Paul McCartney is dead.

[dream9]

It's garbage.


You've been able to determine that already? How so?

[faulconandsnowjob]

^ Obviously, Socrates subjected the evidence to the same scientific methods those researchers used & was unable to duplicate their results. Right. LOL! :p

[faulconandsnowjob]

The Italian article asked at the end: "who is the man we call Paul McCartney?"

I want to know what happened to the real Paul! :(

[faulconandsnowjob]

I wish the Italian article hadn't used this doctored photo of Paul:

http://i366.photobucket.com/albums/oo110/faulconandsnowjob/blue.jpg
The eyes have been changed to blue, & the eyebrows were tampered with.

http://i366.photobucket.com/albums/oo110/faulconandsnowjob/BeatlesStory651.jpg

[ar20]

Let me get this straight...

He still hasn't addressed my nail-biting properly and over the last few days we've had Faul on Letterman talk about PID as well as AN OFFICIAL WIRED PUBLICATION from Italy with a complete PID breakdown involving a scientific team.

And he turns round to you, and tells you it's all garbage. :rolleyes::rolleyes:

Oh, is this a 9/11 Popular Mechanics Yellow Journalism example again? Please, you're done my friend.

Hey Socrates, you might get lucky... maybe they'll discuss the freckles you keep on harping on about.

It's game over for you son, night night.

[ar20]

I read a bit, maybe halfway through, then i had enough. They mentioned "O.P.D" which is a big big flaw. The patch says "O.P.P" Even when i was PID i knew that. But even worse, one of the "experts" noted that the biggest "difference" was that the teeth were slightly different. Uhm...... THE MOPED ACCIDENT? THE CHIPPED TOOTH?! OF COURSE the teeth are going to be slightly different! And the only pics they used at that point was the "Pepper" pics. Yeah great, there are maybe 1 good picture to compare with there. Almost all of them are too small. I do plan on reading the entire thing, but not right now.

Oh look at them all frothing at the mouth, they can't believe it.

There's a clear IAMAPHONEY video showing about 3 images of that patch clearly saying O.P.D not O.P.P

I've tried searching for more info on this and have come up with virtually nothing. There's zilch on the authors Fabio Andriolla and Alessandra Gigante, very little of note on Antonio Carella and Enzo Cicchini. Also there is nothing at all about it on the Italian Wired site.

So...either the Illuminati have removed all traces of the article from the internet ::) or...it's just another (albeit quite clever) hoax.

Needless to say they're starting to go bananas over this on planet PiD. I have a feeling their excitement won't last very long.


...yeah someone spent their time replicating an entire magazine to prove this. :rolleyes: What's the conspiracy here, really?

http://img27.imageshack.us/img27/2190/15072009007.jpg

[brainfreeze]

^ Obviously, Socrates subjected the evidence to the same scientific methods those researchers used & was unable to duplicate their results. Right. LOL! :p

It would seem the Italian evidence is flawed. As you highlight, they used a doctored pic.

I wish the Italian article hadn't used this doctored photo of Paul:

http://i366.photobucket.com/albums/oo110/faulconandsnowjob/blue.jpg
The eyes have been changed to blue, & the eyebrows were tampered with.

http://i366.photobucket.com/albums/oo110/faulconandsnowjob/BeatlesStory651.jpg

[ar20]

http://img27.imageshack.us/img27/2190/15072009007.jpg

Image too big, click link.

Real as PID.

Hey mind the other day you were spouting off that PiD was dead and it was just a hoax? :P

[ar20]

It would seem the Italian evidence is flawed. As you highlight, they used a doctored pic.

Yeah.... a doctored pic on the cover...

What about the rest?

[brainfreeze]

Yeah.... a doctored pic on the cover...

What about the rest?

They start off with a fuck up and you want me to not only look at but to believe the rest?

I'm really not that bored or obessed with McCartney. I'm sure if it were true he has enemies enough who'd have revealled all by now.

I find it facinating when you lot speak with such authority when contributing to this thread.

[ar20]

They start off with a fuck up and you want me to not only look at but to believe the rest?

I'm really not that bored or obessed with McCartney. I'm sure if it were true he has enemies enough who'd have revealled all by now.

I find it facinating when you lot speak with such authority when contributing to this thread.

I find it fascinating how you can speak with an authority in regards to the rest of the article. You haven't even read it but are rolling your eyes at it because they used a doctored photo on the front?

And by doctored, I can only spot the fact that Paul for some reason has blue-eyes.

Wow. Ignorant much?

WIRED's a pretty recognizable publication. It's not like this is Paul is Dead Monthly or IBURIEDPAUL DIGEST.

http://www.foodpoisonblog.com/uploads/image/ostrich_head_in_ground_full.jpg

All truth goes through three phases. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self evident.

[brainfreeze]

I like to think of it as less head in sand and more time and energy best spent on real concerns. So I'll bow out, but retain the right to pop in every once in awhile for a giggle that this is still on going.

Have a good day and carry on as usual :)

[faulconandsnowjob]

Brainfreeze, unless you have a Dr. in front of your name, I think I'm going to go w/ the experts. LOL! And if you had bothered to look at the article, they used different photos to compare. They're obviously not going to use just one. :p More on that...

Hey, Focrates (b/c I have respect for Socrates) why don't you post some more non-matching freckle patterns from 2 totally difft guys? Or how about some more Paul-Paul comps just to show how you can't tell the difference at all?

I guess Paul got a neck transplant while he was going thru that series of painful surgeries to transform his face? LOL!

http://i366.photobucket.com/albums/oo110/faulconandsnowjob/sff_comp2.jpg
http://i366.photobucket.com/albums/oo110/faulconandsnowjob/paul_mccartney_faul_profiles.jpg

[faulconandsnowjob]

The Ontario Provincial Police patch

http://monocommunitypolicing.ca/images/OPP_Patch.gif

looked like "OPD" on Sgt. Pepper:

http://pentaclerecords.net/darien3/Beatles_Sgt_Pepper_main_insert_pic.jpg

Some people think it was doctored to make it look like "OPD."

