switched out w/ a lookalike a couple of times. Paul wore a bowler hat in AHDN.

http://www.dontgo.co.uk/openyoureyes/open-your-eyes.gif

http://img34.imageshack.us/img34/8030/screenhunter72.jpghttp://img339.imageshack.us/img339/8885/screenhunter73.jpg

http://img34.imageshack.us/img34/8030/screenhunter72.jpghttp://img339.imageshack.us/img339/1583/screenhunter70.jpg

http://img34.imageshack.us/img34/8030/screenhunter72.jpghttp://img119.imageshack.us/img119/7976/screenhunter71.jpg

http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/6497/screenhunter38.jpg http://img146.imageshack.us/img146/9188/screenhunter41.jpg

http://www.northernsun.com/images/thumb/education%20(7163).jpg

ar20

15-07-2009, 01:40 AM

*slaps head*

FRECKLES NOW, REALLY?

Oh christ, wait till you get those lamp-posts back out.

Two minutes, finding pics to compare.

ar20

15-07-2009, 01:46 AM

ar20

15-07-2009, 01:47 AM

I've had a look over the collection of Faul/Paul photographs I have, zoomed in, and looked at the freckle pattern.

Doesn't matter what I say here though, right? And this isn't my opinion.

You actually just posted... non-identical patterns... come on, be reasonable here, they aren't even in the same alignment on the face!

http://img199.imageshack.us/img199/9939/001crl.jpg

Zoom into this crispy clear shot of Faul and tell me where those freckles are... and don't tell me they disappeared with tan or age.

Ladies and gentlemen, if you have to resort to counting a guys freckles, you've officially lost the plot.

Can't we talk about something like... oh I don't know, the shoe size difference? This is far from smoking gun material.

QUOTED FOR CLEARLY DIFFERENT EYES... that's something that's been discussed ad nauseum, but it's a magnificant point... how come I have a good few colour photographs of Paul with those hazel/brown eyes and Faul with those greeny eyes?

Lighting, shadows... lamp-posts? Who knows. I certainly know hazel eyed folk don't bloody change their eye-colour over night, please stop being so condescending.

ar20

15-07-2009, 01:56 AM

http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc205/thebeatlesfour/paul/youngpaul1.jpg

First let me say, where is this distinguishable mark on his neck... too blurry, bad lighting? Usual selective response? Please.

This is a monster comp, for your pleasure.

http://img193.imageshack.us/img193/712/monstereuv.jpg

http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc205/thebeatlesfour/paul/glasses.jpg
SHOULDA GONE TO SPECSAVERS :eek:

ar20

15-07-2009, 02:20 AM

Finally let me address this.

http://img146.imageshack.us/img146/9188/screenhunter41.jpg

Like I've been saying the entire topic but no one listens.

If it's the same guy. Then you shouldn't need to tilt, manipulate, or have them in the same conditions to know it's the same guy in the photo.

With this, here, you're assuming that from direct on, those are the same freckles.

Shouldn't the circles you've highlighted round these then, match somewhat on both pictures? They don't even correspond right, and I am aware the two shots aren't straight on here, but there isn't even any similarity at all.

So you've taken two pictures and drawn circles round some spot/freckles on his face and they don't even match up when viewed from direct on.... how is this a case closed picture?

Here's a smoking gun you all should really be aware of:

Paul McCartney, was a nail biter.

You're lucky to find even a few cases of FAUL doing this, and if anyone knows anything about nail biting.... you know you need therapy to get rid of this habit, right? There are adults who even thumb-suck, and there are photos of Paul doing that a few times.

http://img196.imageshack.us/img196/6048/nailbiting.jpg

And here are two instances in interviews where he does it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNYVxqJ83W8

[1:05 onwards]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yukTejx9Kc&feature=related

[3:55 onwards]

He has a tick where he either puts his hands on his face, then gets his pinky and starts biting on it. There are a few more cases on this, but you'll have to look at pre-66 youtube videos.

Faul in the famous LSD interview:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9aqGtxoXPLE&feature=fvw

You'd think being questioned about a hard-drug would trigger that nervous tick, right?

Address this, then we can start talking about god damned freckles.

faulconandsnowjob

15-07-2009, 02:29 AM

Oh, yeah, Ar20, you pretty much just destroyed Socrates. Ouch. lol :p

Socrates, this one is for you:

http://i366.photobucket.com/albums/oo110/faulconandsnowjob/paul_faul_ringo.jpg
http://i366.photobucket.com/albums/oo110/faulconandsnowjob/Paul_faul_height.jpg

http://www.dontgo.co.uk/openyoureyes/open-your-eyes.gif

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLO LOLOL!

:p:D

ar20

15-07-2009, 02:33 AM

http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/8885/screenhunter73.jpg

He actually posted a picture with that very tick... oh by the way, don't even turn round to me and tell me FAULS fingers on the chin is the same thing.

faulconandsnowjob

15-07-2009, 02:58 AM

http://img199.imageshack.us/img199/9939/001crl.jpg

So, why don't the PIAers post some pics of Paul w/ GREEN eyes? What? Can't find any? LOL! :p

fireman

15-07-2009, 08:11 AM

So, why don't the PIAers post some pics of Paul w/ GREEN eyes? What? Can't find any? LOL! :p

As long as you think "only Faul had those freckles" it's "the ultimate smoking gun" of PID evidence..

Once it's prooven pre and post 1966 Paul had them, it suddenly doesn't count as evidence anymore! :D lol

About the pics/eyecoulur (or your last straw).. ever thought about this:

90 % of the pre 1967 pics are black and white, the other 10 % are re-coloured... sooo...:rolleyes:

ar20

15-07-2009, 11:42 AM

As long as you think "only Faul had those freckles" it's "the ultimate smoking gun" of PID evidence..

Once it's prooven pre and post 1966 Paul had them, it suddenly doesn't count as evidence anymore! :D lol

About the pics/eyecoulur (or your last straw).. ever thought about this:

90 % of the pre 1967 pics are black and white, the other 10 % are re-coloured... sooo...:rolleyes:

Oh.. really? Coloured Paul Eyes... mostly brown.

http://www.dmbeatles.com/pictures/0413.jpg
http://www.dmbeatles.com/pictures/0426.jpg
http://s217.photobucket.com/albums/cc205/thebeatlesfour/paul/pyramus2.jpg
http://s217.photobucket.com/albums/cc205/thebeatlesfour/paul/moptop-1.jpg
http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc205/thebeatlesfour/paul/smile1.jpg
http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc205/thebeatlesfour/paul/paulskis.jpg

Even in the light, they aren't that "greeny blue":
http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc205/thebeatlesfour/paul/hands.jpg
http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc205/thebeatlesfour/paul/paulsface64.jpg

ar20

15-07-2009, 11:44 AM

http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc205/thebeatlesfour/paul/sittingonbed.jpg

http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc205/thebeatlesfour/paul/boynextdoor.jpg
http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc205/thebeatlesfour/paul/bitenails1.jpg

An example used by PIA'ers... though it isn't as green as they make out:

http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc205/thebeatlesfour/paul/peeking.jpg

I see your green, and I raise you a brown:

http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc205/thebeatlesfour/paul/Paulie-1.jpg

And again...

http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc205/thebeatlesfour/paul/greetings.jpg

http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc205/thebeatlesfour/paul/face2.jpg

http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc205/thebeatlesfour/paul/itscold.gif

http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc205/thebeatlesfour/paul/gorgeous.jpg

Clear as day for some?

http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc205/thebeatlesfour/paul/65premer.jpg

ar20

15-07-2009, 11:44 AM

http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc205/thebeatlesfour/paul/pauliesmile.jpg

http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc205/thebeatlesfour/paul/scotchcoke1964.jpg

http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc205/thebeatlesfour/paul/wwaw.jpg

http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc205/thebeatlesfour/paul/pauliee.jpg

http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc205/thebeatlesfour/paul/milk.jpg

Can keep going all night...

http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc205/thebeatlesfour/paul/howlovely.jpg

http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc205/thebeatlesfour/paul/foliage.jpg

Examples of a tampering:

http://s217.photobucket.com/albums/cc205/thebeatlesfour/paul/blue.jpg

Pauls eyes were edited in the DVD release of HELP from brown to blue, search for this if you don't believe me.

Finally... we have FAUL:

http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc205/thebeatlesfour/paul/mccartney.jpg

Those are not the same eyes, quit kidding yourselves.

Thanks for playing. Go back a page and look at my nail biting posts, then you can bring up the freckles. :rolleyes:

fireman

15-07-2009, 12:44 PM

Nail biting? Are you kidding me? :D:D

Some more important facts:

1. Paul did NOT grew taller: we have found many pictures of before and after 1966 where he sometimes appears to tower over the others. Plus there are full body shots, that clearly show they are the same height.

2. Pauls ears do NOT look different. I have shown PIDers many pics of before 1967 where Pauls earlobe looks totally different on every shot. It all depends on the lightning source. There are enough photos after 1966 where his ear looks EXACTLY like before 1966. PIDer ignore that fact. http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1088939&postcount=1467

3. Pauls face didn’t change. PIDers tend to use particular photos where he makes a strange face or which are of low quality (of blurry VCR still, copied from youtube). If you find pictures of the same angle, where he’s using the same facial muscle (also called facial expression) he ALWAYS looks EXACTLY the same. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1IdsFPN_aZ0

Or for instance:
http://maccafunhouse.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=essentials&action=display&thread=3189
http://maccafunhouse.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=essentials&action=display&thread=3657

4. PIDers ignore the fact that you can use pre1967 photos, to make comparisons in which he looks by their standards nothing like himself. I have shown them many picture of their beloved JPM, in which he looks really different, but they ignore the fact that that still can happen after 1966.

5. No his forehead DID NOT suddenly grow.. it’s called a haircut. It comes with a more visible forehead.

6. Paul had an asymmetrical face. You can very well see that fact, when you mirror a picture. Guess what: “Faul” has the exact same facial asymmetry. Proof: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7bOpN35mfs4

7. There is to date no plastic surgery that can produce a similarity like that!

8. The replacement does not only look an awfull lot like Paul, he is also playing guitar and bass lefthanded, is a skillfull musician and a voice imitator.. mmh….

9. Paul had very subtle markings on his face, which can only be seen in a few photos: a small scar on his chin, 3-5 freckles on the left side of his nose, 3 freckles on his neck. Guess what: “Faul” also has these markings! :-) TO be seen here: http://maccafunhouse.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=essentials&action=display&thread=3789
Here: http://maccafunhouse.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=essentials&action=display&thread=3796
And here: http://maccafunhouse.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=essentials&action=display&thread=3796

10. Paul produced the album of his brother Mike Mccartney in the 1970s. Would you let the guy who replaced your dead brother produce your album and let him sing background vocals? ..mmh…

11. Listen to the hours and hours of bootleg material of the let it be / get back sessions. The guy who’s jamming, joking and fooling around with the other guys is Beatle Paul. Check it out for your self:
http://letitbedissected.blogspot.com/ In 100 hours of footage there is no instance where he’s treated (or named) any differently.

12. The theories of doctoring, illuminati or whatever are purely fictional IMHO. I have never seen a bit of proof for them.

13. Use some common sense… it’s a internet hoax! Proof:

http://maccafunhouse.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=gossip&action=display&thread=3463
http://allthetruth.galeon.com/index.html
http://pid90066.tripod.com/

(original members of the 60if side coming clean)

Now I hope some might find these informations usefull! See ya!

:)

humito

15-07-2009, 01:39 PM

Oh, btw, the Sgt Pepper album cover was a funeral scene for Paul

http://www.ispauldead.com/mediac/450_0/media/beatles-rare-sgt-a-lg.gif

You guys are not going to be able to prevent the truth from coming out about this. But I can see that you have to try.

http://beatlefans.com/film/sgt%20pepper/002%20sgt%20pepper%20beatles%201967.bmp

http://beatlefans.com/film/sgt%20pepper/005%20beatles%20sgt%20pepper%201967.bmp

http://beatlefans.com/film/sgt%20pepper/003%20sgt%20pepper%20beatles%201967.bmp

Its all open to interpretation...........these alternate takes from the photo sessions would not seem to indicate the death of paul as most of the componants of what eneded up as the releasd pics are not there ( the open palm and most importantly of all the bass drum would not be pointing at paul.................perhaps with these other pics they were still deciding who it was who was going to be killed????????? LOL:D..........you can read anything into images and lyrics...........that was the point of a lot of their artwork and obscure songs and lyrics........

ar20

15-07-2009, 02:07 PM

Nail biting? Are you kidding me? :D:D

Freckles, really? Nail-biting is a nervous condition and it's hard to get rid of with therapy.

I just showed you about 12 pics of Paul doing it, with 2 interviews, and you have shown me none of Faul doing it.

If you know people with nail-biting/thumb sucking habits, you know it's a hard thing to get rid of.

Thanks again for overlooking this fact and the countless pictures of Paul with brown eyes that I just posted. We salute you.

Some more important facts:

1. Paul did NOT grew taller: we have found many pictures of before and after 1966 where he sometimes appears to tower over the others. Plus there are full body shots, that clearly show they are the same height.

http://i366.photobucket.com/albums/oo110/faulconandsnowjob/Paul_faul_height.jpg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AsLaPmvvQLA&feature=related

Have a look at this interview, they're all roughly the same height with Paul being a little taller than Ringo.

http://www.liverpool-360.co.uk/photos/beatles-museum-liverpool.jpg

Here's a Ringo/Faul comparison from todays standards:

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2008/SHOWBIZ/Music/11/16/beatles.mccartney.lost.track/art.beatles.gi.jpg

http://media.photobucket.com/image/the%20beatles%20height/Darryl71/Random%20Stuff/1969_2.jpg

2. Pauls ears do NOT look different. I have shown PIDers many pics of before 1967 where Pauls earlobe looks totally different on every shot. It all depends on the lightning source. There are enough photos after 1966 where his ear looks EXACTLY like before 1966. PIDer ignore that fact. http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1088939&postcount=1467

I don't go for the ear thing so I can't comment. But we've all seen the pic were he looks like he has attached ears, and no, it isn't a bit of sideburn.

3. Pauls face didn’t change. PIDers tend to use particular photos where he makes a strange face or which are of low quality (of blurry VCR still, copied from youtube). If you find pictures of the same angle, where he’s using the same facial muscle (also called facial expression) he ALWAYS looks EXACTLY the same. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1IdsFPN_aZ0

Or for instance:
http://maccafunhouse.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=essentials&action=display&thread=3189
http://maccafunhouse.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=essentials&action=display&thread=3657

Hate to break it to you, those videos -- if anything, and with the viewer having two braincells can see the differences in those pics.

You can scream bloody blurry, lighting or whatever. Fact is, the guys face isn't the same, ok? Quit saying it is because it's incredibly insulting to anyone looking at it.

http://img216.imageshack.us/img216/196/ultimap.jpg

Go back in the topic and look ad nauseum at the comparisons, THERE is a difference. By ignoring the fact that even if they weren't replaced, there is still a difference on Paul between 1966-1967. If you deny this you clearly are just hiding something here, because even the most jaded would admit.

And no, haircuts and mustaches don't make you change so dramatically that you look like practically a different person.

4. PIDers ignore the fact that you can use pre1967 photos, to make comparisons in which he looks by their standards nothing like himself. I have shown them many picture of their beloved JPM, in which he looks really different, but they ignore the fact that that still can happen after 1966.

What photos are you talking about? Every photo pre-66 JPM looks like JPM, then afterwards, doesn't look like JPM... looks like FM.

