Originally posted by Wally Hope


What people? A bunch of kids on the internet comparing pictures?

3

We're not all kids.

I kid you not.

Don't assume.

As I've said before, I find this an interesting theory, which is why i keep coming back to it.
It does seem far-fetched to me, but there are many things which appear to be far-fetched until one gets into the nitty-gritty.

At the moment I'm treating it like an interesting thought exercise because I haven't seen anything to cement it for me yet.

Having said that, there are some curious things such as the obviously different nose shape and curiously-apparent fake ears...or so they seem to me, but i need to investigate this further.
Also, why so much backmasking. Admittedly some of it is clutching at non-existennt straws, but there are a couple (notably the 'Gratitude' one) which intrigue me....I mean, why would they do that?

Yes, it could be all just a big pisstake, and if so, well done!
However, i don't expect to be called a 'kid' when I'm not.

The other reason i don't like to entertain this as 'fact' too much is because then it opens a whole can o' worms about the nature of reality and how much we have been duped by the powers that be.
That just makes my head hurt

There are a few kids on the Paul is Dead forums I visit, but most of the people are in their 40's, 50's and 60's and they are all interested in conspiracy theories. Not all are Beatles fans, but most are.

I don't know why this is so hard to believe. Honestly, people need to quit acting like children when presented with this information. So a celebrity was replaced with a double, it's not the end of the world.

Originally posted by aorAki
Having said that, there are some curious things such as the obviously different nose shape and curiously-apparent fake ears...or so they seem to me, but i need to investigate this further.
Also, why so much backmasking. Admittedly some of it is clutching at non-existennt straws, but there are a couple (notably the 'Gratitude' one) which intrigue me....I mean, why would they do that?

I disagree with the nose and ears looking different, they look the same to me. As we keep saying different lighting and different angles, look at photos of someone else or even yourself.

What's the 'gratitude' one I must have missed it.

The 'backmasking' was a new toy to play with. Musicians are always looking for a new thing to do. They didn't do that much of it, a little backwards guitar here and there and some studio out takes just mixed in for effect. Paul was the first to experiment with it. After they stopped touring they had more time in the studio to experiment, both John and Paul had 4 track tape machines at home. It was all part of the new psychedelic music and avante garde (Paul was the first there also even though John is thought as being the radical one). John went to the Indica gallery to see Yoko Ono's exhibit after Paul had been to see it and recommended it to him.

Yes, it could be all just a big pisstake, and if so, well done!
However, i don't expect to be called a 'kid' when I'm not.

Well done to who? No one set up this hoax, it just sort of grew from a bunch of fans who kept finding the so called 'clues', that were then reported in a college paper or two. At the time it wasn't that big of a story, I think you guys are making more of it than anyone else ever did before the internet.

After Brian Epstein died the band was kind of lost, it was Paul that kept them going, and sort of become their leader much to the resentment of the rest. But if he didn't the band would have split more than likely. Even though John was seen as the leader by default in the beginning, he was too insecure for the role of leader when it became really necessary, before that they did what Brian and George Martin told them to do. Notice Paul got most of the 'A' sides, and he managed to manipulate a lot of the processes so he would stand out from the other 3, such as the black rose when the others all had red, or standing backwards towards the band like he was the conductor, walking out of step and barefoot on the 'Abbey Road' cover. Anything to stand out from the other three. Paul is good at self promotion.

Have you ever watched 'Let it Be'? If you haven't you should, you can see how Paul seems to be the one in control of the sessions. More time was spent on his songs, he tended to be more experimental on Johns songs than he did his own.

Why would the other 3 let that happen if he was not Paul? Common sense and logic should tell you that answer.

[edit on 23-6-2009 by Wally Hope]

The other reason i don't like to entertain this as 'fact' too much is because then it opens a whole can o' worms about the nature of reality and how much we have been duped by the powers that be.

This on top of people not wanting to believe anything bad happened to Paul def makes this an unpopular "conspiracy theory." However, closing your eyes to the truth doesn't change the truth. I think it's better to know what all goes on so we don't fall victim to the manipulation & control.

Getting back to what Sedna said, I do wonder why is this so hard for some people to believe. Given that the Illuminati kill people they don't like & given that there are doubles/impersonators, then how long do you think it took for them to hit upon the idea of replacing people w/ their own stooges? And given that they control most of the media, they have been able to convince most people that a guy who was older, taller, not as good-looking, not as talented, etc, was Paul. Yeah... It's time to wake up & see how much you've been mind-you-know-whated. And this is just the tip of the iceberg...

[edit on 24-6-2009 by faulconandsnowjob]

Paul had a very distinctive right eyebrow that the imposter didn't have. Unfortunately, his eyebrows were often hidden by his hair, but you can see them in this comp.



That's another smoking gun, I would say.

I find it hard to imagine so many girls going wonky over the guy in the white shirt. I know I wouldn't.






[edit on 24-6-2009 by faulconandsnowjob]

Originally posted by Wally Hope
Please point out in detail how the ear is different?

All I see is pics at different angles and in different lighting.

If you really want to prove that human anatomy cannot be slightly different looking from pic to pic, year to year, you need a research test.
You need to look at a bunch of different people, and point out how they all look exactly alike from year to year etc., and then if they do fit your logic then you might have something convincing.

I'm guessing you won't do this?

Cranberry sauce...

It's " I bury Sauce " .....You can here the bury and the S so neither argument is right.

Originally posted by faulconandsnowjob

That's another smoking gun, I would say.

Yeah (yeah yeah) I think you've been smoking something, but I doubt it's a warm gun.

Oh btw this is what Paul said about 'I buried Paul'

That wasn't 'I buried Paul' at all—that was John saying 'cranberry sauce'. It was the end of Strawberry Fields. That's John's humour. John would say something totally out of sync, like cranberry sauce. If you don't realize that John's apt to say cranberry sauce when he feels like it, then you start to hear a funny little word there, and you think, 'Aha!'

So now you've got it from John and Paul, I guess they must have got together at some point to get their story straight...

And From The Beatles Recording Sessions, by Mark Lewisohn...

. . . At the end of the second overdub John Lennon muttered the words 'cranberry sauce' twice over. The red acidic berry, famous for complementing roast turkey, had no relevance whatsoever to the song and John's utterance cannot be satisfactorily explained beyond the point that it was just 'typical John Lennon'. One 'cranberry sauce' (two on some foreign pressings of the song) even made it onto the finished single, if you listen hard enough.

[edit on 24-6-2009 by Wally Hope]

Originally posted by faulconandsnowjob
Paul had a very distinctive right eyebrow that the imposter didn't have. Unfortunately, his eyebrows were often hidden by his hair, but you can see them in this comp.

That's another smoking gun, I would say.

Also the chin....Paul had a more Jay Leno like chin and Faul has a chin that is pushed in more....

Can't you tell that the eyebrows are completely different - as are the entire faces?

Sometimes I wish there were some glasses like in "They Live" that people could put on to see that those are not the same faces.

Should be 1966 & 1967, but o/wise good comp.

[edit on 24-6-2009 by faulconandsnowjob]