[father ted]

He says he's not dead.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cTNHD7lDX2U

[faulconandsnowjob]

Of course, he's not dead. That's like LIFE magazine asking him if he were dead instead of asking if he were an imposter. But now Faul has admitted to being a double on the Letterman show. :p

Just a good replica, my *ss. He's a crappy replica. This is just scary:

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

I can't believe people fell for that. LMAO!!! :p

[faulconandsnowjob]

I don't expect people to willingly give up the illusion just b/c some scientists proved Faul is a fake. Cling to your false beliefs all you want, but that guy ain't Paul! :p

[ar20]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OwFxYWmglv4

People honestly believe the guy holding the camera is the same Paul. Dear God.

[faulconandsnowjob]

I'm really happy the scientists did a biometrical analysis to prove Paul was replaced & everything, but some people can just tell by looking. Who's deluded now? lol :D

Anyway, I wonder what the scientists would have said about the fake ear piece:

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

I wish they'd used this comp:

http://i366.photobucket.com/albums/oo110/faulconandsnowjob/sff_comp2.jpg

instead of this one:

http://jojoplace.org/Shoebox/Wired_Italy_August_2009/Wired_Ear_Crop.jpg

[ar20]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1YxNXrew3Tw

Faulcon watch this, here's a clear shot of it saying O.P.D don't know if it's edited but it's certainly O.P.D on the cover here.

[faulconandsnowjob]

Yeah, they made it look like OPD. Maybe Faul was recruited from the OPP (Ontario Provincial Police), or maybe they used it so they could make it look like OPD - officially pronounced dead - just another clue for you all (& some of you people really do need to get a clue :D). But anyway, when Faul was asked about it once, he said it was from the "Ontario Police Department." lol. That guy cracks me up :p

[ar20]

Ultimately this is just one huge Beatles mindfuck.

It's staggering how much of it you have to go through, I mean for fucks sake it's just a music band -- how important where they in the grand scheme of things?

That's why most people don't get PiD, they haven't researched the 60's drug culture (it's no accident Faul ended up in 1967 saying he'd taken LSD)/rebellion/tavistock institute/manson murders/backwards messages/satanism and crowley/rock and roll deaths and the emergence of MK Ultra and mind control tech.

[jackbumbo]

Just came out to help Socrates. So Paul stopped being a nailbiter after 1966?
http://img166.imageshack.us/img166/6387/paulnail.png
Try again. Paul is not dead.

[faulconandsnowjob]

OMG! Are you kidding me? This argument is over. Paul is dead. Scientists have proven he was replaced.

I guess I shouldn't expect people to believe it just b/c some "scientists" w/ their fancy "scientific methodology" say it's true. They're going to believe whatever they want to believe, evidence be damned! :rolleyes:

Sometimes I wish I could live in the fantasy world some people live in. I bet it's a nice place where everything they say on the news is true & the govt really is here to help. LOL!

[faulconandsnowjob]

Ultimately this is just one huge Beatles mindfuck.
This mindfuck goes way beyond the Beatles. Have you checked out the Stepford Wives thread yet? There's some insane stuff there. :eek:
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=46038

It's staggering how much of it you have to go through, I mean for fucks sake it's just a music band -- how important where they in the grand scheme of things?
They were important - more than you think. ;) But to try to "debunk" this theory, those people sure had to work hard. They are still flailing around on the floor, refusing to give up. At least you have to admire their tenacity. :p

That's why most people don't get PiD, they haven't researched the 60's drug culture (it's no accident Faul ended up in 1967 saying he'd taken LSD)/rebellion/tavistock institute/manson murders/backwards messages/satanism and crowley/rock and roll deaths and the emergence of MK Ultra and mind control tech.
Exactly. They can't see how Paul's getting killed fits into the bigger picture. They don't see how doubles are exploited to further the agenda. They don't see the broader implications of the mass deception that's been going on.

[faulconandsnowjob]

Posted by Kshaund on ATS:

I saw the Letterman interview - and Paul touches his nose just before he talks, generally an indicator what is coming is a lie - body language and mini-facials are more revealing than the words. He also referred to "Paul" as "he" and not "I"... and unless he was intentionally playing around at the end of his story, his face shows a ton of stress and very uncomfortable with it - and I also wonder why that story was the topic of discussion anyway instead of his music or life??? To keep the rumor alive?

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread195888/pg46&addstar=1&on=6740240#pid6740240


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

[socrates]

Just came out to help Socrates. So Paul stopped being a nailbiter after 1966?
http://img166.imageshack.us/img166/6387/paulnail.png
Try again. Paul is not dead.

Thanks dude. So by AR20's silly argument that must mean it's Paul then. :D

That whole 'He doesn't bite his nails in this 2 minute interview so it proves it's not Paul' was one of the most ridiculous PID arguments I've ever come across.

[armoured_amazon]

Just came out to help Socrates. So Paul stopped being a nailbiter after 1966?
http://img166.imageshack.us/img166/6387/paulnail.png
Try again. Paul is not dead.

Lmao :D

I bite my nails, omg I'm Paul McCartney! :eek:

[socrates]

OMG! Are you kidding me? This argument is over. Paul is dead. Scientists have proven he was replaced.

LOL at FaulCON getting all giddy and hysterical about a magazine article she hasn't even read properly yet. :rolleyes:

It would be so ironic if it was just another hoax.

And you do realise that one of the photos they use is "doctored", according to you? The Pepper pic.

And don't you claim the illuminati controls the media? So they'd let this get out, would they?

Listen, until this article has been looked at carefully and the specific claims analysed I wouldn't get too carried away if I was you.

Not that it will stop you, though.

Time to give this thread a miss until all the silly hysteria has died down.....

[socrates]

Lmao :D

I bite my nails, omg I'm Paul McCartney! :eek:

I don't, omg I'm Faul! :eek:

[fireman]

LOL at FaulCON getting all giddy and hysterical about a magazine article she hasn't even read properly yet. :rolleyes:

It would be so ironic if it was just another hoax.

And you do realise that one of the photos they use is "doctored", according to you? The Pepper pic.

And don't you claim the illuminati controls the media? So they'd let this get out, would they?

Listen, until this article has been looked at carefully and the specific claims analysed I wouldn't get too carried away if I was you.

Not that it will stop you, though.

Time to give this thread a miss until all the silly hysteria has died down.....

Funny to see Faulcon so exited! :D If she only knew..
Those illuminati seem to be a careless bunch, that's for sure! :)

[faulconandsnowjob]

Focrates, how many aliases do you have, anyway?