5. No his forehead DID NOT suddenly grow.. it’s called a haircut. It comes with a more visible forehead.

Yes his forehead did suddenly grow, sorry.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_sb_ibiZ5f8o/Ry5F-0kyx8I/AAAAAAAAADo/i9zAK7H3qYw/s200/Get+Back.jpg

http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc205/thebeatlesfour/paul/aww.jpg

Maybe acid makes the brain grow?

6. Paul had an asymmetrical face. You can very well see that fact, when you mirror a picture. Guess what: “Faul” has the exact same facial asymmetry. Proof: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7bOpN35mfs4

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

Go back in this topic and please LOOK with those peepers. I posted half/half comparisons of all the Beatles faces, and FAUL doesn't even fit into PAUL properly.

Not to mention I took Socrates John Lennon time line and half/halfed them, they're the same guy. Go back and see this point because it was indisputable.

7. There is to date no plastic surgery that can produce a similarity like that!

http://www.tv.com/i-want-a-famous-face/show/26181/summary.html

Have a look at that little passport photo on the White Album, you know, the "lookalike" one with the specs.

Perhaps they didn't need to modify the guy too much. It's not like they built a Frankenstein here.

8. The replacement does not only look an awfull lot like Paul, he is also playing guitar and bass lefthanded, is a skillfull musician and a voice imitator.. mmh….

Well here's we differ. I've noticed the differences and I can safely say they don't look that much alike. The only thing clouding your judgement is the haircuts, mustaches and beards.

Faul has been caught playing the guitar right handed in a few shots.

And we'll disagree here. But they sound nothing alike.

In interviews, they don't even act the same or have the same body language.

And for song comparisons the voice in Eleanor Rigby, yesterday and I'm looking through you, sounds nothing like Let it Be, Hey Jude or When I'm 64.

9. Paul had very subtle markings on his face, which can only be seen in a few photos: a small scar on his chin, 3-5 freckles on the left side of his nose, 3 freckles on his neck. Guess what: “Faul” also has these markings! :-) TO be seen here: http://maccafunhouse.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=essentials&action=display&thread=3789
Here: http://maccafunhouse.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=essentials&action=display&thread=3796
And here: http://maccafunhouse.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=essentials&action=display&thread=3796

Yeah, only seen in a few photos, what are the changes in that? Socrates comparison, like those videos, are laughable at best. Even from direct on they weren't in alignment and wouldn't match up. Regardless, people have those freckles anyway. I have a small amount on the other side of my face, but I'm not covered in it.

Anyway that's a completely daft point. Why don't we talk about the sudden cure 66 onwards of Paul's nail biting? Don't knock this one, this is a legitimate point:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nail_biting

10. Paul produced the album of his brother Mike Mccartney in the 1970s. Would you let the guy who replaced your dead brother produce your album and let him sing background vocals? ..mmh…

Well if they let an imposter into the Beatles and let him pose with his Dad and take over the guys life, this wouldn't be much of a stretch, would it?
Hey Jude was written for Johns son.

Perhaps the story did go, Paul died in a car crash and was replaced with the best intentions. I mean, they acted buddy-buddy till the end of the Beatles, and Ringo still hangs about with the guy.

No ones dissing Fauls accomplishments, but I wish they'd just come out and say they were different guys. It's an amazing work they've performed here.

11. Listen to the hours and hours of bootleg material of the let it be / get back sessions. The guy who’s jamming, joking and fooling around with the other guys is Beatle Paul. Check it out for your self:
http://letitbedissected.blogspot.com/ In 100 hours of footage there is no instance where he’s treated (or named) any differently.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cefEXago5k8

Sure it's only a few seconds, but it's suspicious.

There's also one where he says "The voice is ready lads, lets do it".

But that I would agree would be too ambiguous.

12. The theories of doctoring, illuminati or whatever are purely fictional IMHO. I have never seen a bit of proof for them.

See the previous post. They made Paul's eyes blue in the DVD re-release of HELP.

Why? What the hells the point in colourising his eyes exactly? There's also numerous photos of his youth that have been altered.

13. Use some common sense… it’s a internet hoax! Proof:

http://maccafunhouse.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=gossip&action=display&thread=3463
http://allthetruth.galeon.com/index.html
http://pid90066.tripod.com/

(original members of the 60if side coming clean)

It wasn't a hoax back then, people really believed it. Then they released the LIFE cover saying Paul is still alive. The internet wasn't around back then, you couldn't really discuss stuff like this constantly, and people have been busy.

Remember JFK? Yeah we all know he was killed by the government, but how long has that taken to get everybody to admit?

We're still trying to wake the public up to 9/11 for gods sake. And huge portions of America believe there's a guy in the sky watching over us.

*slaps head*

Only conscious objectors will scrutinise the truth out of something. You have to really look at it with the belief system to one side.

Yes, replacing a star is entirely possible.

Michael Jacksons the only black guy on the planet to turn COMPLETELY white from that disease... then turn from a fly black guy into a white accused pedophile child lover over night.

Anything on this planet is possible.

David Icke comes out and says shapeshifting DNA changing reptiles are in positions of power all over but replacing a Beatle and never touring again isn't?

Please.

Now I hope some might find these informations usefull! See ya!

:)

What useful information? ;)

ar20

15-07-2009, 02:13 PM

http://beatlefans.com/film/sgt%20pepper/002%20sgt%20pepper%20beatles%201967.bmp

http://beatlefans.com/film/sgt%20pepper/005%20beatles%20sgt%20pepper%201967.bmp

http://beatlefans.com/film/sgt%20pepper/003%20sgt%20pepper%20beatles%201967.bmp

Its all open to interpretation...........these alternate takes from the photo sessions would not seem to indicate the death of paul as most of the componants of what eneded up as the releasd pics are not there ( the open palm and most importantly of all the bass drum would not be pointing at paul.................perhaps with these other pics they were still deciding who it was who was going to be killed????????? LOL:D..........you can read anything into images and lyrics...........that was the point of a lot of their artwork and obscure songs and lyrics........

...we have the funeral flowers saying Beatles... we have all the people behind the Beatles as dead celebrities, we have the old version of the Beatles looking down and mourning.

And for a grave we have SGT PEPPERS DRUM, which when mirrored says

9/11 HE ^ DIE

http://img267.imageshack.us/img267/4170/sgtpeppersdrum.jpg

Why is it there are some variations of that drum where its "HE BIE"?

The new covers after 2007 are definitely HE BIE, but if you get the original and mirror it it's "HE DIE"

and it ties in with 9/11 and the arrow pointing right up to Paul.

Also note, the PAUL in the BEATLES on the lefts face looks nothing like the FAUL in the middle.

The cover to me suggests they were reborn as SGT PEPPERS LONELY HEARTS CLUB BAND.

Also there's a statue of SHIVA the DESTROYER in there.

Yes, the cover definitely is about death.

And right at the back is ALIESTER CROWLEY.

But no, there aren't any backwards messages or satanic slogans are there? They just had a Jimmy Page like curiousity with the
guy all of a sudden, right?

The start of I am the Walrus isn't quoted from a Crowley book either, right?

This is all just coincidence after 66?

fireman

15-07-2009, 03:14 PM

There is nothing more to say. Without insulting you, you're behaviour seems as if you are delusional, sorry. This post wasn't directed at you anyway. You and Faulcon are hopeless and lost in your paranoid conspiracy world.

This is for people who want to know the truth and people who don't fall for every BS that they read on the internet:

Nail biting? Are you kidding me? :D:D

Some more important facts:

1. Paul did NOT grew taller: we have found many pictures of before and after 1966 where he sometimes appears to tower over the others. Plus there are full body shots, that clearly show they are the same height.

2. Pauls ears do NOT look different. I have shown PIDers many pics of before 1967 where Pauls earlobe looks totally different on every shot. It all depends on the lightning source. There are enough photos after 1966 where his ear looks EXACTLY like before 1966. PIDer ignore that fact. http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1088939&postcount=1467

3. Pauls face didn’t change. PIDers tend to use particular photos where he makes a strange face or which are of low quality (of blurry VCR still, copied from youtube). If you find pictures of the same angle, where he’s using the same facial muscle (also called facial expression) he ALWAYS looks EXACTLY the same. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1IdsFPN_aZ0

Or for instance:
http://maccafunhouse.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=essentials&action=display&thread=3189
http://maccafunhouse.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=essentials&action=display&thread=3657

4. PIDers ignore the fact that you can use pre1967 photos, to make comparisons in which he looks by their standards nothing like himself. I have shown them many picture of their beloved JPM, in which he looks really different, but they ignore the fact that that still can happen after 1966.

5. No his forehead DID NOT suddenly grow.. it’s called a haircut. It comes with a more visible forehead.

6. Paul had an asymmetrical face. You can very well see that fact, when you mirror a picture. Guess what: “Faul” has the exact same facial asymmetry. Proof: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7bOpN35mfs4

7. There is to date no plastic surgery that can produce a similarity like that!

8. The replacement does not only look an awfull lot like Paul, he is also playing guitar and bass lefthanded, is a skillfull musician and a voice imitator.. mmh….

9. Paul had very subtle markings on his face, which can only be seen in a few photos: a small scar on his chin, 3-5 freckles on the left side of his nose, 3 freckles on his neck. Guess what: “Faul” also has these markings! :-) TO be seen here: http://maccafunhouse.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=essentials&action=display&thread=3789
Here: http://maccafunhouse.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=essentials&action=display&thread=3796
And here: http://maccafunhouse.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=essentials&action=display&thread=3796

10. Paul produced the album of his brother Mike Mccartney in the 1970s. Would you let the guy who replaced your dead brother produce your album and let him sing background vocals? ..mmh…

11. Listen to the hours and hours of bootleg material of the let it be / get back sessions. The guy who’s jamming, joking and fooling around with the other guys is Beatle Paul. Check it out for your self:
http://letitbedissected.blogspot.com/ In 100 hours of footage there is no instance where he’s treated (or named) any differently.

12. The theories of doctoring, illuminati or whatever are purely fictional IMHO. I have never seen a bit of proof for them.

13. Use some common sense… it’s a internet hoax! Proof:

http://maccafunhouse.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=gossip&action=display&thread=3463
http://allthetruth.galeon.com/index.html
http://pid90066.tripod.com/

(original members of the 60if side coming clean)

Now I hope some might find these informations usefull! See ya!

:)

ar20

15-07-2009, 04:33 PM

ar20

15-07-2009, 04:41 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7bOpN35mfs4

Folks, listen to me.

If you're using this as PIA evidence.... at least get some photos where they actually match up, this if anything helps our point.

Haven't you all noticed when they do those fades, they don't match in to the same face and are actually different?

I mean, SERIOUSLY?!

He looks different in every fade/comp they have there! :eek:
They could have at least half tried finding ones where he matches up.

And you say I'm fucking delusional?

I show you this...

http://img216.imageshack.us/img216/196/ultimap.jpg

You show me back this...

http://img197.imageshack.us/img197/148/wtfjsv.jpg

Firstly, as I've said... and WILL SAY AGAIN..

THEY'RE FROM THE FRONT....

THEY SHOULDN'T LOOK DIFFERENT...

*slaps head*

ar20

15-07-2009, 05:00 PM

Here, let's mirror them:

http://img382.imageshack.us/img382/8954/wtf2.jpg

Let's do what you said, let's make them asymetrical... all faces should have an 90-100% match on both sides:

http://img114.imageshack.us/img114/5773/wtf3.jpg

OH NOES...

Not legitimate enough?

http://img164.imageshack.us/img164/3138/sym.jpg

http://img212.imageshack.us/img212/1707/paulsym.jpg
http://img212.imageshack.us/img212/1571/realpaul.jpg

There's a whole discussion on this back in the topic which you and Socrates overlooked and it's another legitimate point which goes a miss.

You're all very selective in what you argue against, and that suggests to me that you're in perpetual denial.

And before you go laughing at the "quality". I've left them bad for a reason, to show I haven't done any fades, used any brushes, or any tampering, or cropped the shapes.

socrates

15-07-2009, 06:28 PM

Lol at AR20 wading in with a load of desperate nonsense. I wondered when you'd dive in frantically trying to save PID.

Forget it. The cheek freckles, the chin markings, the neck spots - ALL prove it's the same guy. You can babble all you want - sensible people can see we're right.

Zoom into this crispy clear shot of Faul and tell me where those freckles are... and don't tell me they disappeared with tan or age.

Why not? Don't you want to face the TRUTH? :rolleyes:

Freckles are small brownish spots on the skin, often turning darker or increasing in number upon exposure to the sun.

These brown spots usually appear early in life, increase in number during the summer months and their colour fades during winter.

After the age of 40 – 45, they usually disappear.
http://www.skin-care-tips-online.com/Freckles.html

Most disappear with time, and usually do so without the person even noticing.
http://www.need2know.co.uk/need2know/health/body_matters/article.html/id=1613

Ladies and gentlemen, if you have to resort to counting a guys freckles, you've officially lost the plot.

Faul had freckles. Paul did not.
Faul - 5 freckles on his left cheek by his nose. Paul - none

Faul's freckles. This is where they're located on his face:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/FaulConstellation.jpg

Paul didn't have those freckles.

:rolleyes:

Faulcon started babbling about the freckles, you goon! We just proved she was talking nonsense - as usual. :)

The devil is in the details, huh? lol

Unless it proves PID is poop - then "you've officially lost the plot."

Okaaay....

:)

faulconandsnowjob

15-07-2009, 06:40 PM

This is NOT the same color:

http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc205/thebeatlesfour/paul/peeking.jpg
http://i366.photobucket.com/albums/oo110/faulconandsnowjob/SFF_green_eyes.jpg
http://s217.photobucket.com/albums/cc205/thebeatlesfour/paul/blue.jpg
^ If they're going to change his eye color, why don't they change it to match Faul's? Paul went from brown to green to blue eyes. Um, ok. lol

Paul's ears stuck out more than Faul's:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/faul_paul_eye_distance_comparison.jpg

Ears were attached differently:

http://i366.photobucket.com/albums/oo110/faulconandsnowjob/beatlespaul.jpghttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/LuckEars2.jpg

That pic of Faul isn't a stray hair, since his sideburns were fairly short.

And Paul grew about 2 1/2 inches in his mid-20's... sure.

http://i366.photobucket.com/albums/oo110/faulconandsnowjob/paul_faul_ringo.jpg

ar20

15-07-2009, 06:42 PM

Lol at AR20 wading in with a load of desperate nonsense. I wondered when you'd dive in frantically trying to save PID.

Forget it. The cheek freckles, the chin markings, the neck spots - ALL prove it's the same guy. You can babble all you want - sensible people can see we're right.

Why not? Don't you want to face the TRUTH? :rolleyes:

Oh god, I'm wading in again with desperate nonsense frantically compiling fake beliefs... do you ever change the record?

Address the Half/Halfs
Address the 9/11 HE DIE on the drum
Address the Eye Colour Photos on the last page
Address the clear case of PAUL BEING A NAIL BITER

Stop attacking me and start addressing these points or you clearly are in denial and have lost the steam. Seems everytime these points are made, you and fireman overlook them then insult me or Faulcon by saying something to the tune of it's already been debunked.

Absolute. Bullshit.

The topics far from dead, it has a hefty amount of replies and views... so does the other one which was backtracked a few pages because of the MJ thing.

Sensible people can see you're right? Huh? :rolleyes: Yeah, mind when the earth was flat?

Majority opinion means nothing as we've seen from the history of our world, and those that side with majority opinion without question are brain-dead followers with no critical thinking skills... at all.

Faulcon started babbling about the freckles, you goon! We just proved she was talking nonsense - as usual. :)

Unless it proves PID is poop - then "you've officially lost the plot."

Okaaay....

:)

Yeah and she has a point and you just mixed it up for yourself. I responded to this on the other page, the freckles don't line up anyway...

