It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Did Paul McCartney actually die in 1966?

page: 2
14
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 05:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by Myrddin Wyllt

Why do people play records backwards, obviously hear weird sh!t, then put their own words to it? How bored must they be? Does this only happen in English? Does German or Chinese singing play satanic messages (in their own language) when reversed?

If these recordings were meant as secret messages, how clever of the musicians to write songs, which when played backwards give another message.....lol...., you couldn't do it if you tried!

I can imagine secret labs where employees would be spinning test pressings backwards and listening to the secret messages to spread the word of conspiracy! Haha!



Backmasking


Backmasking (also known as backward masking)[1] is a recording technique in which a sound or message is recorded backward onto a track that is meant to be played forward. Backmasking is a deliberate process, whereas a message found through phonetic reversal may be unintentional.

Backmasking was popularized by The Beatles, who used backward vocals and instrumentation in recording their 1966 album Revolver.[2] Artists have since used backmasking for artistic, comedic, and satiric effect, on both analog and digital recordings. The technique has also been used to censor words or phrases for "clean" releases of songs.




posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 05:02 AM
link   
"Check out the link I posted earlier, there's mention of her in it. She said something along the lines of

"If people knew the truth about Paul...." "

literally means and proves .... nothing at all!

Preposterous yes, how do you know I haven't researched this story extensively, you don't, this story is dead, not Paul McCartney!

Peace



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 05:05 AM
link   
reply to post by ThaLoccster
 


From your same source

Skepticism

Skeptic Michael Shermer claims that the emergence of the "Paul is dead" phenomenon, including the alleged message at the end of "I'm So Tired", was caused by faulty perception of a pattern. Shermer argues that the human brain evolved with a strong pattern recognition ability that was necessary to process the large amount of noise in man's environment, but that today this ability leads to false positives.[92] Stanford University psychology professor Brian Wandell postulates that the observance of backward messages is a mistake arising from this pattern recognition facility, and argues that subliminal persuasion theories are "bizarre" and "implausible."[36] Rumors of backmasking in popular music have been described as auditory pareidolia.[93] James Walker, president of Christian research group Watchman Fellowship, states that "You could take a Christian hymn, and if you played it backwards long enough at different speeds, you could make that hymn say anything you want to"; Led Zeppelin publicist BP Fallon concurs, saying that "Play anything backwards, and you'll find something." Eric Borgos of audio reversal website talkbackwards.com[94] states that "Mathematically, if you listen long enough, eventually you'll find a pattern",[23] while Jeff Milner of backmasking site jeffmilner.com[80] recounts, "Most people, when I show them the site, say that they’re not able to hear anything, until, of course, I show them the reverse lyrics."[95]

Audio engineer Evan Olcott claims that messages by artists including Queen and Led Zeppelin are coincidental phonetic reversals, in which the spoken or sung phonemes form new combinations of words when listened to backwards.[11] Olcott states that "Actually engineering or planning a phonetic reversal is next to impossible, and even more difficult when trying to design it with words that fit into a song."[24]

In 1985, University of Lethbridge psychologists John Vokey and J. Don Read conducted a study using Psalm 23 from the Bible, Queen's "Another One Bites the Dust", and other sound passages made up for the experiment. Vokey and Read concluded that if backmasking does exist, it is ineffective. Participants had trouble noticing backmasked phrases when the samples were played forwards, were unable to judge the types of messages (Christian, Satanic, or commercial), and were not led to behave in a certain way as a result of being exposed to the backmasked phrases. Vokey concluded that "we could find no effect of the meaning of engineered, backward messages on listeners’ behaviour, either consciously or unconsciously."[96] Similar results to Vokey and Read's were obtained by D. Averill in 1982.[97] A 1988 experiment by T.E. Moore found "no evidence that listeners were influenced, consciously or unconsciously, by the content of the backward messages."[31] In 1992, an experiment found that exposure to backward messages did not lead to significant changes in attitude.[98] Psychology professor Mark D. Allen says that "delivering subliminal messages via backward masking is totally and ridiculously impossible".[99]

The finding of backward Satanic messages has been explained as caused by the observer-expectancy effect. The Skeptic's Dictionary states that "you probably won't hear [backmasked] messages until somebody first points them out to you. Perception is influenced by expectation and expectation is affected by what others prime you for."[100] In 1984, S. B. Thorne and P. Himelstein found that "when vague and unfamiliar stimuli are presented, [test subjects] are highly likely to accept suggestions, particularly when the suggestions are presented by someone with prestige and authority."[101] Vokey and Read concluded from their 1985 experiment that "the apparent presence of backward messages in popular music is a function more of active construction on the part of the perceiver than of the existence of the messages themselves."[21]



THERE ARE 2 SIDES TO EVERY COIN!


