Paul McCartney died in 1966 - replaced by Billy Shepherd

But that's just ridiculous. Singers train their voices, underlying characteristics stay the same but that doesn't mean the sound of the voice stays the same. People can, and do, change their voices.

If you don't like the fact that voice prints can be used to establish identity, then you should take it up w/ the legal system.

it's only you making the claim that there wasn't much interest in 2005, I would call that BIG BS lady, see I told you I knew things...

So, there were a lot of people who knew about PID in 2005? How would you know? You're dropping hints that you know something, but you clearly don't. Nice try. But we'll ask someone who has more history in this.

SednaSon, you've been involved in this since 2002. Do you think there were a lot of people who knew about PID in 2005?

Yes photo's (sic) can be used for evidence, but only if what is in that pic points to anything relevant.

Do you even know what "relevant evidence" is? It is "evidence having any tendency to make the existence of any material fact more or less probable." Why do you think photos are on picture IDs? I think photos of faces are very relevant to establishing identity.

why don't you email Paul, or Faul if you'd prefer, and ask him what colour his eyes are?

This is kind of like pmexplorer's idea of asking Faul if he's Paul or not. lol

I'd rather spend more time figuring out Tavistock, or figuring out what the Illuminati does to the most famous artists on the planet. How they manipulate them, if at all.

Oh, how ironic. Clearly, someone has not read all of this thread, b/c I've posted rather a lot on how the Illuminati & Tavistock Institute tie into this.

has anyone tested Pauls voice from the 60s to a later Paul's voice to see if the signature is the same?

As a matter of fact, they have.

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. (Reeve, Andru J., Turn Me On, Dead Man: The Complete Story of the Paul McCartney Death Hoax, Ann Arbor: Popular Culture, Ink, 1994: 69).

It would be better to sample interviews, though, I think.

Those pics show nothing, they'd be laughed out of court if used as evidence.

And how would you know? You're obviously not a lawyer. lol


[edit on 16-7-2009 by faulconandsnowjob]

Not only did they change his brown eyes BLUE, they tampered w/ his eyebrows:

Originally posted by Wally HopeThe PID hoax has been popular for a lot longer 4 yrs ago.

Not correct. The PID "hoax" was only "popular" during the late 60's and early 70's. Late 1969 was when it started and it quickly died down after that due to a publicity campaign, i.e. Life magazine's cover "Paul Is Still With Us".

Originally posted by faulconandsnowjobSednaSon, you've been involved in this since 2002. Do you think there were a lot of people who knew about PID in 2005?

If you walk up to anybody on the street today, if they were old enough they will know about it from 1969. But if you ask most people and ones who frequent the internet, most won't even be aware that there has been a small, modern day reemergence of this topic on the internet. Anyone can prove this to themselves by looking at this thread and seeing the reactions by people saying "I can't believe this topic is still discussed."

This information hit the internet forums in 2003, but it was far from popular. It has grown at a grassroots level but, as I said above, is still not in the mainstream, whereas in 1969 it was. So, to answer your question faulcon, I would say no, not a lot of people knew about PID in 2005 and I don't think they do in 2009 either.

[edit on 16-7-2009 by SednaSon]

I feel hurt faulcon. I thought I was your number one nemesis here.

Now it seems it's all about Wally now.

I've posted links which debunk the so called height differences yet
people still post saying 'why haven't I..' etc. (as if it was my sole responsibility to) please go and read through the info those links contain!

Also faulcon, your claim relating to me a page or two ago..something like...'why would he post here unless he believes in pid' or something to that effect. Again I have also previously explained my reasons, not that I or anyone else should need to, for posting here.

The theory that Paul McCartney died was a hoax, the theory that you are trying to push on here that he was replaced by this 'Faul' person is a myth,
a lie, a complete fabrication which you are trying to prove and persuade others to believe in with ridiculous youtube ''PiD'' propaganda videos, endless repetitive photos which prove absolutely nothing (except the man grew up, changed hairstyles, gained weight, as he got older (shock horror!)
most (photos) I can safely say have been subject to some kind of editing and are taken completely out of context in order to try and prove some ridiculous notion about his height or eyebrows or earlobes etc etc.
I posted a complete explanation about how people's eye colours can change yet you still decide to post about that as if it had not been answered / debunked. What is the point of trying to impose your views on others
if you are unwilling to take in perfectly legitimate points made by people
in reply?