You mug. :P

socrates

15-07-2009, 06:49 PM

Pauls eyes were edited in the DVD release of HELP from brown to blue, search for this if you don't believe me.

http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc205/thebeatlesfour/paul/mccartney.jpg

Those are not the same eyes, quit kidding yourselves.

Thanks for playing. Go back a page and look at my nail biting posts, then you can bring up the freckles. :rolleyes:

An example of the hypocrisy of PIDers - from PID MIss Him:

http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/3443/screenhunter59.jpg

http://img440.imageshack.us/img440/81/screenhunter60.jpg

So if Paul's eyes aren't brown - it IS because of the light.

But if Faul's eyes aren't brown it's NOT because of the light.

http://www.progbreaks.com/images/hypocrisy.gif

ar20

15-07-2009, 06:51 PM

http://intertubes.info/downloads/images/motivation/strawman.jpg

faulconandsnowjob

15-07-2009, 06:54 PM

This video shows that Paul was only a little taller than Ringo:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AsLaPmvvQLA

http://i366.photobucket.com/albums/oo110/faulconandsnowjob/paul_faul_ringo.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v462/OnlyBeatles/beatles-clowning.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v204/WlarusGirl/sleeve4.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v462/OnlyBeatles/niceheightcomparison.jpg

So, why such a difference later on?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v462/OnlyBeatles/walrus016_a.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v462/OnlyBeatles/theBeatles19676.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v462/OnlyBeatles/pid_on_magazine_p68.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v462/OnlyBeatles/L.jpg

ar20

15-07-2009, 06:55 PM

http://img441.imageshack.us/img441/7691/paulseyecolour.jpg

socrates

15-07-2009, 06:56 PM

Yeah and she has a point and you just mixed it up for yourself. I responded to this on the other page, the freckles don't line up anyway...

I'd like to have what you've been a smokin...

Keep dreaming:

http://img127.imageshack.us/img127/5559/freckles3.jpghttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/SSFTampering_01-2.jpg

the freckles don't line up anyway...

http://www.lifeshore.com/smiley/data/media/2/3D_emoticon_194.gif

ar20

15-07-2009, 07:01 PM

I'd like to have what you've been a smokin...

Keep dreaming:

http://img127.imageshack.us/img127/5559/freckles3.jpghttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/SSFTampering_01-2.jpg

http://www.lifeshore.com/smiley/data/media/2/3D_emoticon_194.gif

Well thanks for proving they don't have the same eyes there. Or the nose... or the eyebrows...

You actually relying on a few freckles to prove your case here?

http://www.lifeshore.com/smiley/data/media/2/3D_emoticon_194.gif

ar20

15-07-2009, 07:02 PM

http://img441.imageshack.us/img441/7691/paulseyecolour.jpg

Incase this gets lost.

Colours of his eyes are within the Red/Green regions, no blue.

socrates

15-07-2009, 07:15 PM

.................................................. ..WANTED

Imposter to replace Paul McCartney. Must have freckles in the exact same place and the same chin markings..... Oh, and spots on the exact same place on the neck, too.

Please apply to:

The Illuminati,
Secret HQ,
USA.

http://gickr.com/results/anim_fdf41ae2-f6bb-1854-e10e-c451ba4ab928.gifhttp://img440.imageshack.us/img440/5508/get6.jpg

http://img269.imageshack.us/img269/8062/screenhunter61.jpghttp://img149.imageshack.us/img149/8458/screenhunter64.jpg

http://img34.imageshack.us/img34/8030/screenhunter72.jpghttp://img339.imageshack.us/img339/1583/screenhunter70.jpg

http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/6497/screenhunter38.jpg

socrates

15-07-2009, 07:15 PM

Incase this gets lost.

Colours of his eyes are within the Red/Green regions, no blue.

WHOOSH.......... Right over your head. :rolleyes:

ar20

15-07-2009, 07:20 PM

WHOOSH.......... Right over your head. :rolleyes:

I KNOW WHAT YOU WERE TRYING TO SAY *slaps head*

I was merely commenting on their mis-perception. I actually thought it was blue myself at first until I checked it.

faulconandsnowjob

15-07-2009, 07:21 PM

Originally Posted by fireman
7. There is to date no plastic surgery that can produce a similarity like that!
I remember back in the mid-90's there was an Italian guy who changed himself into Michael Jackson, & a woman who changed herself into Barbie w/ plastic surgery.

The video of the MJ guy is here:
http://www.vidmax.com/video/2670/This_crazy_guy_went_all_out_to_change_himself_to_a _clone_of_Michael_Jackson/

Have a look at that little passport photo on the White Album, you know, the "lookalike" one with the specs.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/VintagePaulBillTrueLook.jpg
There is a reference to this guy in "Free as a Bird" at 3:00:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s332Tt0zxYs

Faul has been caught playing the guitar right handed in a few shots.

This is from the Anthology. If they flipped it, then it was a clue. It's probably not flipped, tho.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4tWikCSZjfs

http://homepages.tesco.net/harbfamily/opd/images/other/guitar1.gif

http://i366.photobucket.com/albums/oo110/faulconandsnowjob/right_handed_faul.jpg

ar20

15-07-2009, 07:23 PM

Wanted:

Gullible idiots to believe this is the same man, must be of sheep quality and capable of juvenile arguments and insults.

Must have zero perception and tons of ignorance.

http://img197.imageshack.us/img197/148/wtfjsv.jpg

ar20

15-07-2009, 07:24 PM

http://intertubes.info/downloads/images/motivation/strawman.jpg

Still haven't addressed the nail-biting.

You aren't touching it because you can't find many instances (or none at all) of Faul with the same tick.

I just provided 7 pictures of it, (you posted one too), and 2 interviews... and it's went completely over the top of you and fireman.

socrates

15-07-2009, 07:24 PM

Well thanks for proving they don't have the same eyes there. Or the nose... or the eyebrows...

Merely your OPINION. Which is ALL PID is.

The FACTS are there for all to see......

http://img34.imageshack.us/img34/8030/screenhunter72.jpghttp://img339.imageshack.us/img339/1583/screenhunter70.jpg

http://img18.imageshack.us/img18/6348/screenhunter55.jpg

http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/6497/screenhunter38.jpg

http://img37.imageshack.us/img37/8570/paulgameover.jpg

socrates

15-07-2009, 07:26 PM

ar20

15-07-2009, 07:27 PM

socrates

15-07-2009, 07:27 PM

I'll leave the PIDers desperately trying to save PID.

I can only take so much of their nonsense in one day.....

ar20

15-07-2009, 07:30 PM

I'll leave the PIDers desperately trying to save PID.

I can only take so much of their nonsense in one day.....

You realise that appears like a cop-out (again), right? Same with the fireman.

You simply have to address my point, if you do a good job debunking it -- you get a cookie.

faulconandsnowjob

15-07-2009, 07:37 PM

Originally Posted by fireman
12. The theories of doctoring, illuminati or whatever are purely fictional IMHO. I have never seen a bit of proof for them.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/sunglasses1-1.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/SunglassesTruth.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/SunglassesTruthotherside.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/SunglassesTogether.jpg

How Paul really looked

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/SunglassesJPM.jpg

Plus, my all-time favorite:

http://i366.photobucket.com/albums/oo110/faulconandsnowjob/beatles_last_interview_66_faul.jpg

http://i366.photobucket.com/albums/oo110/faulconandsnowjob/paul_faul_66.jpg

faulconandsnowjob

15-07-2009, 07:48 PM

Originally Posted by fireman
13. Use some common sense…
Oh, the irony. Yeah, it's really common sensical to think that a guy can transform his face, change his eye color & grow 2 1/2 inches in his mid-20's. lol

This was the "proof" that Paul was alive:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LuoRcuIij70

Sgt. Pepper was a grave scene. Derek Taylor admitted it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjyyvX85Wd4

faulconandsnowjob

15-07-2009, 07:58 PM

Originally Posted by fireman
There is nothing more to say. Without insulting you, you're behaviour seems as if you are delusional, sorry.
Yeah, b/c it's not delusional to think that someone who looks different, has different colored eyes, & is 2 1/2 inches taller is the same guy. LOL!

But yeah, that is a typical disinformation tactic - to discredit people. You have them running scared, Ar20. They can't refute the height differences, the eye color change, the nose change, nail-biting or anything, really. All they can do is keep insisting that a guy who doesn't look or act the same is the same. Ok, I guess some people will buy that, but some will be able to see right thru it.

fireman

16-07-2009, 08:15 AM

noewhan

16-07-2009, 08:33 AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cTNHD7lDX2U

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHaq1PlfJXU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9aqGtxoXPLE

fireman

16-07-2009, 10:06 AM

oh, one last thing. i wanted to post that for a while:

please read regarding eye colour:

http://de.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070630164515AA4E1Dc

http://www.wonderquest.com/eye-color-age.htm

Ok?

boots

16-07-2009, 12:55 PM

ar20

16-07-2009, 06:51 PM

Yes eye colour DOES change over the years either through certain diseases or through pigmentation loss.

I posted that this way back in this thread. It was from a medical doctor.

PID'ers are living in a delusion. That's fine it keeps them sane.

.

Living in a delusion? Where is your proof that between 66-67 he had an Eye Disease where the colour pigments changed?

See this is what I'm talking about. You people just spout off any old nonsense instead of looking at the evidence we present.

I can't really deal with this topic anymore, I've posted what I can.

I posted a monster-point in that Paul was a nail-biter and no ones from PIA has even talked about it, so don't dare say the freckle posts aren't going addressed.

Tired of the debunked/frantically trying to save PiD and the phoney goodbyes when a decent points made. :rolleyes:

You really all need to learn to debate.

I know why I see two different guys.... because I'm not a BIG fan of the Beatles. I don't have anything vested in it, and that's part of the reason I don't suffer the bias.

ar20

16-07-2009, 06:54 PM

We have been insulted and discredited by you and Ar20 often enough. So you disinfo?
I don't waste my life with posting here. And will not, just because of your lonely stuburness. If you want to ignore the solid facts, do as you please.
By your and ar20 hysteric reaction, it's plainly visible that we presented some facts to that you can't deny.

Goodbye Faulcon, if this is what makes you happy...

(don't be too happy that i'm gone, i will stop by from time to read the lies you're spreading... and to debunk more of your illusions) :p

I also haven't insulted you out-right. I've been called a goon, an idiot, and delusional by both you and Socrates. But it's far from important, my skin is thick and it's only the internet for gods sake.

I flat out denied the freckles theory, I don't see them lining up - sorry. Even the neck markings. You didn't even rile me, I just posted the fact that Paul's clearly a nail-biter and as soon as I did... you say goodbye to the topic? Same with Socrates as well? Thanks! Stuff like this proves the point entirely.

It's all diversion anyway. So far from reading this topic I have seen nothing worthy of being called a debunking.

faulconandsnowjob

16-07-2009, 07:01 PM

Still haven't addressed the nail-biting.

You aren't touching it because you can't find many instances (or none at all) of Faul with the same tick.

Yep, no picture or video of Faul biting his nails whatsoever. They just ignore it b/c they have nothing. LOL!

Ar20, you're killing them! I LOVE it :D

Yes eye colour DOES change over the years either through certain diseases or through pigmentation loss.
Paul's eye color changed from brown to green in ONE year. What are the chances? What are the chances that on top of growing 2 inches in his mid-20's & under-going a face transformation, he would also suffer from some weird eye disease? Come on, that's just too far-fetched.

I've been called a goon, an idiot, and delusional by both you and Socrates.
Yeah, b/c they have nothing, so they have to resort to insults. It's just a way to discredit people, & is pretty transparent.

faulconandsnowjob

16-07-2009, 07:09 PM

On top of changing his eye color to BLUE, the tampered w/ his eyebrows. :eek:

http://s217.photobucket.com/albums/cc205/thebeatlesfour/paul/blue.jpghttp://i366.photobucket.com/albums/oo110/faulconandsnowjob/Paul_66_last_interview.jpg

fireman

16-07-2009, 07:23 PM

I never called anybody a goon or an idiot. Go through my posts, i tried to stay polite as much as possible regarding your arrogant behaviour.

Doctored to BLUE???? :D:DLOL Why on earth should somebody do THAT on purpose?

It's just as i told you before, a lot of the older (pre 1966) pictures a recouloured, because they didn't use colour photography that much these days.. (thats why your colour thing is worth nothing anyway)

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

nailbiting??? LOL:D:rolleyes:

Oh my god, i'm outa here (again), biggest waste of time EVER!!

Ar20, killing us??? :rolleyes::):p

haha omg

faulconandsnowjob

16-07-2009, 09:55 PM

Interesting quote by Faul:

Paul McCartney, the Fireman and the smokescreen
http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/music/article5365557.ece

...

“I’m just doing the same thing I did with Sgt Pepper. It’s just a trick to fool yourself into thinking you’re not you, like a masked ball. There’s something liberating about that.”

dream9

16-07-2009, 11:42 PM

, biggest waste of time EVER!!

I actually agree with something you've said fireman. It is a big waste of time and I never understood why someone who believed PID to be ridiculous to actually spend time on a PID forum or thread arguing against it.

faulconandsnowjob

17-07-2009, 12:03 AM

I never understood why someone who believed PID to be ridiculous to actually spend time on a PID forum or thread arguing against it.
It does make one wonder.

hunger

17-07-2009, 04:04 AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJdzoMKZStI

:cool:

faulconandsnowjob

17-07-2009, 08:12 AM

Thanks for posting that, Hunger :)

Preserve the myth... yep.

This is him - the good double. lol

boots

17-07-2009, 12:39 PM

Paul's eye color changed from brown to green in ONE year. What are the chances? What are the chances that on top of growing 2 inches in his mid-20's & under-going a face transformation, he would also suffer from some weird eye disease? Come on, that's just too far-fetched.

The photos of the supposed eye color changes form Pid show a young PMc and an recent one of PMc. There has been no photos showing this so called proof from 66 to 67.

.

hunger

17-07-2009, 12:42 PM

Thanks for posting that, Hunger :)

Preserve the myth... yep.

This is him - the good double. lol

I love the way Iamaphoney slows this stuff down & you can focus on Fauls mannerisms more easily. the nervous laugh, eyes darting to the audience, the guilt written all over the face. He's a blatant liar & he's relieved that Letterman is joking even though it's all the truth. ah I could go on & make a real anaylsis but there's more important things happening right now
Peace
:cool:

ar20

17-07-2009, 04:29 PM

STILL NOT ADDRESSING IT. This is gold. Anyone lurking can see you all just avoid valid points.

Haha omg.

This just makes you lot look like idiots -- it's a legitimate point. Nail-Biting takes therapy to get rid of, it's a nervous trait Paul has and Faul doesn't.

What, he just suddenly stopped puting his fingers to his face when he gets nervous?

7 pics of Paul doing it + 2 interviews where I timemarked what the tick was.

Then I showed you a FAUL interview with him being questioned about a CLASS A DRUG, LSD and the whole 2 minutes he's sat there, doesn't once do the hand to face thing.

Maybe the LSD cured it? :eek: And made his face different in the process?

Enter Strawman.

ar20

17-07-2009, 04:37 PM

I love the way Iamaphoney slows this stuff down & you can focus on Fauls mannerisms more easily. the nervous laugh, eyes darting to the audience, the guilt written all over the face. He's a blatant liar & he's relieved that Letterman is joking even though it's all the truth. ah I could go on & make a real anaylsis but there's more important things happening right now
Peace
:cool:

Wow, Faul just rewrote history again.

That videos excellent.

socrates

17-07-2009, 08:04 PM

STILL NOT ADDRESSING IT. This is gold. Anyone lurking can see you all just avoid valid points.