Ok, here's a suggestion for you. Why don't you find evidence of the wires that would have been necessary to reconstruct Paul's face? That might prove it's the same guy. lol :D

[faulconandsnowjob]

Focrates, you could also try this. You could conduct the the same scientific analysis those scientists did. If you can't duplicate their results, then maybe you could publish your findings & refute their claim that Paul was replaced. Until then, you got nothing! lol :p

[faulconandsnowjob]

Lmao :D

I bite my nails, omg I'm Paul McCartney! :eek:

LOL! I know, right? And they post non-matching freckle patterns from 2 completely difft people to somehow "prove" they're the same. These people must be on crack or something. :p

[faulconandsnowjob]

Here's Focrates:

I don't care what any "scientists" say with their crazy scientific method & fancy measurements & calculations. I can look at these pictures & tell they're exactly the same:

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

Well, except for the nose, and the eyebrows. Oh, & the jawline & throat. And of course, the mouth - that goes w/o saying. Actually, the whole freakin' head & face are different. :p

[faulconandsnowjob]

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

Posted by Kshaund on ATS:


I saw the Letterman interview - and Paul touches his nose just before he talks, generally an indicator what is coming is a lie - body language and mini-facials are more revealing than the words. He also referred to "Paul" as "he" and not "I"... and unless he was intentionally playing around at the end of his story, his face shows a ton of stress and very uncomfortable with it - and I also wonder why that story was the topic of discussion anyway instead of his music or life??? To keep the rumor alive?

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread195888/pg46&addstar=1&on=6740240#pid6740240

[toty1994]

The Wired article is now online.
http://www.wired.it/magazine/archivio/2009/06/storie/chiedi-chi-era-quel-%C2%ABbeatle%C2%BB-.aspx
Whatever the credibility of the findings, this is an interesting development as you would expect any msm PiD article to poke fun at the conspiracy. Very intrigued to see how this will pan out, particularly if it's picked up by other msm sources.

[dream9]

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



Does anybody have a date for this Letterman appearance?

[astrochicken]

Asides from the fact that it's obviously 2 different people, the nay-sayers like to portray the "paul is dead" conspiracy as just a few deluded anonymous posters on internet forums who picked it up from some obscure radio host in 1969 and have been keeping the rumour alive since then.

The fact that it was in most of the papers, magazines and on TV since 1966 goes completely over their heads, there's enough footage and articles pointing this out and showing thousands of crying girls standing outside paul's house in '66.

Throw in the change in music, timbre, voice, lyrical ability, mannerisms and the fact that paul went from charismatic to a pretentious wanker in the space of months and it should be fairly obvious to more than the few that can see it.

[start socrates mode]
Ah.. but this is of course. all just my OPINION which i can't PROVE
with IRREFUTABLE EVIDENCE. BLAH BLAH BLAH.
[end socrates mode]



Noting how easily they removed michael jackson.. i think i'd be shitting myself, if i were wearing faul's shoes.

[ar20]

Just came out to help Socrates. So Paul stopped being a nailbiter after 1966?
http://img166.imageshack.us/img166/6387/paulnail.png
Try again. Paul is not dead.

Oh god! NOOOOOO! YOU DEBUNKED ME WITH 1 WHOLE PIC.

That isn't even him biting his nails... the look is universal, google image - nail biting/nail biters

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

Just go back and get the videos I'm not quoting my entire post AGAIN for the blind.

*slaps head* If this is what we're dealing with in discussion here....

The point was he was a rabid nail biter until 1966, then suddenly dropped his habit with no explanation. That's the issue, not the fact he bit his nails.

Wriggly Socrates try to pull straws and say it wasn't a nervous tick or whatever, but I've shown him about 10 articles saying it is as well as one with clinical data and medical sources.

Regardless, here we have a top magazine from Italy saying it with 2 biometric scientists prove it and all he can say now is.

"Oh I'll be back later when this nonsense subsides".

If that isn't proof he has nothing left to say I don't know what is. You can see the rest of the PiA'ers limping out of this topic because they can't say a thing against it.

[ar20]

The Wired article is now online.
http://www.wired.it/magazine/archivio/2009/06/storie/chiedi-chi-era-quel-%C2%ABbeatle%C2%BB-.aspx
Whatever the credibility of the findings, this is an interesting development as you would expect any msm PiD article to poke fun at the conspiracy. Very intrigued to see how this will pan out, particularly if it's picked up by other msm sources.

I'm not expecting you to change stance overnight but what is your actual opinion here. I'm interested in that. PiD finally has some scientific recognition with this, and the fact it's a huge spread in a big science magazine is pretty amazing.

Honestly want to know what you're thinking right now, because we've all been going back and fourth in this topic for months and this is huge in regards to our evidence.

[ar20]

Thanks dude. So by AR20's silly argument that must mean it's Paul then. :D

That whole 'He doesn't bite his nails in this 2 minute interview so it proves it's not Paul' was one of the most ridiculous PID arguments I've ever come across.

One of the better ones you actually couldn't argue against so it's now ridiculous? :rolleyes:

God your a piece of work, do you know anything about Body Languages / Mannerisms / Habits and Traits?

You don't just stop being a rabid nail-biter overnight (after 66). :rolleyes:

Aren't you the guy that posted Lamp-Posts and told us we couldn't judge two pictures because they were at different perspective?

And haven't you been spamming those silly freckle pics which don't even match?

Give it up, dude. You're done. Game over. Go find another topic to play in.

[fireman]

You can see the rest of the PiA'ers limping out of this topic because they can't say a thing against it.

Oh, there is a lot to say against EVERY SINGLE POINT of yours and PID. ANd we did that over and over again. But you just shut your ears and eyes, and continue putting every reasonable PIA proof down.

But just a quick reply to your last post:

1. Wired italy is not a "top magazine". if a was a real top journalisticly renowned journal... it would be a bit different.

2. What they do isn't science!! don't you see that? they compare some random pictures and call that science? did you go to university? that is science

3. if they would have compared pictures that I MYSELF had selected, they would have seen it's the same man. Also: i had picked out pictures of only before 1967, they must have thought it's a different guy. Because features DO LOOK DIFFERENT even if it is the same guy, if you pic the right photos.

4. Why is it clear that the solution of that article was "yeah, he could be dead!"? It's an entertainement magazine, NOT a scientifical journal! The only interesting thing to bring out in public is: " yeah, he could be dead! we have "scientifically prooven that!! wink, wink...." Because the answer "he is alive" is self-evident! of course he is alive!