Why do you think you are finding it so hard on page 40 or whatever we are on of this thread to convince people?
Sure many come in and post how interesting it is, sure it is, it's a conspiracy theory about a musical superstar, a member of the most important band of all time, who wouldn't be interested?
Some are taken in by the aforementioned propaganda and before long you have a few bites and your fishing trip has been a success as you've suddenly landed a few beauties, well done, cue lots of stars for your following posts where you (try and) set right all the inadequacies and problems which I, Wally and many others have highlighted in relation to your 'evidence' by posting the same pictures and videos from ten pages ago again and again and pose the same rhetorical questions. Ad infinitum.

You still haven't offered (afaik) a decent and believable explanation
for simple questions like 'how did this 'faul' person manage to fool Macca's own father, his brother Mike, his children, his wife, his fellow Beatles, his colleagues like George Martin and Brian Epstein, etc etc. and others to this
day????????



[edit on 16-7-2009 by pmexplorer]

Originally posted by jimstradamus

Has anyone ever seen this picture of Faul with his rubber nose collection.

LOL! The 2 bottom pics show 2 difft Faul noses:



Bottom right is rather beaky. Paul's nose wasn't beaky.










[edit on 16-7-2009 by faulconandsnowjob]

Originally posted by SednaSon
So, to answer your question faulcon, I would say no, not a lot of people knew about PID in 2005 and I don't think they do in 2009 either.

No, but that's changing :-)

[edit on 16-7-2009 by faulconandsnowjob]

(you're at it again Faulcon ^^ - oh dear! photos showing no discernable difference whatsoever, apart from in one he's older, in one he's younger, different camera angles, lighting, editing, airbrushing, colouring etc etc etc.
I'm sorry but for me that's a NO.
:dn

Anyways here is a little interview with Sir Paul from last year
from a highly reputable source, the Times (UK).
entertainment.timesonline.co.uk...

I just happened to come across this gem of a quote..
(it's about two third of the way down)

"The primary beneficiary of Sunday’s hubbub will be Electric Arguments, the new album that — as the Fireman — he and the famously “cosmic” producer Youth wrote and recorded in just a fortnight. This isn’t the first time the two have collaborated, but, unlike the instrumental electronica of their first two albums, something long believed missing in McCartney has re-emerged. By lurching dramatically from a stoned modern sea-shanty (Travelling Light) to a lysergically progtacular Maori spiritual (Is This Love), it’s closer to the Beatles at their most casually inventive than anyone could expect. How perverse, then, that McCartney should stop short of putting his name to it.
“Actually, I don’t think it is,” he protests. “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.”



[edit on 16-7-2009 by pmexplorer]

Originally posted by pmexplorer
which I, Wally and many others have highlighted in relation to your 'evidence'

Unless you're a lawyer, I don't really care what your opinion is on what constitutes evidence. Cite to some legal sources to make claims about what is or isn't "evidence."

You still haven't offered (afaik) a decent and believable explanation
for simple questions like 'how did this 'faul' person manage to fool Macca's own father, his brother Mike, his children, his wife, his fellow Beatles, his colleagues like George Martin and Brian Epstein, etc etc. and others to this
day????????

I have addressed that. I'm sure he didn't fool anyone but the gullible masses who believe anything they're told. It doesn't matter if the guy looks or acts the same. They believe it b/c they WANT to believe it.

Not one PIA'er has tried to refute that Paul was a nail-biter & Faul wasn't. Guess you can't find any pics or video of Faul doing it? Difft mannerisms - more EVIDENCE that it's not the same guy. lol

Originally posted by pmexplorer
photos showing no discernable difference whatsoever, apart from in one he's older, in one he's younger, different camera angles, lighting, editing, airbrushing, colouring etc etc etc.
I'm sorry but for me that's a NO.

:dn

Obviously, you have no eye for detail if you can't see a difference in the noses.

Anyways here is a little interview with Sir Paul from last year
from a highly reputable source, the Times (UK).
entertainment.timesonline.co.uk...
...
“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.”