Your points are NOT valid, whatsoever.

Paul has been quoted as saying his fave colour was blue. This was a long time ago however so it may have changed. He also used to say one of his 'dislikes' was shaving. I've never seen it actually mentioned anywhere I don't think but I know he used to be a terrible nail biter. He got over that somewhere in the 60s' though.
http://en.allexperts.com/q/McCartney-Paul-517/Paul.htm

For your argument to have any credibility, you will need to prove that the nail-biting stopped AFTER Paul allegedly died. You have not done so.

It could have stopped before PID.

Just because Faul doesn't bite his nails in your clips and photos doesn't prove he doesn't bite them at other times.

I could produce clips of Paul where he doesn't bite his nails.

As such, your whole argument is pointless and irrelevant as regards evidence that Paul is dead.

Haha omg.

Yes - QUITE! :rolleyes:

This just makes you lot look like idiots -- it's a legitimate point. Nail-Biting takes therapy to get rid of, it's a nervous trait Paul has and Faul doesn't.

I think we can quite clearly see who the "idiot" is here.

What, he just suddenly stopped puting his fingers to his face when he gets nervous?

Of course not:

http://img34.imageshack.us/img34/1431/screenhunter94.jpghttp://img99.imageshack.us/img99/7519/screenhunter95.jpg
http://img512.imageshack.us/img512/9274/screenhunter97.jpghttp://img512.imageshack.us/img512/2687/screenhunter100.jpg

Notice anything SIMILAR, here, AR?

http://img99.imageshack.us/img99/7519/screenhunter95.jpghttp://i25.tinypic.com/2j5azrd.jpg

:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

http://www.dontgo.co.uk/openyoureyes/open-your-eyes.gif

faulconandsnowjob

17-07-2009, 08:17 PM

Hunger, excellent analysis of Faul on David Letterman.

Notice how the profiles don't match. lol

http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/7954/rubbernosespo1.jpghttp://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c250/ladygamer/beauty2.jpg

socrates

17-07-2009, 08:25 PM

http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/1583/screenhunter70.jpghttp://img34.imageshack.us/img34/8030/screenhunter72.jpg

http://www.dontgo.co.uk/openyoureyes/open-your-eyes.gif

faulconandsnowjob

17-07-2009, 08:31 PM

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/Is_It_Not_Obvious.jpg

socrates

18-07-2009, 12:15 AM

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/Is_It_Not_Obvious.jpg

http://img268.imageshack.us/img268/7426/isitnotobvious.jpghttp://img145.imageshack.us/img145/3462/daytripper.jpg

:rolleyes:

faulconandsnowjob

18-07-2009, 12:55 AM

Socrates, I know you can't tell the difference, but you just posted a Paul-Paul comp. lol

socrates

18-07-2009, 01:20 AM

Socrates, I know you can't tell the difference, but you just posted a Paul-Paul comp. lol

You PIDers have been posting Paul-Paul comps throughout this entire thread. :p

If you can't tell why I posted that comp, I think it demonstrates how you cannot look at things objectively.

Here's another one:

http://img268.imageshack.us/img268/7426/isitnotobvious.jpghttp://img50.imageshack.us/img50/7519/screenhunter95.jpg

There's as much difference between the two Paul's in these comps as the Paul - 'Faul' one AR20 posted.

Get it now?

dream9

18-07-2009, 02:23 AM

http://img34.imageshack.us/img34/1431/screenhunter94.jpghttp://img99.imageshack.us/img99/7519/screenhunter95.jpg
http://img512.imageshack.us/img512/9274/screenhunter97.jpghttp://img512.imageshack.us/img512/2687/screenhunter100.jpg

Notice anything SIMILAR, here, AR?

http://img99.imageshack.us/img99/7519/screenhunter95.jpghttp://i25.tinypic.com/2j5azrd.jpg

:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

http://www.dontgo.co.uk/openyoureyes/open-your-eyes.gif

Open YOUR eyes. Faul is just touching his lips. He is NOT biting his nails.

faulconandsnowjob

18-07-2009, 02:42 AM

Socrates, we've been posting Paul-Faul comps. But how would you know, anyway, since you can't tell the difference? lol

faulconandsnowjob

18-07-2009, 04:19 AM

faulconandsnowjob

18-07-2009, 07:34 AM

faulconandsnowjob

18-07-2009, 07:38 AM

http://digilander.libero.it/p_truth/the_truth/paul_mccartney_faux_paul.jpg

socrates

18-07-2009, 12:44 PM

Open YOUR eyes. Faul is just touching his lips. He is NOT biting his nails.

Did I say he was? :confused:

Please READ things properly before posting.

I was responding to this:

What, he just suddenly stopped puting his fingers to his face when he gets nervous?

Do you see anything about biting his nails in that quote? :confused:

socrates

18-07-2009, 12:52 PM

Some more ear weirdness. This pic is from the "Strawberry Fields Forever" video of 1967. What is up w/ his ear? Is that a prosthetic ear piece?

http://i366.photobucket.com/albums/oo110/faulconandsnowjob/FaulEar.jpg
http://i366.photobucket.com/albums/oo110/faulconandsnowjob/FaulEarZoom.jpg
http://i366.photobucket.com/albums/oo110/faulconandsnowjob/beatlespaul.jpg

Oh, no. Back to the bloody ears, yet again. :(

"Repetition does not transform a lie into a truth"
(Franklin D. Roosevelt (1882 - 1945)

The ears are the same.....

and so are the spots/freckles on the neck:

http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/1583/screenhunter70.jpghttp://img34.imageshack.us/img34/8030/screenhunter72.jpg

:D :D :D

Check mate!

ar20

18-07-2009, 01:33 PM

Your points are NOT valid, whatsoever.

For your argument to have any credibility, you will need to prove that the nail-biting stopped AFTER Paul allegedly died. You have not done so.

It could have stopped before PID.

Just because Faul doesn't bite his nails in your clips and photos doesn't prove he doesn't bite them at other times.

I could produce clips of Paul where he doesn't bite his nails.

As such, your whole argument is pointless and irrelevant as regards evidence that Paul is dead.

Yes - QUITE! :rolleyes:

I think we can quite clearly see who the "idiot" is here.

Of course not:

Notice anything SIMILAR, here, AR?

:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Brilliant, just brilliant Socrates - you've rumbled me. :rolleyes:

For comparisons sake.

http://img196.imageshack.us/img196/6048/nailbiting.jpg

Most reasonable people can tell the difference here. He does the "pinky nail" bite. It's most common, have a look at these.

http://www.socialmediamom.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/nail-biting-273x300.jpg
http://www.lifetipsdaily.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/nailbiting.jpg
http://www.istockphoto.com/file_thumbview_approve/4220191/2/istockphoto_4220191-nail-biting.jpg

You just posted pics of Faul with his....finger on his face, that isn't a nail biting dude -- if you think it is, then you have no right judging side-by-side comps because you clearly can't see for shit.

And once again, you totally ducked my point.

I show two interviews where he does it clearly.

FAUL/PAUL is questioned about LSD... and he doesn't once get nervous and touch his face/bite the nail.

The interview is apparently from 67? (I don't know this for sure, feel free to correct me). So within the space of one year and it just happens to be round the PiD's time period for the crash, he stops doing his nervous tick.

I don't know about you, but at that time, being questioned about a hard drug by a reporter I'm pretty sure you wouldn't be sitting there that cool. LSD changes personalities but it doesn't eliminate little things like that.

ar20

18-07-2009, 01:35 PM

ar20

18-07-2009, 01:37 PM

http://img196.imageshack.us/img196/6048/nailbiting.jpg

And here are two instances in interviews where he does it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNYVxqJ83W8

[1:05 onwards]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yukTejx9Kc&feature=related

[3:55 onwards]

He has a tick where he either puts his hands on his face, then gets his pinky and starts biting on it. There are a few more cases on this, but you'll have to look at pre-66 youtube videos.

Faul in the famous LSD interview:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9aqGtxoXPLE&feature=fvw

You'd think being questioned about a hard-drug would trigger that nervous tick, right?

Address this, then we can start talking about god damned freckles.

Quoted for the interview comparisons.

ar20

18-07-2009, 01:41 PM

Did I say he was? :confused:

Please READ things properly before posting.

I was responding to this:

Do you see anything about biting his nails in that quote? :confused:

Oh by the way, you're fucking sneaky.

That's just totally taking my words out of what I was meaning.

Doesn't put hand to face = Referring to Pauls nail biting in line with the post :rolleyes:

What is that, a lawyer trick or something?

So if I showed you the comps on the last two points and missed your "OH FAUL HAS HIS HAND ON HIS FACE TOO!" point, you know why.

Yes, Faul does put his hand on his face, he isn't a robot. Does he bite his nails though?

The LSD is a close enough interview comparison to show he just suddenly stopped doing this, and there aren't really any pics of FAUL with the same tick.

Nice try though.

ar20

18-07-2009, 01:48 PM

Finally, I'm addressing this point you made:

"Paul has been quoted as saying his fave colour was blue. This was a long time ago however so it may have changed. He also used to say one of his 'dislikes' was shaving. I've never seen it actually mentioned anywhere I don't think but I know he used to be a terrible nail biter. He got over that somewhere in the 60s' though.
http://en.allexperts.com/q/McCartney-Paul-517/Paul.htm"

So it PROVES he was a nail-biter. There are pictures of PAUL doing it. And there are a few of the later 66 interviews where he has the tick.

So for arguments sake, right around then and the LSD interview in PiA he lost his nail biting.

I don't know much about it myself, but I know that therapy takes a long time to have the habit just stop. It's all psychological/personal like smoking, but I'm pretty sure he was too busy to regularly seek a therapist for it.

But at least it's admitted.

"He got over it somewhere in the 60's though".

Terrible Nailbiter + Just randomly lost it at some point...

Does not compute.

That's like saying he was a 40 a day smoker but just stopped somewhere in the 90's.

Too vague an answer. So yes, the point is valid. Unless there's documented evidence he got treatment for it, he didn't just drop it overnight. The closest interview between the PiD theory I can find is the LSD one.

He does it when asked nothing questions, then he's being questioned about hard drugs and doesn't do it, so I'm assuming he's lost it by then.

ar20

18-07-2009, 01:52 PM

Just passing on this observation from TRJ on PID MH: Back in 1969, people were asking if Paul were dead. The question to ask Faul should've been "Are you an imposter?" But the news reporter asked "Are you dead?" They only compared pictures back to 1967. So, what they showed was that 1967 Faul was still alive in 1969. Great. lol

1969 NOVEMBER 7TH LIFE MAGAZINE

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/PIDLIFE.jpg

Isn't that interesting.

There's actual debunkers in here suggesting it was just a silly hoax in the 60's with no longevity and it was only a small minority who saw it.

Then on the Letterman interview it was a "worldwide phenomenon" then, and has had many mentions and references in movies and TV shows.

Somebodies missing the boat here.

socrates

18-07-2009, 02:32 PM

He does the "pinky nail" bite.

So what?

You just posted pics of Faul with his....finger on his face,

Because you infered he stopped doing it!

What, he just suddenly stopped puting his fingers to his face when he gets nervous?
:rolleyes:

I show two interviews where he does it clearly.

FAUL/PAUL is questioned about LSD... and he doesn't once get nervous and touch his face/bite the nail.

And you are offering that as proof he's not the same man?

Clutching at straws, or what?

So within the space of one year and it just happens to be round the PiD's time period for the crash, he stops doing his nervous tick.

One video proves he now NEVER does his "nervous tick"? He may have been zonked out of his brain in that interview.

And it only lasted a mere 2 minutes.

Clutching at straws...

Why don't you stop your amateur SPECULATING and look at some OBJECTIVE evidence?

http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/1583/screenhunter70.jpghttp://img34.imageshack.us/img34/8030/screenhunter72.jpg

ar20

18-07-2009, 02:37 PM

So what?

Because you infered he stopped doing it!

:rolleyes:

And you are offering that as proof he's not the same man?

Clutching at straws, or what?

One video proves he now NEVER does his "nervous tick"? He may have been zonked out of his brain in that interview.

And it only lasted a mere 2 minutes.

Clutching at straws...

Why don't you stop your amateur SPECULATING and look at some OBJECTIVE evidence?

http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/1583/screenhunter70.jpghttp://img34.imageshack.us/img34/8030/screenhunter72.jpg

Read above. You took my "fingers to face" thing to mean something completely different. In the context of what I was talking about, I was referring to his fingers to the face / nail biting. Not the... fingers on the lip or chin when thinking.

He wasn't zonked out his brain. Your opinion. He has his arms spread and is answering coherently.

It may have lasted two minutes... but I showed you within 1:30 of the first interview he does it, then sporadically then on.

In the other one, it's 9 minutes, with all the Beatles there and as soon as Paul's introduced to the discussion it flares up.

He's sat there getting drilled on LSD and doesn't once do it, your excuse is he is zonked out.

Well...

This sounds more zonked out.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxnCngmi8gg&feature=related

Lucid stoned like thoughts here. Not much nail-biting though. Hand to face yes, but not comparable to what I'm talking about. We have universal body language.

Your "objective" evidence is a few indistinguishable marks on a few photos that don't even line up, they aren't the same marks or freckles - quit kidding yourself.

Clutching at straws? Please. I showed you he had a noticable nervous tick and you're ducking it and throwing out neck spots, which one looks more silly -- be reasonable for once in your posting life. :p

socrates

18-07-2009, 02:47 PM

What you posted and what I've posted aren't the slightest bit similar, quit kidding yourself.

Your're kidding yourself that that is what I was trying to show!

Quit wriggling.

YOU tried to suggest he stopped putting his fingers to his face!

What, he just suddenly stopped puting his fingers to his face when he gets nervous?

I merely posted those photos to prove this contention wrong:

http://img99.imageshack.us/img99/7519/screenhunter95.jpghttp://i25.tinypic.com/2j5azrd.jpg

Paul has a habit of touching his mouth with his finger during interviews. Funny - so does Faul. :rolleyes:

He also has a habit of looking down, to his right. Funnily enough, so does Faul:

http://img238.imageshack.us/img238/3479/screenhunter441.jpg

Paul also has a habit of looking up to his right when he's thinking of an answer to a question...

Funnily enough, so does Faul:

http://img33.imageshack.us/img33/4371/screenhunter442.jpghttp://img355.imageshack.us/img355/3981/screenhunter443a.jpg

ar20

18-07-2009, 02:53 PM

EXCELLENT VIDEO:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkKYgX2Fu-U&feature=fvw

6:30 onwards, Paul McCartney clearly doing the "nail biting" tick.

And it also contains comparison footage from 66/67, EXCELLENT FOOTAGE, must see.

ar20

18-07-2009, 02:55 PM

Your're kidding yourself that that is what I was trying to show!

Quit wriggling.

YOU tried to suggest he stopped putting his fingers to his face!

I merely posted those photos to prove this contention wrong:

http://img99.imageshack.us/img99/7519/screenhunter95.jpghttp://i25.tinypic.com/2j5azrd.jpg

Paul has a habit of touching his mouth with his finger during interviews. Funny - so does Faul. :rolleyes:

He also has a habit of looking down, to his right. Funnily enough, so does Faul:

http://img238.imageshack.us/img238/3479/screenhunter441.jpg

Paul also has a habit of looking up to his right when he's thinking of an answer to a question...

Funnily enough, so does Faul:

http://img33.imageshack.us/img33/4371/screenhunter442.jpghttp://img355.imageshack.us/img355/3981/screenhunter443a.jpg

GO BACK TO MY ORIGINAL POST. IN THE CONTEXT OF THE POST, I WAS REFERRING TO FINGERS TO THE FACE IN RESPONSE TO THE TICK!