5. All by a sudden, if it's in the media, then it's solid, scientifical facts?
How comes? What about the illuminati controlling the mass-media? What about all those journals that have debunked conspiracies like "the moon landing hoax" or "9/11"? Are these all scentifically prooven facts now?
ok: close the david icke forum down then!

6. Ah wait, the logic is: if a theory that you believe in is debunked, then it's bullshit, disinfo or whatever. If the theory is affirmed, then it's scientifically prooven!

7. If there would have been a magazine saying: we have scientifical proove that PID is a big hoax and none of it is true (which of course nobody is interested in, because it's self-evident) then you would NEVER EVER be so easily convinced or be such a science-devotee all of a sudden!



That is my honest reply, so please ar20, take it as as such...

[faulconandsnowjob]

Thanks for posting the link to the article, Toty.

Fireman, WIRED is a respectable magazine. Those are real scientists. I realize you have to attack the credibility of the source, but we can see right thru that charade.

Obviously, PID isn't a "ridiculous" theory at all, since it's now been SCIENTIFICALLY PROVEN. I think some of you who have been calling us, the ones who could see it along, "delusional" should be eating crow right now.

Let's take a look at "delusion," shall we?

de⋅lu⋅sion 
 [di-loo-zhuhn]
–noun
...
3. a false belief or opinion ...
4. Psychiatry. a fixed false belief that is resistant to reason or confrontation with actual fact...

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/delusion


Now that it has been proven that Paul was replaced by science, those of you who cling to the false belief that it's the same guy are the ones who are "deluded." Sorry, but that's just the way it is.

[ar20]

Oh, there is a lot to say against EVERY SINGLE POINT of yours and PID. ANd we did that over and over again. But you just shut your ears and eyes, and continue putting every reasonable PIA proof down.


The things you've had to say have been:

:rolleyes: and "Pathetic", "Debunked", "Nonsense"

You haven't even touched on half the stuff we've talked about, and you side-by-side with Socrates all the way holding his hand.

But just a quick reply to your last post:

1. Wired italy is not a "top magazine". if a was a real top journalisticly renowned journal... it would be a bit different.



On February 19, 2009, Condé Nast Italia launched the Italian edition of Wired and Wired.it.[7] On April 2, 2009, Condé Nast relaunched the UK edition of Wired and launched Wired.co.uk.[8]



Wired is a full-color monthly American magazine and on-line periodical, published since March 1993, that reports on how technology affects culture, the economy, and politics. Owned by Condé Nast Publications, it is published in San Francisco, California.

It now has two new international editions retailing in the United Kingdom and Italy.

It's a top magazine in America (as in, well known), this is just the italian deviation.


2. What they do isn't science!! don't you see that? they compare some random pictures and call that science? did you go to university? that is science


Did you read who the people doing those tests were? They were scientists, see this how you can't argue for nothing -- you don't read anything or even scan the things we post.

http://www.wired.it/magazine/archivio/2009/06/storie/chiedi-chi-era-quel-%C2%ABbeatle%C2%BB-.aspx

The two of them were scientists, the translation isn't that good -- so I cannot even tell you what field they're from except for a word of Anthropometry, and the other having something to do with biometrics.

Anyway, I can assure you they are scientists.


3. if they would have compared pictures that I MYSELF had selected, they would have seen it's the same man. Also: i had picked out pictures of only before 1967, they must have thought it's a different guy. Because features DO LOOK DIFFERENT even if it is the same guy, if you pic the right photos.


There's a part in the article describing why they don't even have the same teeth, and if you're comparing before 1967 photos then you're comparing Paul with Paul. He died late 66, remember?


4. Why is it clear that the solution of that article was "yeah, he could be dead!"? It's an entertainement magazine, NOT a scientifical journal! The only interesting thing to bring out in public is: " yeah, he could be dead! we have "scientifically prooven that!! wink, wink...." Because the answer "he is alive" is self-evident! of course he is alive!


This is just incoherant rambling. It's a magazine spread with two scientists claiming photos of Paul before and after 66/67 don't match (LIKE WE'VE BEEN SAYING). They went into it with your mindset, thinking it was a hoax and came away with the answer that those two cannot be the same man.


5. All by a sudden, if it's in the media, then it's solid, scientifical facts?
How comes? What about the illuminati controlling the mass-media? What about all those journals that have debunked conspiracies like "the moon landing hoax" or "9/11"? Are these all scentifically prooven facts now?
ok: close the david icke forum down then!


Silly comment. The illuminati don't control EVERYTHING. That's your opinion. David Icke was featured Channel 5 on here asking was he right, there's room all over the general media for this type of stuff.


6. Ah wait, th[e logic is: if a theory that you believe in is debunked, then it's bullshit, disinfo or whatever. If the theory is affirmed, then it's scientifically prooven!


Why is it you slow-witted people think everythings got to be peer-reviewed and written in scientific journals :rolleyes:. Scapegoat every time, I don't need a man in a lab coat to tell me those two guys aren't the same -- you do though, it's weak minded.

I'm not saying anythings proven. I'm saying PiD in the last week hasn't been "dead" as you put it -- the contrary, he was rumbled on Letterman and looked visably nervous and stressed / PiD is on front page of Wired Magazine in Italy with two scientists claiming he isn't the same man.


7. If there would have been a magazine saying: we have scientifical proove that PID is a big hoax and none of it is true (which of course nobody is interested in, because it's self-evident) then you would NEVER EVER be so easily convinced or be such a science-devotee all of a sudden!


Yes it's so self-evident that it's true, give me a break. It's been going on for over 40 years, it isn't just a few people noticing this -- these two scientists are now on the front cover of a big magazine talking about Paul McCartney being dead.

We've been hollering for years about voice prints and biometrics and somebody finally has done it. Now that they've done it, you've nothing more to say... "Oh the pictures they used were doctored", "Oh they aren't scientists", "Oh it isn't peer reviewed".

Neither is all the work from 9/11Truth but you still vest an interest in saying a conspiracy behind that, don't you? Please, have some sense.

I'm laughing my ass off, I thought you all didn't believe in tampering?



That is my honest reply, so please ar20, take it as as such...

I don't know how to take it, you just ramble on about a whole load of nothing.