That is a very interesting quote. He's always making weird comments like that.

Originally posted by faulconandsnowjob

I have addressed that. I'm sure he didn't fool anyone but the gullible masses who believe anything they're told. It doesn't matter if the guy looks or acts the same. They believe it b/c they WANT to believe it.

Not one PIA'er has tried to refute that Paul was a nail-biter & Faul wasn't. Guess you can't find any pics or video of Faul doing it? Difft mannerisms - more EVIDENCE that it's not the same guy. lol

I don't need to be a lawyer to see things with my own eyes and not be misled by this nonsense.
That's a load of *****ks! So you find a video where he didn't bite his nails, wow, how utterly amazing, he was conducting an interview remember.
Paul swings his arms when he walks, it is an untypical style, is this impostor faking that too. I'll post some footage for you to mull over later.

"They believe it cos they want to believe it"

Haha, that should be your signature as that's about the only fathomable reason for you continuing this farce, exactly you believe it cos you want to believe it, but that's your choice, if you want to spend your days trying
to prove the unprovable the best of luck to you!

But anyway back on topic, so you are trying to tell me and everyone else his family were quite happy to have their beloved son,father, friend, colleague, relation etc etc replaced by a stranger!!!!! An impostor, they were content to allow this man to take over his identity and inherit his
personal wealth and live off his name?

Are you seriously trying to say that or did you really mean something else?

Originally posted by faulconandsnowjob

Originally posted by pmexplorer
photos showing no discernable difference whatsoever, apart from in one he's older, in one he's younger, different camera angles, lighting, editing, airbrushing, colouring etc etc etc.
I'm sorry but for me that's a NO.

:dn

Obviously, you have no eye for detail if you can't see a difference in the noses.

Anyways here is a little interview with Sir Paul from last year
from a highly reputable source, the Times (UK).
entertainment.timesonline.co.uk...
...
“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.”

That is a very interesting quote. He's always making weird comments like that.

''Weird'' according to you. Telling according to me and everyone else
who isn't trying to make something out of nothing.
He clearly relates to the fun they had with Sgt. Peppers, but you cannot accept that of course as to do so would be to admit defeat wouldn't it and make one look rather silly and we can't have that now can we.

Originally posted by pmexplorer

I don't need to be a lawyer to see things with my own eyes and not be misled by this nonsense.

And yet you claim to know what can or can't be evidence.

The pictures aren't misleading you. You're just refusing to believe what they're showing you.

That's a load of *****ks! So you find a video where he didn't bite his nails, wow, how utterly amazing, he was conducting an interview remember.

Try to find evidence of Faul biting his nails. Go on, I dare you. Oh, & Paul did bite his finger-nails - even in interviews.

you believe it cos you want to believe it

No one wants to believe anything bad happened to Paul.

if you want to spend your days trying to prove the unprovable

It's definitely provable.

But anyway back on topic, so you are trying to tell me and everyone else his family were quite happy to have their beloved son,father, friend, colleague, relation etc etc replaced by a stranger!!!!! An impostor, they were content to allow this man to take over his identity and inherit his
personal wealth and live off his name?

Do you actually know anything about the Illuminati?

Originally posted by pmexplorer
''Weird'' according to you.

Faul says: "It’s just a trick to fool yourself into thinking you’re not you, like a masked ball."

Faul is always saying things like that, or making references to his twin, saying "he's the famous one," or saying that he's schizophrenic or whatever. It's not a one time occurrence.

I think he almost wants people to figure out he's not the real deal. It must be tough pretending to be someone else for so long.

I agree faulcon. Faul gives clue to his being a double all the time.

Originally posted by Wally Hope


Yes it was. I lined up the eye balls with the edges of his eye sockets, the bottom of the chin, the part where the bone of the nose would be, even his hair line hasn't changed. The horizontal lines on the eyes match in both horiz, vert and the angle of the droop of his eyes, which is his most noticeable feature over the years that didn't change. Take a good stare at his eyes in any pic, then look at his eyes in another pic, if you don't see they are same then it's a perception issue not a conspiracy.