If you're that thick, you're doing nobody on your side any justice, I can't help you.

Body language is universal... I bet you look to the right and left sometimes. :rolleyes:

You'd know if you looked it up, nail-biting is a nervous twitch which does need therapy to get rid of, it's a bad habit like smoking.

Game over for you, thanks for playing. You've lost the plot.

ar20

18-07-2009, 03:01 PM

He has a tick where he either puts his hands on his face, then gets his pinky and starts biting on it. There are a few more cases on this, but you'll have to look at pre-66 youtube videos.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9aqGtxoXPLE&feature=fvw

You'd think being questioned about a hard-drug would trigger that nervous tick, right?

Address this, then we can start talking about god damned freckles.

http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/8885/screenhunter73.jpg

He actually posted a picture with that very tick... oh by the way, don't even turn round to me and tell me FAULS fingers on the chin is the same thing.

STILL NOT ADDRESSING IT. This is gold. Anyone lurking can see you all just avoid valid points.

Haha omg.

This just makes you lot look like idiots -- it's a legitimate point. Nail-Biting takes therapy to get rid of, it's a nervous trait Paul has and Faul doesn't.

What, he just suddenly stopped puting his fingers to his face when he gets nervous?

7 pics of Paul doing it + 2 interviews where I timemarked what the tick was.

Then I showed you a FAUL interview with him being questioned about a CLASS A DRUG, LSD and the whole 2 minutes he's sat there, doesn't once do the hand to face thing.

Maybe the LSD cured it? :eek: And made his face different in the process?

Enter Strawman.

I know what I've been saying, ok? In the entire context of the post the "hands to face" refers to him moving his hands to his face and then proceeding with the tick.

Don't dare strawman me and then put words in my mouth. We all put our hands to the face, look left and right and other stuff -- NOT ALL OF US ARE HABITUAL NAIL BITERS THOUGH.

So once again, you look foolish for ignoring this point then going off on a tangent -- but I say thanks, because lurkers can see how it makes you look.

socrates

18-07-2009, 03:12 PM

Read above. You took my "fingers to face" thing to mean something completely different.

You specifically said his "fingers" to his "face"!

What, he just suddenly stopped puting his fingers to his face when he gets nervous?

Now you're trying to suggest you meant something else?!

Unbelievable.

He wasn't zonked out his brain.

More SPECULATION. You don't know if he was or not.

Your "objective" evidence is a few indistinguishable

They are not indistinguishable - you can CLEARLY see them! :rolleyes:

marks on a few photos that don't even line up

They are in the same places on his neck. 3 spots that clearly stand out from any others. You cannot PROVE they don't line up just as I cannot prove they do.

But any objective person would conclude that they are the very same spots.

http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/1583/screenhunter70.jpghttp://img34.imageshack.us/img34/8030/screenhunter72.jpg

You're trying to tell me that an imposter just happened to have 3 spots on his neck in the same places - which also just happened to be more pronounced than any others?

And if you look at the 2 spots that are close together, you can see that the highest spot is not as dark as the one just below it - in BOTH photos.

WOW - that's some coincidence, huh?

And the imposter also just happened to have the very same freckles on his left cheek, too?

Man - we're talking some freaky coincidences here! :eek:

http://img196.imageshack.us/img196/1566/faulpaul4.pnghttp://img196.imageshack.us/img196/7830/cheezeymoustache3.jpg

http://img127.imageshack.us/img127/5559/freckles3.jpghttp://img134.imageshack.us/img134/2436/freckles01.jpg

Do me a favour.

Clutching at straws? Please. I showed you he had a noticable nervous tick

And you are offering that as proof he's not the same man?

Ok, take it to court then if it's such conclusive proof! :rolleyes:

You cannot prove a negative. Just because 'Faul' doesn't do it in one tiny 2 minute interview doesn't mean he doesn't do it at other times.

The neck spots and cheek freckles offer far more objective and credible evidence that Paul is alive than ANY PID evidence, period.

ar20

18-07-2009, 03:17 PM

Quoted for blindness, these are also in order from first to last...

He has a tick where he either puts his hands on his face, then gets his pinky and starts biting on it. There are a few more cases on this, but you'll have to look at pre-66 youtube videos.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9aqGtxoXPLE&feature=fvw

You'd think being questioned about a hard-drug would trigger that nervous tick, right?

Address this, then we can start talking about god damned freckles.

http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/8885/screenhunter73.jpg

He actually posted a picture with that very tick... oh by the way, don't even turn round to me and tell me FAULS fingers on the chin is the same thing.

STILL NOT ADDRESSING IT. This is gold. Anyone lurking can see you all just avoid valid points.

Haha omg.

This just makes you lot look like idiots -- it's a legitimate point. Nail-Biting takes therapy to get rid of, it's a nervous trait Paul has and Faul doesn't.

What, he just suddenly stopped puting his fingers to his face when he gets nervous?

7 pics of Paul doing it + 2 interviews where I timemarked what the tick was.

Then I showed you a FAUL interview with him being questioned about a CLASS A DRUG, LSD and the whole 2 minutes he's sat there, doesn't once do the hand to face thing.

Maybe the LSD cured it? :eek: And made his face different in the process?

Enter Strawman.

I know what I meant when I said it, I'm pretty sure others wouldn't have read into it the way you did. :rolleyes:

It was also you who suggested he was zonked! God damn you're the absolute King Troll. Kudos.

ar20

18-07-2009, 03:25 PM

I can only post so much, but I will say this -- maybe I should have worded that clearly for the slow witted here.

Maybe I should have said.

What, he just suddenly stopped puting his hands to his face, moving it down slightly, entering his pinky through his lips, and nibbling on the nail of his finger when he's nervous?

I'm sorry you got so confused. I really thought I wouldn't have to elaborate that point. :rolleyes:

Moving on...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkKYgX2Fu-U

Here's that time period video evidence comparison you wanted.

66/67 footage, Paul does the tick at 6:30... Faul doesn't in any clip, he's standing up in one, fair enough -- he's sitting in two talking about drugs and society and doesn't once do it.

You'll dispute this regardless, so I don't really know why I'm wasting my time trying to convince a brick wall of anything.

I await your freckles and neck photos again *sigh*.

ar20

18-07-2009, 03:28 PM

And another thing...

You STILL haven't addressed my point. You just picked apart one sentence I said and ran with it, then hit out with the freckles and neck photos again which I've told you my opinion on.

I mean, COME ON -- seriously?!

socrates

18-07-2009, 03:30 PM

You'd know if you looked it up, nail-biting is a nervous twitch which does need therapy to get rid of, it's a bad habit like smoking.

I think you'll find you're mistaken:

Although referred to as a nervous habit, there is no clinical data anywhere in the world to support the theory that stress or anxiety causes nail biting. Contrary to popular opinion, nail biting does not typically occur during periods of high stress.

Instead, the habit often rears up during quiet, inactive and solitary moments.
http://www.selfgrowth.com/articles/Brown14.html

So much for your theory, huh? :rolleyes:

which does need therapy to get rid of, it's a bad habit like smoking.

No - not in every case:

The most common treatment, as it is cheap and widely available, is a special clear nail polish that has to be applied to the nails.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nail_biting

Game over for you, thanks for playing. You've lost the plot.

http://www.lifeshore.com/smiley/data/media/2/3D_emoticon_40.gif

You do put your foot in it, don't you?

Give up on the Nervous Twitch rubbish - it's completely flawed.

ar20

18-07-2009, 03:36 PM

I think you'll find you're mistaken:

So much for your theory, huh? :rolleyes:

No - not in every case:

http://www.lifeshore.com/smiley/data/media/2/3D_emoticon_40.gif

You do put your foot in it, don't you?

Give up on the Nervous Twitch rubbish - it's completely flawed.

This.... was.... the best.... you could do, with what I posted.... THAT WAS IT?!

Rofl rofl rofl.

Okay.

That polish was around in 1966/1967 then, right?

"Paul has been quoted as saying his fave colour was blue. This was a long time ago however so it may have changed. He also used to say one of his 'dislikes' was shaving. I've never seen it actually mentioned anywhere I don't think but I know he used to be a terrible nail biter. He got over that somewhere in the 60s' though.
http://en.allexperts.com/q/McCartney-Paul-517/Paul.htm"

You posted this ^

You then posted this:

"Although referred to as a nervous habit, there is no clinical data anywhere in the world to support the theory that stress or anxiety causes nail biting. Contrary to popular opinion, nail biting does not typically occur during periods of high stress.

Instead, the habit often rears up during quiet, inactive and solitary moments."

Right so what are you saying here exactly with this?

Paul still bites his nails, I've just shown that -- doesn't matter if it's nerves or not. He still does it, Faul doesn't... probably used that polish or something... ah fuck it, it was the LSD, right?

socrates

18-07-2009, 03:39 PM

nail-biting takes therapy to get rid of

the most common treatment, as it is cheap and widely available, is a special clear nail polish that has to be applied to the nails.

it's a nervous trait paul has and faul doesn't.

Although referred to as a nervous habit, there is no clinical data anywhere in the world to support the theory that stress or anxiety causes nail biting. Contrary to popular opinion, nail biting does not typically occur during periods of high stress.

.

ar20

18-07-2009, 03:40 PM

http://www.gift4life.com/acatalog/nail_biting.html

"Dear Zakkiyah:

Nail biting is a nervous habit. I would suggest you have a talk with your daughter to learn if anything has her worried."

http://www.allbusiness.com/sales/463408-1.html

"The amazing thing about nervous habits is that almost everybody has at least one, and many quite normal people have several..."

"These range from nail-biting to table-pounding and may include the migraine headache and the irresistible urge of some people to "tidy things up." "

http://www.thebakerorange.com/lifestyles/nervous-habit-causes-health-problems-spreads-germs-1.1747034

"Nail biting is one of the most common nervous habits that affects people of all ages ... People can kick the habit of nail biting in multiple ways"

http://www.stopbitingnails.com/A_Nail_Biting_Article_1.htm

"Gale Research, 1998. A generally harmless nervous habit of biting or chewing the fingernails. Children's nervous habits, including nail biting, are common. .."

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/1739328/break_the_habit_stop_nail_biting.html

"19 May 2009 ... How to Break the Finger Nail Biting Habit. The nervous habit that people sometimes they don't even know their doing and how to break the ..."

Yeah I sure do put my foot in it. :rolleyes:

I would hazard a guess and say it's COMMONLY REFERRED to as a nervous habit and always has been.

ar20

18-07-2009, 03:41 PM

[/size][/b]

.

Was this special polish available in 1966 and did it work so well that in 1967 he stopped doing it?

God how... HOW.... do you put your socks and shoes on in the morning, god damn.

I realise there could be polish, THERE ARE ALTERNATIVE TREATMENTS TO CONDITIONS.

Like you know that old smoking game? Yeah, there isn't just a patch... there's hypnosis CD's, therapy, fake cigs, etc.

Alcoholics can go to therapy, go cold turkey, all that etc.

There's a therapy for a lot of things, commonly if you can afford it, and he was wealthy, would have opted for therapy.

ar20

18-07-2009, 03:45 PM

http://images.wikia.com/uncyclopedia/images/4/41/No_More_Nails.jpg

ar20

18-07-2009, 03:52 PM

http://www.articlesbase.com/health-articles/nail-biting-causes-and-consequences-259193.html

Do you bite your nails often? Do you find it difficult to stop? Then welcome to the club. Nail biting is common among children although adults are not exempted from this nervous habit. Famous nail biters include Britney Spears, Eva Mendez, Lisa Marie Presley, and Elijah Wood.

This irritating habit is more common in boys than girls, and can be seen during periods of nervousness, stress, hunger, boredom or lack of activities. In some cases, it can be a sign of a mental or emotional disorder.

“Nail biting is often considered to be a common reaction to stress. A child or even an adult uses nail biting as a coping mechanism to relieve pent-up emotions. Dr. Ronald Bronow, a dermatologist in private practice and assistant clinical professor of medicine at the University of California, Los Angeles, says nail biting is a habitual condition, a common reaction to stress and boredom. Nail biters could also suffer from a poor self-image or could be punishing themselves for deeper-rooted problems or anxieties. Basically, nail biting is a rational substitution of one problem for another. In many instances nail biting is used as a tension reliever. Any kind of disharmony as a result of friends, family, work or school can trigger the habit,” explained Onychophagia.com.

http://www.mothernature.com/Library/Bookshelf/Books/50/78.cfm

''Nail-biting is a nervous habit that's often a symptom of anxiety or insecurity,'' says William Womack, M.D., associate professor in the Department of Child Psychiatry at the University of Washington School of Medicine and codirector of the Stress Management Clinic of Children's Hospital and Medical Center, both in Seattle. ''It's your child's way of comforting herself.''

I could go on and on here.

socrates

18-07-2009, 04:05 PM

I could go on and on here.

Although referred to as a nervous habit, there is no clinical data anywhere in the world to support the theory that stress or anxiety causes nail biting.

Yeah - please carry on wasting your time posting links that only refer to it as a nervous habit. :rolleyes:

Where's the "CLINICAL data"? :confused:

socrates

18-07-2009, 04:06 PM

I'll leave you to ramble on. When you can show CLINICAL proof that nail biting is a nervous habit then you can dance around your room shouting in glee.

But this whole nail biting garbage is irrelevant, anyway. Your argument proves nothing.

'He didn't bite his nails in this 2 minute interview so that proves he's an impostor'.

http://img63.imageshack.us/img63/4869/wwwmyemoticonscomgigglexh7.gif

Yeah - okaaaay...

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3187/2832545604_3cd9e7c279.jpg?v=0

Meanwhile, here's some REAL evidence that the PIDers can't rebutt:

http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/1583/screenhunter70.jpghttp://img34.imageshack.us/img34/8030/screenhunter72.jpg

You're trying to tell me that an imposter just happened to have 3 spots on his neck in the same places - which also just happened to be more pronounced than any others?

And if you look at the 2 spots that are close together, you can see that the highest spot is not as dark as the one just below it - in BOTH photos.

WOW - that's some coincidence, huh?

And the imposter also just happened to have the very same freckles on his left cheek, too?

Man - we're talking some freaky coincidences here!

http://img196.imageshack.us/img196/1566/faulpaul4.pnghttp://img196.imageshack.us/img196/7830/cheezeymoustache3.jpg

http://img127.imageshack.us/img127/5559/freckles3.jpghttp://img134.imageshack.us/img134/2436/freckles01.jpg

http://img127.imageshack.us/img127/5559/freckles3.jpghttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/SSFTampering_01-2.jpg

But hey-ho - continue rambling on about some 2 minute interview where he doesn't bite his nails.......

faulconandsnowjob

18-07-2009, 06:46 PM

What is that, a lawyer trick or something?

Hey! I object! :p Anyway, Socrates is obviously NOT a lawyer. lol

Ar20, you've done such a great job of showing the different mannerisms. I'm sure Faul studied his target's mannerisms, but couldn't bring himself to actually chew on his nails. lol :p It is funny how Paul was magically "cured" of his nail-biting. lol

Then on the Letterman interview it was a "worldwide phenomenon" then, and has had many mentions and references in movies and TV shows.
You know how the Illuminati tell people what's going on in their own charming way? They keep referring to PID, like you said. There's a reference in "Sleepless in Seattle," for example. Also, there was a big brouhaha over this a couple of years ago:

http://www.tech-utopia.biz/paul-is-dead.png

They're telling us what's what.

And about the freckles, Ar20 has already shown they don't match up. It'd be pretty amazing if they did, since they're different guys.

Paul also has a habit of looking up to his right when he's thinking of an answer to a question...