Peace



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 05:25 AM
link   
There is a thread here already!= www.belowtopsecret.com...



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 07:05 AM
link   
Thank you everyone for your participation in this thread. I know there is already some existing thread on the subject, but what I wanted to highlight was the movie coming about this!

I tend to believe in everything but I am still a scpetic about this one! But if we continue to discuss on this subject, maybe we're going to find cool things (?) !

Thanks again,

Peace!



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 07:24 AM
link   
I had never heard about the movie, but the doppelganger research society has a good thread on paul/faul - doppels.proboards.com... - check it out....



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 07:34 AM
link   
In hearing him sing lately, I think his voice died in 1977.


Insert second line here.



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 08:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by hinky
In hearing him sing lately, I think his voice died in 1977.


Insert second line here.


Ahaha


2nd line here too



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 09:23 AM
link   
I'm actually seeing him live this Sunday. I'll ask him for you.


This is the first time I've read about this conspiracy in years!



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 09:35 AM
link   
Yes, Paul died in 1966. All of the Beatle died in 1966. They stopped playing pop music and began experimenting with different sounds. They were tired of the "good boy" facade. They used a lot of drugs and got involved in eastern mysticism. There was no physical death. It was the death of an idea; the fab 4, mop top, lovable Beatles. They just wanted to be who they really were and not what was expected.



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 09:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by nuclearbuddha
I'm actually seeing him live this Sunday. I'll ask him for you.


This is the first time I've read about this conspiracy in years!


Ahaha yes do it
! LOL!

@Darkelf - Yes ok, but it's not really the point
What we're talkin' about is PAUL = DEAD or not?

But I know you know that..



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 10:15 AM
link   
reply to post by Myrddin Wyllt
 


I was just trying to point out that not all instances of backmasking are made up or something left open to interpretation. It is something that really happens, as far as the Beatles backmasking I don't really have an opinion about.



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 10:57 AM
link   
reply to post by I.C. Weiner
 


That was a pretty interesting site you linked to. I read it for awhile. The one thing that really struck me about the pictures were the fact that Pauls hair always seemed to part, or go over the eyes to the right ear, where the Fauls always seem to go to the left. The foot thing was rather odd as well. The photo in the beginning with the ear piece missing was strange too.

I remember when the news came about about Paul being dead and the fact that there was a lot of ummm inuendos about it. Never thought much more about it till now.

As far as what this thread is about, I have to say, now I am curious about the movie just to see what there is to see.

Things that make you go hmmm



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 11:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by yigsstarhouse
reply to post by I.C. Weiner
 


That was a pretty interesting site you linked to. I read it for awhile. The one thing that really struck me about the pictures were the fact that Pauls hair always seemed to part, or go over the eyes to the right ear, where the Fauls always seem to go to the left. The foot thing was rather odd as well. The photo in the beginning with the ear piece missing was strange too.

I remember when the news came about about Paul being dead and the fact that there was a lot of ummm inuendos about it. Never thought much more about it till now.

As far as what this thread is about, I have to say, now I am curious about the movie just to see what there is to see.

Things that make you go hmmm


Glad my thread as made you "Hummm"!!
And yes, the site is very interesting!



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 03:50 PM
link   
there are alot of clues, but they already came out and said this was a hoax



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 03:51 PM
link   
Wow, it's been a while since the great Paul McCartney conspiracy has been
discussed. Search Search Search!!!



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 03:59 PM
link   
I say.....watch the ears....Every ear of every person looks different. take a picture of the real Paul and compare it with the fake Paul. That will do the job.....unless they gave him an ear-job of course.

It is on the other hand remarkeble how much talent the 'stand-in' Paul has compared to the dead Paul. With the band Wings he made some first-class music and with the Beatles he didn't fail to produce some real good stuff.

That is reason enough to conclude that it is a hoax...not true.



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 04:26 PM
link   
I absolutely love this topic!

I did extensive digging on this a while back and it was really fun to say the least.

There are a lot of odd things that can be considered clues in some of their songs and even on album artwork.

I don't know if it is true but its fascinating none the less.



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 04:35 PM
link   
Have you looked at this? www.myspace.com... Todd Loren


[edit on 8-6-2010 by DCDAVECLARKE]

[edit on 8-6-2010 by DCDAVECLARKE]



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 06:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by TV_Nation
I absolutely love this topic!

I did extensive digging on this a while back and it was really fun to say the least.

There are a lot of odd things that can be considered clues in some of their songs and even on album artwork.

I don't know if it is true but its fascinating none the less.


My pleasure


@ DCDaveClarke.. Nope, I will!




top topics



 
14
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join