[faulconandsnowjob]

I wonder how many surgeries it took "Paul" to transform himself into the guy on the right? :p

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

[ar20]

Sorry it was this word:

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

[ar20]

Translation isn't the best from BabelFish but the jist is there:


Gabriella Carlesi adds an ulterior element: “Regarding the photos precedence, that of Sgt. Pepper' s extension clearly that the labiale commessura, that is the formed line dall' union of the two lips, without warning has grown tall. What that obviously is not possible and that the moustaches do not succeed to camouflage”. In other words, and it is phenomenon too much frequent end of these times, the lips can be swollen and increased of volume, but l' amplitude of the labiale commessura cannot vary more than a lot. It can endure lightest alterations, but the case of the examined photo is not this: here the difference between first and after is too much hard for being able to be be caused from a any surgical participation. And in more, always under the moustaches of the McCartney di Sgt. Pepper' perhaps s, it has been attempted to hide an other element: what the specialists call the nose-spinal or sottonasale point. It is the point between the two narici where the nose begins to detach itself from the ace: “Draft also in this case of a characteristic feature that the surgical medicine cannot modify. It can change the form of the nose but not the nose-spinal point”, explains Gabriella Carlesi. “And between the McCartney of the first group of photo and that one of the second that varied point clearly”.

[ar20]

> from Systran

Tecnicamente is called trago. All we have two, one for ear, but the characteristics are various for every human being. “In Germany, in a procedure of craniometrico acknowledgment, the identification of right the auricular pavilion is equivalent quite to the dactyloscopy, that is to the survey of the fingerprints”, Carlesi remembers. But what is the trago? It is that small covered cartilage of skin that surpasses the auditory entrance of the ear and that, to the par of all the auricular pavilion, is not modifiable surgical. How to explain therefore the differences between the right ear of Paul McCartney in an instantaneous precedence to 1966 and in realizing probably at the end of the Nineties? It is not only the trago to betray a various conformation but also others you leave like, hardly over the auditory entrance, the reliefs of the helix and the antelice. Things that to the mortal municipalities can seem insignificant or little clear but that instead, every day, allow with the experts to characterize and to identify people, bodies, photographies.

Nevertheless, also in front of considerations of this type, the skepticism is hard to die. “I still now do not know what to say, indeed what to be said”, he admits Gavazzeni that of McCartney, anyone it is, fan is declared. While Carlesi is limited to observe: “The doubts are very strong and the numerous discordanze, but us it cannot be still expressed with absolute certainty. Above all because we speak about a famous and so moreover alive personage. In front of a corpse I would be cleaner: the data emerged would have induced to me and authorized to proceed with more deepened examinations and dirimenti. However, if substitution has been, the true masterpiece has been that to find a counterpart with anthropometric characteristics all things considered many neighbors to the “original””, it admits. “There is from saying that the anthropometric analysis goes, necessarily, equipped from examinations with other type in order to formulate a sure skill to the 100 percent”.

We had to endure PiA'ers saying there wasn't any change in the ears when there clearly is.

[faulconandsnowjob]

At least, now PIA'ers are willing to admit pictures have been doctored :p

I love this picture of Mr. inflatable Potato Head Faul on the right. I wonder why they didn't just go ahead & doctor his eyes brown while they were at it? :confused:

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

[toty1994]

I'm not expecting you to change stance overnight but what is your actual opinion here. I'm interested in that. PiD finally has some scientific recognition with this, and the fact it's a huge spread in a big science magazine is pretty amazing.

Honestly want to know what you're thinking right now, because we've all been going back and fourth in this topic for months and this is huge in regards to our evidence.
They do indeed appear to be legit experts in their respective fields, which I must admit surprises me. However, their research does need to be subjected to something akin to peer review before it can be anywhere near proven (despite what faulcon said). That's how science operates, and if Carlesi and Gavazzeni take this further they know they will have to put their findings through that rigorous process. As Gavazzeni himself says "It must be said that the analysis anthropometric be necessarily accompanied by other tests to make sure an expert at 100 percent." (translation). The question is, will they take it further?

So no, my stance has not changed but it would be churlish not to concede that the article, to an extent, supports yours. :)

[ar20]

They do indeed appear to be legit experts in their respective fields, which I must admit surprises me. However, their research does need to be subjected to something akin to peer review before it can be anywhere near proven (despite what faulcon said). That's how science operates, and if Carlesi and Gavazzeni take this further they know they will have to put their findings through that rigorous process. As Gavazzeni himself says "It must be said that the analysis anthropometric be necessarily accompanied by other tests to make sure an expert at 100 percent." (translation). The question is, will they take it further?

So no, my stance has not changed but it would be churlish not to concede that the article, to an extent, supports yours. :)

I can agree with this. It's absolutely right.

Just wait and see how it develops and if it is taken further and if interest peaks with it.

[faulconandsnowjob]

PIA'ers will attack any aspect of the science or the scientists just so they don't have to admit they were taken for suckers. :p

So, who are the "stupid" & "delusional" ones now? The ones who have strong scientific support for their position, or the ones who insist it must be Paul b/c the mainstream media tell us so? :p

[faulconandsnowjob]

If the PIA'ers want to challenge the science, then let them do their own biometrical analysis. Until then, they got nothing :p

BTW, other scientists have used similar methods to detect other 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

[astrochicken]

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


Even better, here's one of my own.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SfE29IKrRJE

[noewhan]

I still don't get how cloning a singer (not a leader of an army, as far as I know), who sings about love - could work for the 'elite'. Maybe he invested in cloning himself, bought a new body back in the 80s, just in case.
I wonder how much that costs?

If I was a clone, what would you do?

[faulconandsnowjob]

Faul isn't a clone. There are too many differences. If he had been, no one may ever have noticed, but they did. Lots of people.

The Elite use celebrities to further whatever agenda they are pushing. Back in the 1960's, there was this little program called MK-ULTRA in which LSD was an integral part. Faul subtly promoted LSD use, IMO. But whatever the reason, Paul was def replaced.

Paul's lips:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v462/OnlyBeatles/paulAHDN.jpg

The lips & eyebros are markedly different. :eek:
http://i366.photobucket.com/albums/oo110/faulconandsnowjob/paul_ahdn.jpg

[fireman]

YOU MUST BE KIDDING ME! :p

you do realize that he's making a funny-face on the right side?

his lips look perfectly the same!

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

So does his whole face, btw:

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/newfade1.gif


The many face of James Paul Mccartney, always different yet always the same:

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/pepperrrua9.png


:p:)

[faulconandsnowjob]

Oh, give it a rest. It's already been PROVEN they're not the same person. Why don't you see if you can see if you can spot the differences that we know are there?