Funnily enough, so does Faul:
Everybody does that. It's well known in psychology & cognitive science.

ar20

18-07-2009, 07:44 PM

This guy isn't for real, is he?

Like 10+ links showing sources saying it's a nervous habit, and a well known one and HE STILL DENYS IT.

It's COMMONLY KNOWN TO BE A NERVOUS HABIT.

And I have shown....3 or more videos with PAUL doing it, and you have shown NONE with FAUL doing it.

And you even slipped up posting that he was known to be a terrible nail biter.

So if anything, it's you that has to do some proving -- the point still stands, it hasn't been even touched by you.

You're going to argue over CLINICAL studies of nail biting?

http://www.scientificblogging.com/small_world/onychphagia_the_neurology_of_nail_biting

In Greek “Onycho” means fingernail or toenail and “phagia” is to eat or consume. Hence, “Onychphagia,” the clinical name for nail biting as a habit

http://www.allbusiness.com/sales/463408-1.html

One of the most common nervous habits, nail-biting, occurs among a surprisingly high percentage of people. A clinical study conducted to determine the... continued in link

http://galatiansc4v16.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/strawman2.jpeg

Your arguments weak. Your logic is poor. The fact you avoid this point and think of it as nothing shows how strong your points are -- they're not. Right now you're relying on non-identical marks from two pictures.

*pats Socrates head*

ar20

18-07-2009, 07:46 PM

Hey! I object! :p Anyway, Socrates is obviously NOT a lawyer. lol

Ar20, you've done such a great job of showing the different mannerisms. I'm sure Faul studied his target's mannerisms, but couldn't bring himself to actually chew on his nails. lol :p It is funny how Paul was magically "cured" of his nail-biting. lol

You know how the Illuminati tell people what's going on in their own charming way? They keep referring to PID, like you said. There's a reference in "Sleepless in Seattle," for example. Also, there was a big brouhaha over this a couple of years ago:

http://www.tech-utopia.biz/paul-is-dead.png

They're telling us what's what.

And about the freckles, Ar20 has already shown they don't match up. It'd be pretty amazing if they did, since they're different guys.

Everybody does that. It's well known in psychology & cognitive science.

That last point about him looking to the right with a question. I didn't think he was serious but nothing surprises me... he's the smartest brick wall I've ever had the pleasure of dealing with.

http://www.youlied.org/nlp3.gif

faulconandsnowjob

18-07-2009, 07:50 PM

ar20

18-07-2009, 07:51 PM

Studies have shown that nervousness or stress, or even boredom can cause nail biting disorder. The clinical name given to nail biting is called onychophagia and it is often associated with some unsettling emotional state. It shows quiet prominently in adolescents and then in children around the age of 7 to 10 years of age.

3 Reasons to Stop Your Nail-Biting Habit
http://ezinearticles.com/?3-Reasons-to-Stop-Your-Nail-Biting-Habit&id=2540130

ar20

18-07-2009, 07:52 PM

Oh, suh-lam, Ar20. You're killing them! :D

Just this observation about how they created the illusion. Not only were the pics on the "Let It Be" album cover compressed from top to bottom to make Faul's face look rounder, but he was also sporting a beard, which also made his face look rounder. Clever lot...

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/BohLetItBeUNDOCTOREDTRUE2.jpg

It's an interesting point here.

They claim no tampering with photos, yet that's clearly edited.

Why is it only PAUL being edited? What's the reason for that? PiA'ers explain.

ar20

18-07-2009, 07:59 PM

MONEYSHOT

Clinical Studies / References to Nail Biting:

http://lifebeginsat41.wordpress.com/2008/12/19/onychophagia-revisited/

http://www.capmh.com/content/2/1/13
Mild forms of onychophagia had been compared to nervous habitssuch as fidgeting [6]. Therefore, some studies make a distinction between mild forms and severe forms of nail biting [7]. There is no specific diagnostic category for a number of prevalent habit disorders such as nail-biting in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition-Text Revision. Nail biting could be categorized as an 'impulse control disorders not otherwise specified'.

http://ww1.cpa-apc.org:8080/publications/archives/cjp/1999/feb/wells.htm
In clinical research, onychophagia has been compared to various nervous habits such as thumb-sucking, giggling, and twitching (1–4). Recognition by relatively few authors of a more severe category of onychophagia (5) has highlighted a lack of clear categorization of these 2 quite distinct forms. Mild onychophagia has been described as a crude form of self-grooming, in which nail length is controlled with the teeth (6). Authors that have recognized the more severe nature of onychophagia in some individuals have defined it as “nails bitten beyond the free edge, with nail margin below the soft tissue border” (5, p 822).

http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc205/thebeatlesfour/paul/bitenails1.jpg
http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc205/thebeatlesfour/paul/thumbsucking.jpg

http://s217.photobucket.com/albums/cc205/thebeatlesfour/paul/wink2.jpg

Thanks for playing! ;)

faulconandsnowjob

18-07-2009, 08:14 PM

Actually, all of the pics on Let It Be have been compressed as a way to hide the fact that Faul's was. It's just a mindf**k. BUT Faul is the only one who has RED behind him, which could be a reference to blood & death, just like Faul's macabre pantings:
http://www.contactmusic.com/new/xmlfeed.nsf/mndwebpages/art%20critics%20reconsider%20mccartney%20is%20dead %20myth

So, this is isn't suspicious at all. It seems that the video of Faul on the Letterman show's website has been edited to remove the reference to PID. The video of the show has also been removed from YouTube. Glad IAAP captured it.

ar20

18-07-2009, 08:18 PM

faulconandsnowjob

18-07-2009, 08:23 PM

I bet Faul is accidentally on purpose trying to expose himself as a fraud. It must be hard to live a lie for so long. I hope there's a deathbed confession, at least. I feel kind of bad for him, in a way. I think he knows he has failed to fill Paul's Beatle boots. People are always comparing his stuff to Paul's, & wondering why he never exhibited the brilliance of "Eleanor Rigby" (for ex) again. Gee, I wonder why. lol

socrates

18-07-2009, 08:54 PM

This is the LAST time I'm addressing this, cos it's getting boring.

Like 10+ links showing sources saying it's a nervous habit, and a well known one and HE STILL DENYS IT.

Where, exactly, have I "denied" it?

QUOTE ME!

Your whole premis relies on the fact that you claim stress should cause Paul to bite his nails during the LSD interview if it was him.

I pointed out that there is no clinical proof that stress causes nail biting:

Although referred to as a nervous habit, there is no clinical data anywhere in the world to support the theory that stress or anxiety causes nail biting. Contrary to popular opinion, nail biting does not typically occur during periods of high stress.

Instead, the habit often rears up during quiet, inactive and solitary moments.
http://www.selfgrowth.com/articles/Brown14.html

Therefore, your premis is not PROVEN.

Understand?

It is an OPINION - nothing more.

It's COMMONLY KNOWN TO BE A NERVOUS HABIT.

But there is no clinical proof for it. How many more times do I have to point that out?

Are you really this thick?

And I have shown....3 or more videos with PAUL doing it, and you have shown NONE with FAUL doing it.

So that proves it's an impostor?

You're having a laugh.

Is that the best evidence you can come up with?

'Look here! He's not biting his nails in that 2 minute interview. This proves it's an impostor!

Pathetic. Really, just pathetic.

So if I show one with Faul doing it would you admit that he's really Paul?

Would you hell! You'd just say he's personating Paul!

And you even slipped up posting that he was known to be a terrible nail biter.

Are you for real? Where did I claim he wasn't a nail biter?

So if anything, it's you that has to do some proving -- the point still stands, it hasn't been even touched by you.

The point doesn't stand - it's totally stupid.

The fact that Faul doesn't bite his nails in a 2 minute interview proves absolutely nothing.

If you think it does, then you are more deluded than I thought.

Well go ahead and take this startling, undisputable evidence to the newspapers!

You'll make a fortune.

http://www.lifeshore.com/smiley/data/media/2/3D_emoticon_194.gif

Can you PROVE that Paul DIDN'T stop biting his nails before PID?

If he did stop biting his nails before PID, then he wouldn't bite his nails during that interview, would he?! :rolleyes:

Therefore, I claim that Paul stopped biting his nails before PID.

Prove me wrong!

You can't, can you?

This is just one example of how your whole argument falls apart.

http://s217.photobucket.com/albums/cc205/thebeatlesfour/paul/wink2.jpg

Thanks for playing! ;)

Now that's the last time I'm discussing this stupid claim.

You can stamp your feet and rant on all you want. I'm bored of it.

THIS is the REAL evidence that you want to avoid:

http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/1583/screenhunter70.jpghttp://img34.imageshack.us/img34/8030/screenhunter72.jpg

http://img196.imageshack.us/img196/1566/faulpaul4.pnghttp://img196.imageshack.us/img196/7830/cheezeymoustache3.jpg

http://img127.imageshack.us/img127/5559/freckles3.jpghttp://img134.imageshack.us/img134/2436/freckles01.jpg

faulconandsnowjob

18-07-2009, 09:14 PM

I saw this on TKIN, & thought it was pretty funny.

Faul with his plastic nose tip collection:

http://i250.photobucket.com/albums/gg275/faullable/rubbernosespo1.jpg

Faul getting ready for a concert:

http://i250.photobucket.com/albums/gg275/faullable/ps2-c.jpg

http://60if.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=faul&action=display&thread=1298&page=3

ar20

19-07-2009, 12:01 AM

This is the LAST time I'm addressing this, cos it's getting boring.

Where, exactly, have I "denied" it?

QUOTE ME!

Well, you deny it's a good point... when infact it is a good point. I've pointed out numerous times, that he was infact a nail-biter, and does do it interviews -- I also posted a picture of 7 times Paul does it.

You have posted none to the contrary. Instead, you choose to argue about weither or not it's a nervous habit brought on by stress or boredom.

:rolleyes::rolleyes:

Regardless of stress, boredom, inactivity, randomness -- whatever. This is what you choose to do to actually avoid debating me on it.

Your whole premis relies on the fact that you claim stress should cause Paul to bite his nails during the LSD interview if it was him.

I pointed out that there is no clinical proof that stress causes nail biting:

Therefore, your premis is not PROVEN.

Understand?

This is just plain old ignorance at its finest.

Does it MATTER what makes Paul bite his nails? He still does it, in 3 seperate interviews in time periods before 66 and during 66. He's in all those photos I showed you doing it, he does it when asked simple questions (I have said that previously, that infact WAS MY POINT...)

Listen... carefully, because I'm not repeating this for you to twist.

I said...

You'd think being questioned about a hard-drug would trigger that nervous tick, right?

Address this, then we can start talking about god damned freckles.

What this means, in simple terms -- for your benefit Socrates:

He does it when getting asked simple questions, why doesn't he do it when being questioned about drugs?

Your line of answers there suggests he does it out of boredom and not stress, so he's not stressed in the interview with LSD or the one on the chair talking stoned-like about psychedelic societies...

:confused: WTF

I don't know about you, but anyone reading this will think you think ass-backwards.

It is an OPINION - nothing more.

Folks, you all know people who are a nail biter and they've all said they do it alot when stressed or when bored. Does it matter what the trigger is? You see what you're focusing on here?

The trigger isn't important! Paul was a rabid nail-biter, Faul isn't... you still haven't posted videos or photos of it -- and I've 7 with Paul doing it, as well as a thumb-sucking pic which is an analogue to nail-biting (as referenced in one of the MEDICAL links I posted).

But there is no clinical proof for it. How many more times do I have to point that out?

Are you really this thick?

Continue pointing it out! You're just being oblivious to the entire point of why I brought up the nail-biting and you continue to give credence to our case.

So that proves it's an impostor?

You're having a laugh.

Is that the best evidence you can come up with?

'Look here! He's not biting his nails in that 2 minute interview. This proves it's an impostor!

Pathetic. Really, just pathetic.

I can tell you're on the verge of throwing the toys out the pram. When you stoop to calling me shit in every reply regarding this.

How thick do you have to be to think I'm relying on ONLY THIS? Haven't I posted so many pic comparisons/interviews and all sorts of other stuff?

Don't you think I use a collated bunch of evidence to prove my case for Paul being Dead...

The nail-bitings important as it highlights the fact that one had a habit, and the other one suddenly didn't.... I even posted a video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkKYgX2Fu-U

66/67 footage, watch from 6:30 onwards to see Paul nail-biting, and yes, it does look like nerves that's causing it. What else would?

It's like I said, anyone you know that does it just isn't sitting there talking to you then RANDOMLY SHOVING THEIR NAILS IN THEIR MOUTH.

What else would cause it Socrates, was PAUL HUNGRY?

God damn, I can't deal with that level of idiocy.

So if I show one with Faul doing it would you admit that he's really Paul?

Would you hell! You'd just say he's personating Paul!

I actually think you can't match my 7 pictures of Paul doing it + examples of video interviews. I actually think you'll post pictures of FAUL touching his face and claim it's the same thing.

Are you for real? Where did I claim he wasn't a nail biter?

The point doesn't stand - it's totally stupid.

Calling something stupid doesn't make it go away.

All I'm saying is you're denying it's validity as a point. What made PAUL/FAUL stop doing it after 66? Did he get that lotion or whatever it was you babbling about? :rolleyes:

The fact that Faul doesn't bite his nails in a 2 minute interview proves absolutely nothing.

I think you'll find it does when he mysteriously stops doing it around the time he's supposedly died. Does this escape you or something?

If you think it does, then you are more deluded than I thought.

Well go ahead and take this startling, undisputable evidence to the newspapers!

You'll make a fortune.

Making fun of it doesn't make it any less valid and it still isn't going away.

Can you PROVE that Paul DIDN'T stop biting his nails before PID?

Glad you asked, for the 8th time or something...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkKYgX2Fu-U

6:30 onwards, a 66/67 interview video comparison.

So in our case, he's dead after late-66.

If he did stop biting his nails before PID, then he wouldn't bite his nails during that interview, would he?! :rolleyes:

Therefore, I claim that Paul stopped biting his nails before PID.

Prove me wrong!

ok...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkKYgX2Fu-U
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkKYgX2Fu-U
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkKYgX2Fu-U
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkKYgX2Fu-U

You can't, can you?

Yes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkKYgX2Fu-U
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkKYgX2Fu-U
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkKYgX2Fu-U
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkKYgX2Fu-U

This is just one example of how your whole argument falls apart.

I guess so. :rolleyes:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkKYgX2Fu-U

THIS is the REAL evidence that you want to avoid:

http://img134.imageshack.us/img134/2436/freckles01.jpg

Feel real sorry for you, you can't find any other photos with those freckles or neck markings.

GAME. SET. MATCH

Thanks for playing! ;)

One last time:

http://img196.imageshack.us/img196/6048/nailbiting.jpg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNYVxqJ83W8
1:05 onwards

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yukTejx9Kc
3:55 onwards

http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc205/thebeatlesfour/paul/thumbsucking.jpg

In clinical research, onychophagia(nail biting) has been compared to various nervous habits such as thumb-sucking, giggling, and twitching (1–4). Recognition by relatively few authors of a more severe category of onychophagia (5) has highlighted a lack of clear categorization of these 2 quite distinct forms. Mild onychophagia has been described as a crude form of self-grooming, in which nail length is controlled with the teeth (6). Authors that have recognized the more severe nature of onychophagia in some individuals have defined it as “nails bitten beyond the free edge, with nail margin below the soft tissue border” (5, p 822).