Yes my lines are approximate

Originally posted by aorAki

It wasn't their skulls you measured, fully. At least that's what I interpreted it to be.
Surely skull measurements remove the hair, are front and side as well as top and bottom, circumference etc....then it is possible for some features to match, but not others...you only shewed one angle, a two dimensional section; even then there were discrepancies.

It's not proof, but you haven't proved yourself correct yet.

So, again, you didn't measure the skulls. You engaged in some approximate measurements. I wonder how 'approximations' hold up in a court of law?

...and I'll re-ask my second question: how do you know that Paul/Faul answers all his emails?

Originally posted by faulconandsnowjob

It's definitely provable.

Oh right. WELL PROVE IT THEN!!

Originally posted by faulconandsnowjob
Do you actually know anything about the Illuminati?

The Illuminati - yes I do, it's all here: en.wikipedia.org...
What of it?

Now can you please answer my original question and refrain from
answering a question with a question. Thank you!


[edit on 16-7-2009 by pmexplorer]

Originally posted by aorAki
It wasn't their skulls you measured, fully. At least that's what I interpreted it to be. Surely skull measurements remove the hair, are front and side as well as top and bottom, circumference etc....then it is possible for some features to match, but not others...you only shewed one angle, a two dimensional section; even then there were discrepancies.

It's not proof, but you haven't proved yourself correct yet.

Dude you are looking at this too hard. The measurements were as exact as you could get with a simple graphic, the lines from one pic line up exactly to the second pic exactly. The lines I put mark major points of the skull, eyes, nose and chin.

How much more proof do you need? Again you can prove to yourself that I am right by repeating my work yourself. Just do it and quit wasting time with this pointless arguing.

So, again, you didn't measure the skulls. You engaged in some approximate measurements. I wonder how 'approximations' hold up in a court of law?

Yes I did as explained already. If it was to be used in court then a little more time and better photographs it wouldn't be approximate, because they measure exactly the same as you can see if you actually look. I say approx because you can't see the skull because of skin but as long as my lines are the SAME on both pics than being slightly off to the actual skull doesn't matter, as long as the lines on both pics match to the same points on each photo then the skulls are the same size.

...and I'll re-ask my second question: how do you know that Paul/Faul answers all his emails?

It's not a secret. Well Faul doesn't answer any emails because there is no such person unless they had the technology to re-size peoples heads and re-shape their eye sockets.

[edit on 16-7-2009 by Wally Hope]

Originally posted by SednaSon
I agree faulcon. Faul gives clue to his being a double all the time.

Like his album Twin Freaks

Originally posted by jimstradamus
Like his album Twin Freaks

Twin Freaks is a collaborative album by musician Paul McCartney with DJ and producer Freelance Hellraiser (Roy Kerry). The album was released on June 14, 2005.

History and structure

McCartney and Kerry created the double vinyl album as a continuation of Kerry's collaboration with McCartney from a 2004 tour. Kerry had previously released the mash-up album A Stroke of Genius, in 2002. The format of the mashup is that of an extreme remix in which two disparate musical and recording experiences are combined in a manner that goes beyond remix to literally merge or mashup the two songs so that they emerge as something unique or hybridized. The technique sometimes obscures the original source material or so seamlessly blends the divergent elements that disentangling the grafted parts becomes nearly impossible.

Kerry performed a half hour set prior to McCartney's 2004 gigs in which the Kerry remixed various McCartney tracks into unusual and often unrecognizable forms. Twin Freaks was the outgrowth of these manipulations.

All McCartney tracks are strongly revised and reinvented in the process. Parts of basic McCartney tracks are vigorously reworked.

The album was produced as a double vinyl release and a digital download in Windows Media Audio (WMA) format. The cover and interior artwork features paintings that are similar in tone and style to artist Willem de Kooning. McCartney knew the late artist, with whom he shared a similar painting style.



Next.



[edit on 16-7-2009 by pmexplorer]

reply to post by jimstradamus


Called 'Twin Freaks' because it was a collaboration with DJ Roy Kerry, and it was a double vinyl album.

It's a pun on the paring of two different talents that wouldn't normally collaborate and the double album.

DGPAC!

Ah beat me to it by a minute pm, good post!

[edit on 16-7-2009 by Wally Hope]