It's really shocking how desperately some people cling to the old paradigm. Why don't you try to get your head around the fact that Paul was replaced rather than fighting proven fact?

Anyway, Astrochicken, that was a great song. Thanks for sharing.

[socrates]

Oh, give it a rest. It's already been PROVEN they're not the same person.

It has not been "proven" whatsoever.

The conclusions raise doubts - I'll give you that. But to say it's been scientifically proven is pure nonsense.

The expertise of Francis Gavazzeni and Gabriella Carlesi ended without a verdict so unequivocally. Could not be otherwise, given that the analysis and anthropometric craniometrica is expressed only in terms of compatibility, not certainty. This time the science does not offer answers, indeed relaunches sensationally doubts.
http://paulmccartney-fanclub.blogspot.com/

Comparisons biometric on conformation of the skull, jaw curve, ear, details of teeth and palate showed significant discrepancies between the images taken before and after 1966 but the report has not resulted in an unambiguous verdict: the analysis and anthropometric craniometrica it is expressed in terms of compatibility, not certainty.
http://www.lastampa.it/_web/cmstp/tmplrubriche/musica/grubrica.asp?ID_blog=37&ID_articolo=1472&ID_sezione=62&sezione=

Hopefully this will be reported in the British/American press and they will hire their own experts to do a more thorough investigation.

[jackbumbo]

Hopefully this will be reported in the British/American press and they will hire their own experts to do a more thorough investigation.

It wont do any good. The PID'ers will go on and say those results were false and changed to claim Paul is alive. Really, the comparison fireman just gave (with Paul smiling) just tells me enough: Paul is alive.

[faulconandsnowjob]

What part of the scientific proof didn't you people understand? You're just going to have to accept that you've been fooled by a double. Too bad, so sad.

[faulconandsnowjob]

de⋅lu⋅sion  [di-loo-zhuhn]
–noun
...
4. Psychiatry. a fixed false belief that is resistant to ... confrontation with actual fact...

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/delusion

The fact is Paul was replaced. Please TRY to wrap your heads around that.

[socrates]

What part of the scientific proof didn't you people understand?

There is NO scientific proof to "understand"!

The investigation raised doubts - that's all.

Stop making false claims.

The expertise of Francis Gavazzeni and Gabriella Carlesi ended without a verdict.
"Repetition does not transform a lie into a truth"
(Franklin D. Roosevelt)

[socrates]

It wont do any good. The PID'ers will go on and say those results were false and changed to claim Paul is alive.

Agree entirely. :)

[faulconandsnowjob]

Give up? Here's a difference. The LIPS:

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

Want to play again? B/c there are other differences.

[faulconandsnowjob]

Pro-PID Evidence

Biometrical analysis showing different bone structure & differences in other facial features

Paul had brown eyes
Faul has green eyes
Paul had thicker eyelashes

Faul's head & face are more elongated than JPM's
Faul has a higher forehead

Paul had upturned nose
Faul has beaky nose

Paul's hair grew from left to right and his bangs were thick
Faul's hair grows from right to left, and his bangs are thinner

Paul's earlobes were attached and his ears stuck out farther from his head
Faul's ears have unattached earlobes, and are set closer to his head
Faul has worn prosthetic ears

Paul had high-arching eyebrows
Faul has thick eyebrows with little natural arch

Paul was left-handed
Faul is right-handed

Paul was masculine
Faul's portrayal of Paul has been effeminate

Faul is around 2.5 inches taller than Paul, and has a larger frame

Faul’s feet are longer & are shaped differently from Paul’s/different shoe sizes

Photo doctoring has taken place to make Faul look more like Paul and vice versa

Different lips
Different hand-writing
Different voices
Different mannerisms
Different musical styles

Pro-PIA Evidence

SIR Paul & the media say it's the same guy
They look alike

[jackbumbo]

How about, same assymetrical face? Same scars? Same freckles? Most of your pro-PID claims are just opions. You know there is much more proof for our side than you're willing to admit. I'm trying to be nice to you but you're certainly not trying to be nice to any of us PIA'ers. I wonder if you'd meet a guy and fell in love with him but he's a 'stubborn' PIA'er, would you break up with him? If the answer is yes, I think you've fallen way too deep into this.

[humito]

There is NO scientific proof to "understand"!

The investigation raised doubts - that's all.

Stop making false claims.

"Repetition does not transform a lie into a truth"
(Franklin D. Roosevelt)

I agree entirely ............faulcon is always banging on about us sheep believing what the mainstream media tell us...........is Wired an underground publication??........I think not !!! but the info put out is taken as truth!!as you say NOTHING was proven..........That magazine is just out to make a buck like all mainstream twaddle.........it will not be taken any further because they know its rubbish...............hence the non verdict.
In early 1967 the so called Faul would still have a mass of scar tissue etc..........faulcon says she has pics of this................I am still waiting for them to be posted.
Also I still would like to know what Paul has done ,in action,film or song to further the illuminati agenda........millions must have been spent on the imposter and the persistant coverup , so I would think as an artist he and his music would be a prime tool for spreading evil messages to the population.........the suggestion that the whole thing was done to promote the use of lsd is absurd...........anyone who has ever taken a large dose of lsd will know that it is likely to show you the charades of ego and the mass manipulation of conciousness........( except in extreme brainwashing scenarios).........not really something that they would want...............If they were that serious about getting people tripping they would not have made its production or ingestion illegal.
I am open to the fact that people are replaced and stooges used..........anyone could see multiple saddams or bin ladens........etc.......but there is no reason to replace mc cartney as far as i can see.Again I want to know what songs "faul" has recorded or what he has done in life to warrant replacing him??.

[faulconandsnowjob]

This is a fun game for me. See if you can spot even ONE difference in this comp.

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

[seamus]

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.
LSD a hard drug? You're joking right? Hard drugs are things that will kill you, like heroin or cocaine or even alcohol. But acid? LOL! In 1967 it wasn't the bogeyman it later became. btw.

[faulconandsnowjob]

LSD a hard drug? You're joking right? Hard drugs are things that will kill you, like heroin or cocaine or even alcohol. But acid? LOL! In 1967 it wasn't the bogeyman it later became. btw.
Didn't you know LSD could cause height gain, skeletal restructuring, & eye color change? lol

[jackbumbo]

Faulcon, you didn't respond to my question. I'd really appreciate it if you did. I'm trying to be nice to you, something I cannot say about your attitude towards the PIA'ers.