"Paul has been quoted as saying his fave colour was blue. This was a long time ago however so it may have changed. He also used to say one of his 'dislikes' was shaving. I've never seen it actually mentioned anywhere I don't think but I know he used to be a terrible nail biter. He got over that somewhere in the 60s' though.
http://en.allexperts.com/q/McCartney-Paul-517/Paul.htm"

socrates

19-07-2009, 12:23 AM

Well, you deny it's a good point... when infact it is a good point. I've pointed out numerous times, that he was infact a nail-biter, and does do it interviews..........

Which part of this didn't you understand?

Can you PROVE that Paul DIDN'T stop biting his nails before PID?

If he did stop biting his nails before PID, then he wouldn't bite his nails during that interview, would he?! :rolleyes:

Therefore, I claim that Paul stopped biting his nails before PID.

Prove me wrong!

You can't, can you?

This is just one example of how your whole argument falls apart.

Now that's the last time I'm discussing this stupid claim.

You can stamp your feet and rant on all you want. I'm bored of it.

socrates

19-07-2009, 12:25 AM

I saw this on TKIN, & thought it was pretty funny.

Faul with his plastic nose tip collection:

Don't forget his freckle collection..... Ooh, and his neck spot collection:

http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/1583/screenhunter70.jpghttp://img34.imageshack.us/img34/8030/screenhunter72.jpg

http://img196.imageshack.us/img196/1566/faulpaul4.pnghttp://img196.imageshack.us/img196/7830/cheezeymoustache3.jpg

http://img127.imageshack.us/img127/5559/freckles3.jpghttp://img134.imageshack.us/img134/2436/freckles01.jpg

Funny how the PIDers don't want to talk about objective evidence.

Freakin nose tips, not biting his nails during an interview.....

:rolleyes:

faulconandsnowjob

19-07-2009, 12:37 AM

Funny how the PIDers don't want to talk about objective evidence.
Photos ARE evidence. If you don't agree, then take it up w/ the judicial system.

[T]he term "record" means any item, collection, or grouping of information about an individual that is maintained by an agency, including, but not limited to, ... other identifying particular assigned to the individual, such as a finger or voice print or a photograph... 5 USCS § 552a(4).

[T]he term "means of identification" means any name or number that may be used, alone or in conjunction with any other information, to identify a specific individual, including any--
...
(B) unique biometric data, such as fingerprint, voice print, retina or iris image, or other unique physical representation; ...

United States v. Hawes, 523 F.3d 245, 249 (3d Cir. Pa. 2008); United States v. Mitchell, 518 F.3d 230 (4th Cir. S.C. 2008).

... [T]he district court found that duty titles were not comparable to captured immutable characteristics such as finger or voice prints or photographs. The district court reached these conclusions because an individual's duty title changes over time, because multiple people can concomitantly have the same or similar duty titles, and because each individual has predecessor and successor holders of the same duty titles. We agree with the reasoning and conclusions of the district court. In circumstances where duty titles pertain to one and only one individual, such as the examples of identifying particulars provided in the statutory text (finger or voice print or photograph), duty titles may indeed be "identifying particulars" as that term is used in the definition of "record" in the Privacy Act. For the reasons detailed by the district court, however, the [**9] duty titles in this [*188] case are not "identifying particulars" because they do not pertain to one and only one individual.

Pierce v. Dep't of the United States Air Force, 512 F.3d 184, 188 (5th Cir. Miss. 2007)

socrates

19-07-2009, 12:43 AM

Photos ARE evidence.

These sure are....

http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/1583/screenhunter70.jpghttp://img34.imageshack.us/img34/8030/screenhunter72.jpg

http://img196.imageshack.us/img196/1566/faulpaul4.pnghttp://img196.imageshack.us/img196/7830/cheezeymoustache3.jpg

http://img127.imageshack.us/img127/5559/freckles3.jpghttp://img134.imageshack.us/img134/2436/freckles01.jpg

And they are a damn site more credible than any PID photos.

faulconandsnowjob

19-07-2009, 01:40 AM

Yeah, & bug-eyed Faul isn't Paul. Thanks for pointing that out.

http://img196.imageshack.us/img196/7830/cheezeymoustache3.jpghttp://img196.imageshack.us/img196/1566/faulpaul4.png

It's funny how some people think it's obvious Faul is a double, & some people can't even seem to grasp the concept.

socrates

19-07-2009, 01:43 AM

http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/8961/screenhunter97a.jpghttp://img189.imageshack.us/img189/9628/screenhunter97b.jpg

faulconandsnowjob

19-07-2009, 01:44 AM

At least you've managed to not make a Paul-Paul comp. lol

How's that nail-biting going? Can't find any of Faul chewing on his nails? :D

socrates

19-07-2009, 01:46 AM

http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/8961/screenhunter97a.jpg
http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/9274/screenhunter97.jpg

http://careersi.files.wordpress.com/2009/05/elephany.jpg

:rolleyes:

socrates

19-07-2009, 01:47 AM

How's that nail-biting going? Can't find any of Faul chewing on his nails? :D

Found Faul's freckle collection yet? :p

http://careersi.files.wordpress.com/2009/05/elephany.jpg

socrates

19-07-2009, 02:05 AM

Faul's freckles. This is where they're located on his face:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/FaulConstellation.jpg

Paul didn't have those freckles.

Why don't you finally admit the truth?

http://img146.imageshack.us/img146/1120/screenhunter99.jpg

http://img9.imageshack.us/img9/914/screenhunter56.jpghttp://img200.imageshack.us/img200/4286/screenhunter57.jpg

It's funny how some people think it's obvious Faul is a double, & some people can't even seem to grasp the concept.
It's "funny" that some people have been deluded by a 40 year old joke.

It's also "funny" that some people can't grasp or acknowledge the fact that 'they' have the same freckles and markings on the neck.

Guess it's just a freaky coincidence, huh?

Or perhaps 'Faul' got a freckle transplant?

Or perhaps he uses fake freckles to go with his fake ears and fake nose tip? :rolleyes:

http://careersi.files.wordpress.com/2009/05/elephany.jpg

faulconandsnowjob

19-07-2009, 02:21 AM

This has just come to my attention - at http://invanddis.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=5735&page=1.

A scientific team made an accurate biometrical comparison of Paul & Faul. They wanted to demonstrate it's a hoax, but the result was just the opposite. This article is from the Italian WIRED magazine of August 2009.

It seems they are saying that too much of "Paul's" head and face changed for that person to be Paul. There is too much difference between the skull, palate, mouth, nose, jaw, chin, & eyes. Paul would have had to undergone a series of major surgeries. He would have had to wear wires and braces which could not have been hidden simply by growing a mustache.

http://jojoplace.org/Shoebox/Wired_Italy_August_2009/p1.jpg
http://jojoplace.org/Shoebox/Wired_Italy_August_2009/p2.jpg
http://jojoplace.org/Shoebox/Wired_Italy_August_2009/p3.jpg
http://jojoplace.org/Shoebox/Wired_Italy_August_2009/p4.jpg
http://jojoplace.org/Shoebox/Wired_Italy_August_2009/p5.jpg
http://jojoplace.org/Shoebox/Wired_Italy_August_2009/p6.jpg
http://jojoplace.org/Shoebox/Wired_Italy_August_2009/p7.jpg
http://jojoplace.org/Shoebox/Wired_Italy_August_2009/p8.jpg
http://jojoplace.org/Shoebox/Wired_Italy_August_2009/p9.jpg
http://jojoplace.org/Shoebox/Wired_Italy_August_2009/p10.jpg

This was a translation using Babylon translation software:

Many polls confirm that the legend of P. I. D. is among the most
known by public opinion. From today, perhaps, new polls
could give results even more debt, thanks to discoveries
of two Italian researchers that to check the whole of history are not limited to send the opposite musical tracks or to make the exegesis
of a text but are appeals to rigid protocols that regulate
the practice lawyer of the methodology identification.

Gabriella CARLESI and Francesco Gavazzeni are a strange couple:
she is an anatomopatologa, he is a computer. You are an expert in the recognition craniometrico, he puts the potential of computer available
for discipline born in the mid 19 th century: the
craniometria precisely. According to the Zingarelli, "is the science that deals with the measurement of the skull in relationship to Anthropology and the comparative anatomy". Now, to identify a person absolute certainty the damage two tests: fingerprints and the DNA (if
the samples is carried out correctly, which is not always the case). In the absence of blend of samples and the methodology of DNA identification avails itself of the anthropometry and, in particular,
the craniometria, which is based on analysis of certain specific points.
present in the face of anyone, due and codified in the 1800
from the French Paul Broca. What are these points? In terms
not scientific we could define them the distance between the pupils, the intersection between the nose and the arches sopraccigliari, the point where the basis of the nose is detached from upper lip, the conformation of jaw and chin, the pavilions headsets. Then there is the form of the skull.
In general but the anatomy topographical prefers to talk, more than of
specific points, to "regions", because in a few centimeters
of skin may be more useful characteristics to establish similarities and
differences. The anthropometry and the craniometria, as
have an origin nineteenth century, are the basis of biometrics, the
science used today for the recognition staff from intelligence
more sophisticated of the world. Huge database of biometric data
of terrorists and sought are quickly crossed and, according
to algorithms generated by points of the face, reveal the true identity of people shooting by cameras or photographed to airports. As
to CARLESI and Gavazzeni, cross their powers and, as happens
in television series, see dawero what we unlani we cannot
imagine. For this have assisted the investigations in
cases of chronicle black or of intrigues international: from the monster of Florence the attack to John Paul II, from crimes Erika and Omar
in Novi Ligure in the investigation into the death of journalist Ilaria Alpi.
Each time by adding elements vital, both for the police investigations in
both for the tribunals and parliamentary committees of inquiry
. Their expertise anthropometric on photographs and Movies
have contributed to exclude that he was the Somali Hashi Omar
Hassan to kill Ilaria Alpi and its operator MIRAN HROVATIN in May
1994 in Mogadishu. halido they opened a new
track in the case of monster of Florence when, together with Professor
John Pierucci, Dean of Italian legal medicine, have shown that
the man from the lake Trasimeno in 1985 was not
in fact, the doctor Francesco Narducci, Principal of the killings
of suspected "monster."

The decision that pushes two experts this level to devote time
and intelligence to the verification of P. I. D. is taken in a Saturday
March 2006, in the Institute of Legal Medicine of Pavia.
It is here that has its center the team gathered around to Professor
Pierucci, holder of the chair of Legal Medicine with the
passion for history. And it is here that are recording the interviews
for a documentary on the death of Benito Mussolini and Claretta Petacci, theme on which Pierucci and "its Boys" have no fact discoveries sensational by analysing the
photo of Piazzale Loreto, taken in Milan on
29 April 1945. Old and dramatic images
able to reveal, only thanks to the most
recent analysis techniques, special unpublished
a dynamic of the events other than that
of the classic execution. In practice:
no two execution in front of the famous
gate near of Mezzegra to 16 and the
, 28 April 1945, but two killings distant
between them some time and a few hundred meters away.
First Mussolini, perhaps during a
over, he is struck from the front and
to point while is t-shirt and without
boots; later you, dressed and in fur, is
cut to the shoulders. In later, he lined
to better and you without more fur, are brought to
Piazzale Loreto. That day,
none of the many photographers could imagine
how many things could reveal,
60 Years After, their shots.

chiviato the case Mussolini-Petacci, comes the proposal
for a new challenge: why not take a look a little
old photos, this time of the 1960s, and demonstrate the groundless
a legend underground so widespread as
incredible? The challenge is collected by Gabriella CARLESI and Francesco
Gavazzeni with fun and a peak of enough, because here
there are corpses or holes of bullet to analyse. Rather, it must
push as far as possible their capacity
to compare the images to discover if two faces belong to or
no to the same person. A speciality that the two had already
put in place some years before, when it was understand
if in Piazza San Pietro, on 13 may 1981, next to Turkish Alì
agca that shot to John Paul II there was or was less EC in reality
it was discovered that there was) the Bulgarian Sergei Antonov.
The junction between craniometria and technology (which, among other things,
allows to bring in proportions of the same subject homogeneous photo
taken at different times) has allowed to observe,
as never before, a series of images of Paul McCartney
the 1960s to today. Gavazzeni explains: "Now is infinitely
easier to see and note certain things, because the technique
of Digital Processing allows a speed of comparison
and a precision of analysis clearly superior to those of only
ten years ago." The first step is therefore search and select
images to put in proportion
to the best Pictures quality and framing and carry out measurements and respect.
At the end we can deliver the verdict. On which neither Gavazzeni
nor cadesi, to the top, seem serious doubts: "But Yes,
I have said, we put two minutes to conclude that this is the same
person", recalls the smiling anatomopatologa.
"A look at what they were on the Internet seemed sufficient
to clear the affair: do not know operate with a proper methodology
and so prove what they want".
In general, on many Web sites devoted to the legend of Paul is
dead, the demonstration to what door? To say that, in November
1966, the "real" McCartney died in a car accident
and was replaced by a double, left-handed and musician as him.

An operation sophisticated (but not the point of not
leaving a trace), a deceit necessary
for not obstructed a mechanism that
produced gains fabulous. So amazing
to give a breath of oxygen to the entire economy
English. And so, for the rank of
complottisti, also thanks to numerous tests
that the same Beatles would have sown the seeds for
years in the songs and on the covers of their
album, the truth is only one. Not at random,
Paul McCartney of successes by soloist, the tour
record, of the campaigns vegetarian and
of divorces billions is often called
faui. Not Paul but "OUT", a merger between fake, i.e. "
false", and paui. The nickname is between the consequences
of a storm media that
begins on 12 October 1969 with the call of
a not better identified Tom (Alfred for
some sources) during the transmission conduct by DJ Russell
Gibb on Radio wknr of Detroit. Tom was alleged that McCartney
was dead, that his disappearance was kept secret from the other
Beatles and from their management but that the group had also decided to
sow a series of evidence in the disks, but no one is
was still unaware of anything. The call in direct
gave the boot to a treasure hunt that, at a distance of 40 years'
not highlighted to finish.

"We knew these stories in a superficial, as a little all", they say CARLESI and Gavazzeni. "but not this was
our point of departure. For us the base had to be
good images, in large numbers and with an acceptable compatibility
anatomical-monitor between them, ". The search is conducted
to the whole field: pictures taken before the 1966 and photos certainly
dating from 1967 in next, and while the Beatles were still
united both during the period soloist of McCartney. "not been
as easy as could seem" recalls Gavazzeni. "For
the photo of the first years I noted the widespread uncertainty on dating, what that does not occur in the subsequent period
. Even, some snapshots
have different dates in different agencies and
the Best pictures are the property of photographers
that not the grant too easily ".
To be able to make a comparison between two
different periods was therefore necessary to fix
some fixed points, comparing
the best available images of the same
subject and realized in the short distance of time
. As a base element to determine the proportions
and be able to proceed in the work was sacrificed an important aspect to the identification:
the distance regulation. In fact, having chosen this criterion, such as
point of alignment of the images, not been able to use
for comparing the different pictures. In other words, because all the rest
were in scale something had vary.
Two images pre' 66, to be compared and brought on a single
SCALE OF REFERENCE TO MAKE uniform the proportions, show a
perfect coincidence of the main key points. In particular
the curve mandibular, i.e. the line that you can track
to the computer to define the lower perimeter of the face, say
from ear to ear passing through the chin, is basically
identical. The margin of error is less than one percent
. "As the perfect coincidence between two images is
virtually impossible," explains Gavazzeni, "For convention
is considered acceptable to maximum of 2, 5% of difference.
Beyond this limit, the discrepancy is that favour
the different identity between the two subjects under consideration. Given that in this case
the difference is less than the% a not a problem
: the two pictures depict surely the same person ". This was
at this point to seek other pictures, with similar characteristics,
but after the alleged "accident".

The first photograph useful, TAKEN
OF CERTAIN AFTER THE DATE OF'' incident'' is
, to say, a picture emblematic. It is in fact
inside of the cover of a disk
not only important for the history of rock
but fundamental, even in the development
of the story of P. id.: Sgt.
pepperjs Lonely Hearts Club Band) published in June
1967. For over eight
months the Beatles not appear in public
and now is catching up with a change of
style and look that, with hindsight, it makes that increase the doubts. In fact, even
without the craniometria, in the past
P. id. has been able to count on some anomalies
able to feed the suspicion that
, perhaps, something had happened really.
For the rest, not knowing the
searches of CARLESI and Gavazzeni, Glauco
including, author of the one Italian book
on this theme (the case of double
Beatle, Robin editions, 2007) noted that
", there is no doubt as
the most of the facts or evidence is
easily rebuttable, or appears decided mind ludicrous and paradoxical; on the other,
it can be said that a good 30
% of them remains worrying, and not explained the
logic". In the only Sgt. Pepper's been counted 40 different
evidence, including the photo on which it has focused the attention of
CARLESI and Gavazzeni. The legend of P. id. would not have had the impact this has had
, without another initialled at first sight not less opaque
: O. P. D. is the one that is law on a curious distinctive McCartney
has on the left arm in that picture. For almost
all, McCartney in head, is a casual choice, a funny gadgets Canadian.
In fact O. P. D. would "Ontario police department.
The version complottistica o.p.d. would indicate the formula
used commonly by the police to declare the death of a person
: offlcially pronounced goddess D, namely "officially declared dead
". "At the beginning we have chosen the McCartney of Sgt.
Pepper) s not because we thought in the true meaning of O. P. D. but simply
because it seemed a photo that was to our case.
Certainly not imagined yet how many things we would have helped
to discover the ", says Gavazzeni.
That McCartney, certainly portrait in the first half
of 1967, was then assisted on another picture of a few years
later, taken between 1971 and 1972. The objective was to repeat the operation
of comparison already made with images of the first 1960s and then proceed to COMPARATIVE EXAMINATION OF
DATA emerged from the two groups of images. Also in this case
, between the two new images there is a good compatibility
. There was therefore that compare the data
of the images preceding the date of the alleged
incident and subsequent. "The surprise was a great
", says Gavazzeni: "The curve
mandibular BETWEEN THE TWO GROUPS OF picture had a
discrepancy of more than 6.5 percent, well above
the threshold of error. But there was more. CHANGED ITS
DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROFILE mandibular: before the 1966
each side of the jaw is composed of two curves
net; from 1967 there seems to be a single curve. There is therefore
a curve morphological different ".

And the surprises do n't end there because the implacable
Gavazzeni, as a boxer that feel near the
and of awersario, not spring the TAKEN ON THAT Photo
in which McCartney, ignorant, mentions a grin
a bit perplexed: "to the naked eye will note that that
will be a constant in the photos from that moment on,
a couple of readjustments photographic sufficiently evident at
a glance expert. There is a shadow that covers
the outer corner of the left eye. only for some time
not seen more. and going to observe in that
point, where for years there has been that spot dark,
now we note a middle way between a scar and the sign
of the skin stretched as to a readjustment aesthetic.
The explanation is that probably immediate,
already in the 1960s, HAS BEEN MADE AN OPERATION TO
INTERVENE ON THE eyes but which remained something
of imperfect, which for a long time has moved on
to mask ". There is then a detail that concerns
the conformation of the skull: "Even,
the impression is that the form of the head has been made it a little
more rounded nose", says Gavazzeni: "Therefore, be reduced
in l ength effective, by means of a escamotage
in use at the time and that it had in phase of the press'
. Modify actually the conformation
of the skull of an individual person is an impossibility.
Yet, judging from the photos, it is precisely
what one sees.

Gabriella CARLESI adds a further element:
"compared to previous photos, that of Sgt. Pepper's
shows clearly that the commessura speech, that
the line formed by the union of two lips, suddenly
elongated. which, of course is not possible and
that the moustasches not manage to camouflage ".
In other words, and is phenomenon all too often now, Lips can be inflated and increased
in volume, but the extent of commessura speech may not vary
much. can be very slight alterations, but this is not the
case of the photo examined: here the difference between the BEFORE AND AFTER
is too strong to be caused by any
surgery. And in more, and always moustache
, McCartney of Sgt. pepper>s, perhaps it is tried to hide
another element: what the experts called the point
nose-cord or sottonasale. is the point between the two nostrils where the nose
begins to break away from the face: "This is also in this case for a feature
that the medicine surgical cannot alter. can change the shape of the nose but not the
point nose-spinal ", explains Gabriella CARLESI.
"and between the McCartney of the first group of
pictures and that of the second that point varies
clearly".

Conscious of not having left nothing to chance,
CARLESI and Gavazzeni, between the surprised and the
amused, are beginning to admit to being
puzzled. says Gabriella: "we liked
the idea of applying also to this case a rigorous methodology
, accepted and request
for work of some importance. But not publication of Sgt. pepper>s Lonely Hearts
Club band> instead, the palate of McCartney
widens considerably, to the point that
the front teeth not revolve more on
its axis as before. With the only,
on, except in the usually Canino.
"a change in the form of the palate",
concludes CARLESI, "in the 1960s
was not impossible but would be very
traumatic, the fruit of a genuine
intervention maxillo-facial surgery". In practice
McCartney would have put
in a transaction that would have resulted in the
opening of suture Palatine, the breaking of
bone and then a long orthodontic treatment
and prosthetic. In other words, to obtain a
change
in the 1960s sensitive to McCartney would have been
not only to a
particularly painful intervention and cruel but also
the use of a fixed orthodontic,
then multibande, for more than a
year. What it would not be possible to hide
and that would have had obvious effects
on vocal performance of a singer
professional. "But above all",
concludes Gabriella CARLESI, "that reasons
could have Paul McCartney to undergo
such a calvary?".

Unnecessary put this question to direct
concerned: Paul McCartney, as the other
Beatles, has always preferred clear
on questions DIRECT OR IS appeal to the irony
to put in ridiculous throughout the whole affair.
One between McCartney and the legend of
his death is a game'. In
reality, reaffirm CARLESI and Gavazzeni, had he
wanted to put the word end to all
this history McCartney could
do this by time. As long as was in life, his father
could do for example
an examination of the DNA to confine the history of
P. I. D. once and for all the world of
imagined that in a certain point, our investigation
would have taken the direction that
was taking... ". The same wonder that picks who
analyses in its dynamic (esoteric, communication, musical
) the story of the presumed death and replacement
of Paul McCartney takes possesion also of the two researchers, as and when
it concerning in the study of the images considered most suitable
for checks craniometri that. "The more we encouraged a response and
most other time", recalls Gavazzeni. "seemed
impossible but the idea that something was always reverts
stronger, day after day, photo after Photo". The challenge was made
intriguing, would have gone forward: also because other aspettiimportanti
awaiting examined. Starting with the one
in which cadesi excels Gabriella and for which enjoys international fame:
the identification dental. More McCartney sings and
show smiling, more CARLESI collects elements to feed
its doubts: "For me the evidence of: tests is represented by the shape
of the palate, still more than from the teeth".

There are things impossmili and things that are possible but at the price
of operations long, painful and never be perfect. Species if made in the 1960s
. Now, the careful examination of some images of McCartney
before and after the Autumn 1966 leaves, is the case of say, open-mouth
: "First of all there is the canine upper right", noted
Gabriella CARLESI. "n elle previous photos to 1966 is known as sticks out
compared to the line of dental Arch. is the classic case of a tooth
that lack of space ends for disallinearsi, pushed out of the
pressure of the other teeth. It is curious that the same Canino,
in the photos from 1967 in next, sticks out always but without apparent reason
: the images show that would have the space to be aligned
to the teeth neighbours. It is as if it is wanted to recreate a detail
in a mouth where that anomaly it would never could
demonstrate ". li crux of the reasoning of identification
Odontologica suggested by Gabriella CARLESI concerns the whole palate
of McCartney, before the 1966, is showing close to the point to justify
various misalignments of teeth, albeit in forms less
obvious Canino right upper. After the legends. Or Paul could run his younger brother Re, Mike. And instead has done nothing. Indeed, the only time that was forced
to an examination is has
fed new suspicions and questions. which
has given voice a woman of the German 45 years,
Bettina krischbin, so-called daughter of
McCartney fruit of a relationship between the young musician
not yet famous and Erika
against, a blonde girl of Hamburg
where the Beatles did part of their
dedicated. In 1961, when he was born Bettina,
McCartney not recognise the daughter wanted
but, curiously, contributed to keeping
with a monthly payment of
200 marks. Erika is long, Bettina
no. And, once come of age, decided to
turn to Court to obtain the
official recognition of the Father. The test
of authorship not gave the expected results.
But Bettina suspected that there was
a sham: the test could be presented
this as an double of the Father, as
would demonstrate both pictures taken that day
is an autograph, which, to a report,
would not only done by a mock
handed, but also quite different from other
autographs of McCartney. The uncertainties
continue to accumulate above all in virtue
of the last paper, of the last ace
this in the study carried out by Gabriella
CARLESI and Francesco Gavazzeni: detail
of a few inches square in court
could be decisive.

Technically is called piercing. All
we have two, one for ear, but the characteristics
are different for every human being
. "In Germany, in a procedure
for the recognition craniometrie or, the identification
of the pavilion headset right
is even the fingerprint data, namely
the fingerprinting",
recalls CARLESI. But what is the piercing? Is
that little cartilage coated Leather
that overlooks the auditory entrance of the ear
and that, like all the ear's pavilion
, is not changeable surgically.
How to explain the differences
between the right ear Paul McCartney in
an instantaneous previous to 1966 AND IN A
made probably the end of the 1990s
? is not only the piercing
to betray varying design
but also other parties as, just above
the entrance auditory, surveys of Litania and
the antelice. Things to ordinary mortals
may seem insignificant or little clear but that instead, every day, allow experts to detect and identify yet, even in the face to considerations of
this type, scepticism is hard to die
. "The still now do not know what to say
, in fact what you say" admits Gavazzeni
that McCartney, whoever he is,
it declares fan. While CARLESI is limited
to observe: "The doubts are very strong and
the discrepancies numerous, but there is expressing
yet with absolute certainty.
especially because we speak of
a character so well-known and more alive.
Before a corpse would be more clear:
the data emerged they would led to, and authorized to
proceed with more
depth and decisive examinations. However, if
replacement there was, the real masterpiece was to
find a double with anthropometric characteristics
in all,
very close to the original "" admits.
"There is to say that the analysis monitor
is, necessarily, accompanied by examinations
of other Type to make a report certain
to 100%".

Without be and without lead, at least in
words, to the extreme
their investigation, CARLESI and Gavazzeni embody
the essence amletica of the legend of
Paul is dead. Two different types of rationality
are hampered without the possibility of a truth
shared. as not to ask oneself
as can a man, in a few
months, alter form of the skull, palate, mouth,
nose, jaw and ears
while continuing to sing and to compose
music? There is the difficulty in
accepting an exchange of person almost
perfect; the other part, the craniometria is
not uphold the few indications inserted in the disks
, on the covers and in their video from the same
Beatles.

But the questions that may have found the answer
if they replace other, no less
demanding. Starting with the
question nobody, including
the party in question appears to give
an answer: who is the man we call
Paul McCartney?

Top that, Socrates! LOL!

socrates

19-07-2009, 02:25 AM

This has just come to my attention - at http://invanddis.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=5735&page=1.

Top that, Socarates! LOL!

You only just heard about it? LOL

We've been discusing that since yesterday.

It's garbage.

"Scientific team"? Yeah - right. :rolleyes:

http://maccafunhouse.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=pid&action=display&thread=3801&page=2

Still, I suppose it will get you PIDers all excited and jumping about - till you realise it's not a serious scientific study after all.

faulconandsnowjob

19-07-2009, 02:38 AM

It's game over for you, Socrates. All you can do is bully & insult people who don't agree w/ you. I guess you're going to declare yourself more of an "expert" than scientists? LOL! Ok, go ahead & keep trying to insist that Faul is Paul. You just make yourself look ridiculous. But hey, you keep the thread alive, so who cares? Knock yourself out. :p

faulconandsnowjob

19-07-2009, 03:25 AM

More from the August 2009 Italian WIRED Magazine PID article:

http://jojoplace.org/Shoebox/Wired_Italy_August_2009/Wired_Ear_Crop.jpg

You can see the different conformation of piercing A (billobato before the 1966) the different performance of ellce and the different amplezza of antelice and of the valley. Do not coincide even the proportions between the various points Litania-from antelice and incisura pretagica (or the depression between Piercing and antitrago).

http://jojoplace.org/Shoebox/Wired_Italy_August_2009/Wired_Lineup_Crop.jpg

First of all the sources:
CARLESI and Gavazzeni have used images acquired digitally from album original, photos of repertoire and steps with a digital different origins.
The question of their research, technically, is:
compatibility anatomoantropometrica between the portraits of Paul McCartney before and after the 1966, the year in which some believe is dead.
The images pre 1966 have been put in comparison with photo current, taking into account the impact of time past and surgery
aesthetics on soft parts of the face.
Before proceeding with the comparisons, pictures are
aligned and given to a single scale of reference.
Then (picture I) you have to identify the points
of craniometrici Broca (by Paul Pierre Broca, anthropologist,
doctor and surgeon French lived
in the 19 th century) and mapping the face of Pau!.

1. glabella (g).
2. nasion (n).
3. Centre of pupils (a parameter that we should abandon because it has been
used as point of alignment for the images).
4. Point nose-cord (Sn).
5. pogonion and gnathion (PG).

condilare gonion and emergency of articulation time-mandibular
serve to determine the profile

http://jojoplace.org/Shoebox/Wired_Italy_August_2009/WIred_Jaw_Crop.jpg

are beginning to arise the first discrepancies anatomical in figure the (two different images of Paul McCartney prior to 1966), extrapolating in detail the movements of the curve mandibular, we note the perfect coincidence of curves.
In the images pre 1966 the face of Paul McCartney is inscrivibile in a trapeze, in the rear in an ellipse, comparing two pictures taken in different periods the discrepancies are obvious.
The size of the third medium of the skeleton of the massive facial not match.

In Figure IV shall note the rough discrepancy of the trend of the curve mandibular, the pogonion DOES NOT COINCIDE AS THE commessura speech (the corners of the mouth).

In comparison with the image is the cover internal Sgt. Pepper's (figure (iii) is also noted a discrepancy of dimensional commessura speech that the moustasches (a completely new nellook by Paul post 1966) are unable to camouflage. Also the different performance
of the pavilions headsets is not completely hidden by the new cut of hair.

http://jojoplace.org/Shoebox/Wired_Italy_August_2009/Wired_Teeth_Crop.jpg

The existence of images of the mouth open of Paul McCartney before the 1966 (essentially live pictures of the artist while he sings) has also made possible a comparison on the look of teeth.

The figure v Paul dated 1966 show a marked endognazia, or a palate close to form the ogiva. There is a minimum distance between the canines, with misalignment of upper-right Canino for lack of space in Arch. There is also an arch of narrow chin also at the level. And molar. The Arch over the figure you left track dental arch different with the incisors central and lateral completely visible, and not aligned rotated on their axis. There is also a uniform of the color of the crowns in all the elements of
arch superior, that is we expect a ceramic encapsulation of the teeth.
It is important stress that no prosthetic rehabilitation is able to
create a bone that discrepancy, cellular and palatal. Aspects that in a person
shall be only through a surgical very invasive the suturing palatal and consequent orthodontic treatment and prostheses Co. these interventions, very difficult today, were particularly painful and almost impossible in the 1960s