[faulconandsnowjob]

It's amazing how "Paul" suddenly got a lot taller. I guess it was all the LSD he dropped. lol

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AdRgDOkM43E

[faulconandsnowjob]

Faulcon, you didn't respond to my question. I'd really appreciate it if you did.

What was your question?

BTW, I love your avatar, Seamus.

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/image.php?u=2340&dateline=1245432155

Yeah!

[toty1994]

Faulcon, there is no doubt that the Wired article strikes a blow for believers in PiD. I and others have acknowledged this. In your excitement, however, you appear to have rather jumped the gun; your new mantra 'Italian scientists have PROVEN Paul McCartney was replaced' is simply not true. Your sudden and new found trust in science is noted, but it strangely omits acknowledgement of the scientific process itself - ie findings have to be tested thoroughly by others before any conclusion can be drawn.

In a few weeks we may have a clearer picture of what all this means. There's just a chance the story will be picked up elsewhere and go big - if so then everyone will be discussing PiD. The findings of Carlesi and Gavazzeni may then be tested by others and, who knows, it may even force McCartney to clear this up once and for all. On the other hand nothing may happen at all.

Let's wait and see.

[astrochicken]

LSD a hard drug? You're joking right? Hard drugs are things that will kill you, like heroin or cocaine or even alcohol. But acid? LOL! In 1967 it wasn't the bogeyman it later became. btw.

I've popped enough tabs to throw in an opinion.

I wouldn't class "hard drugs" as just being things that can kill you.

If you're not sound of mind and earthed then it will most definitely fuck your head up and turn you in to an unfunctioning individual despite their being no obvious physical symptoms as with smack or alcohol. I know, personally, at least 3 people that have gone off the edge.

As with everything, moderation is the key. It's still worth trying though. ;)

[faulconandsnowjob]

Faulcon, there is no doubt that the Wired article strikes a blow for believers in PiD.
Yes, it does. It strikes a fatal blow to PIA, in fact.

Your sudden and new found trust in science is noted, but it strangely omits acknowledgement of the scientific process itself - ie findings have to be tested thoroughly by others before any conclusion can be drawn.
What are you on about? My "sudden and new found trust in science?" My methods are similar to what other scientists have used:

... 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

The simple fact is I can look at them & tell they're not the same person. I'm sorry if some of you have been tricked by a double, but the differences are obvious to me.

In a few weeks we may have a clearer picture of what all this means.
What it all means is Paul was replaced by a double. Why is that such a difficult concept for some people? I understand some people don't want to admit they've been tricked by an imposter for so long, but it's time to face facts. The illusion is over.

[ar20]

LSD a hard drug? You're joking right? Hard drugs are things that will kill you, like heroin or cocaine or even alcohol. But acid? LOL! In 1967 it wasn't the bogeyman it later became. btw.

LSD was big enough to fuck up Syd Barrett and a lot of people have had bad trips from it. So yes, it can be considered hard -- not heroin or crack/meth hard, but hard enough to mess the mind this is all I was getting at.

But you're right, it's not heroin and cocaine. But my point was how come his nervous habit doesn't come up when he's being asked about drugs (and it was considered hard at a the time, the 1960's) he just sits there nonchalantly.

Hope this cleared up what I was getting at.


I've popped enough tabs to throw in an opinion.

I wouldn't class "hard drugs" as just being things that can kill you.

If you're not sound of mind and earthed then it will most definitely fuck your head up and turn you in to an unfunctioning individual despite their being no obvious physical symptoms as with smack or alcohol. I know, personally, at least 3 people that have gone off the edge.

As with everything, moderation is the key. It's still worth trying though.

Yeah, this is what I was meaning.

I wish people would stop picking apart at what I'm saying and address the points I raise. *shrugs*

[ar20]

Really? You're kidding me...

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/newfade1.gif

How many times do I have to explain, quit tilting the pictures into the shape profiles. I mean this is laughable, Paul has MATRIX-WARP face? It's not even a natural fade.

Why not use one of Faulcons Front View comparisons for a fade? If you're so confident it's the same, they should fade in the same and be the same face.

I doubt you'll do it though. Wouldn't wanna undermine your own belief, would ya?

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

Try these:

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

[fireman]

HAHA :D

You are a funny chap. Whats wrong with my fade? It matches perfectly!

And what is natural fade?

And if i would make a fade with Faulcons comp i am a 100 % sure the eyes and the head would match, but as even a 3rd grader can see, he is making a funny face there with the lips. i posted another pic of that session and you completly ignored it. Why? Truth too hard to handle?

You should be happy Paul is alive and well. Go and listen to some music, dude! :cool:

And why are there 2 threads for the same subject?
:confused:

[jackbumbo]

Those wouldn't work because he has completely different expressions. The one fireman showed works great because the angle is right and the expression is almost exactly the same.

[ar20]

HAHA :D

You are a funny chap. Whats wrong with my fade? It matches perfectly!

And what is natural fade?

And if i would make a fade with Faulcons comp i am a 100 % sure the eyes and the head would match, but as even a 3rd grader can see, he is making a funny face there with the lips. i posted another pic of that session and you completly ignored it. Why? Truth too hard to handle?

You should be happy Paul is alive and well. Go and listen to some music, dude! :cool:

And why are there 2 threads for the same subject?
:confused:


Yeah I agree, not the best -- the expressions aren't similar.



THESE ARE, (aside from a slight smile and mustache):

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

Faulcon has posted 100's of frontal comparisons and you won't fade them.

[ar20]

Those wouldn't work because he has completely different expressions. The one fireman showed works great because the angle is right and the expression is almost exactly the same.

Yeah, this is my point.

He turns the pictures to fit the profiles...

I debunked that crap by saying there's applets all over the web with "see which celebrity you look like".

You upload your picture, line it up to the eyes then it fades you into Nicholas Cage or something and it's pretty convincing.

If you're going to fade, stop rotating the pictures.

Use flat on, eye to eye lineups from the front. Then you have weight with the fades, until then 3rd graders are commenting how wonderful your proof with the fades are. :rolleyes:

[faulconandsnowjob]

Paul McCartney is really dead

This is confirmed by an investigation of "Wired"
It 'one of the best known legends of rock: Paul McCartney died in 1966 and what we know today is merely a double that has changed. A legend who just now seemed to have been dismantled and forgotten. But now two scientists have conducted an investigation for "Wired": The objective was to demonstrate that everything was false but the results were rather surprising ...

The object of the dispute is the "PID", or the legend "Paul Is Dead". Dedicarcisi A were two experts, the computer Francesco Gavazzeni legal and medical Carlesi Gabriella. The objective was to demonstrate that all these entries were false and unfounded, urban legends, in fact, throw a meal in the media and fans. The studies conducted by two experts however have led to quite unexpected results.

The story in brief: Paul McCartney, the original is in fact died in a car accident in 1966, a crash occurred on board of his Austin Martin after a quarrel with other members of the band. From that time to replace him there would be a double. Would have been the Beatles themselves to disseminate texts confirm this in the coming years more or less messages subliminal by allusive covers such as "Abbey Road", a message engraved on a disk on the contrary.

Gavazzeni Carlesi and were based on anthropometric and craniometrica, comparing, through images of repertoire, shape of the skull, teeth, etc.. in the before and after 1966. And, since these tests, however, we can express only in terms of compatibility and non-certainty, the results still give a negative result: that is, the person known as Paul McCartney before 1966 would not be the same that we see in the photos taken after that date. Case reopened?

********************/ngp29e

From the original:

Paul McCartney è morto davvero
http://www.tgcom.mediaset.it/spettacolo/articoli/articolo455762.shtml

[fireman]

Turning a picture around for the purpose of making a fade doesn't change ones face, sorry. turning around a picture 20 degrees doesn't make me look exactly like Paul. Maybe in your world, where everything is possible.. :confused:

[faulconandsnowjob]

Now that it's been proven that Paul was replaced, why don't you see if you can spot the differences, rather than continuing to insist they're "exactly the same," when they're obviously not?

[ar20]

Turning a picture around for the purpose of making a fade doesn't change ones face, sorry. turning around a picture 20 degrees doesn't make me look exactly like Paul. Maybe in your world, where everything is possible.. :confused:

http://img21.imageshack.us/img21/9395/faul.gif

http://celebrity.myheritage.com/celebrity-face-recognition

Have a play with this link above to see what I mean...


Thanks for playing Fireman.

[ar20]

http://img170.imageshack.us/img170/3888/faulisalive.gif

I shoulda done these ages ago...

http://img263.imageshack.us/img263/2853/faulisalive2.gif

[faulconandsnowjob]

Thanks for the fades & the link, AR20. That's awesome!

[fireman]

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


But to be serious again... they match up pretty good even in your sloppy fade! :p


How would you explain the difference in these:

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/PID%20stuff/new6.gif

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/PID%20stuff/new3.gif


Since angle, lightning and camera distance don't exist in PID-world, i guess he was already replaced by then?

Really, i am having my fun here and everything, but don't you think there is a point in that argument?

[ar20]

http://img505.imageshack.us/img505/2326/faulisalive3.gif

[fireman]

haha, in one his head is tilted to left, in the other to the right. But still the same man! you should come up with something better.

check this out:


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


But to be serious again... they match up pretty good even in your sloppy fade! :p


How would you explain the difference in these:

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/PID%20stuff/new6.gif

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/PID%20stuff/new3.gif


Since angle, lightning and camera distance don't exist in PID-world, i guess he was already replaced by then?

Really, i am having my fun here and everything, but don't you think there is a point in that argument?

[ar20]

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


But to be serious again... they match up pretty good even in your sloppy fade! :p


How would you explain the difference in these:

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/PID%20stuff/new6.gif

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/PID%20stuff/new3.gif


Since angle, lightning and camera distance don't exist in PID-world, i guess he was already replaced by then?

Really, i am having my fun here and everything, but don't you think there is a point in that argument?

I can only say...

You're being very selective with which photos you use, aren't you?

http://img21.imageshack.us/img21/9395/faul.gif

They match up pretty good? Where do you get your crack? They're clearly not the same face!

My sloppy fade as you put it is lined up from the eyes from the front, something you can't say for yours. :rolleyes: Typical response when you get rumbled, "HEY, LET'S INSULT IT/HIM/THEM!".

http://img170.imageshack.us/img170/3888/faulisalive.gif

How do you explain this one in bizarro world? The pose is pretty much the same and the fade comes from the eyes.

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/image.php?u=22323&dateline=1239011660

It's the same as this. Except I haven't tilted the picture to match up the shapes (I can't believe this concept alludes you).

http://img263.imageshack.us/img263/2853/faulisalive2.gif

[ar20]

Wait a minute... this is your proof?! I realise you were joking but come on! This is how I actually think you're seeing them as the same guy!

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

OMFG. Loss for words here.

An Xbox Avatar... dude, the difference is the eyes and mouth doesn't stay the same. :rolleyes:

Jesus.... christ....

http://img21.imageshack.us/img21/9395/faul.gif

People can tell the difference here, right? SURELY.

[fireman]

An Xbox Avatar...

ttss..:rolleyes:

[fireman]

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/comp1-1.gif

same dude

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/cvomp-2-1.gif
http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/symetri22.gif

same facial assymetry

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/newfade1.gif

same smile


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

same nose

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/classic_fade1.gif

same everything


http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/uppermost.gif
http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/uppermost_blink.gif



so lets all make a funny face and go home to our beds.

Good night!


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

[faulconandsnowjob]

Some people can just not accept reality. :confused:

Paul was replaced, like it or not.

[socrates]

Some people can just not accept reality.

Like the person who keeps claiming scientists have "proven" Paul was replaced, when they quite clearly haven't. :rolleyes:

Maybe in your world - but not in the real one.

[faulconandsnowjob]

Focrates, I didn't realize you were an expert in anthropometrics & were in a position to give your expert opinion on the scientific findings that concluded Paul had been replaced. But if you have the scientific credentials, & have carried out a similar study, then I'm sure we'd all be interested in your findings. :D Until then, you've got NOTHING :D Sorry, but it doesn't really cut it to say they "look alike." Duh! Of course, they look alike. That's the point of a double.

[faulconandsnowjob]

People can tell the difference here, right? SURELY.

Yes. At least, those of us who haven't been fooled by a poor double. lol

[socrates]

Focrates, I didn't realize you were an expert in anthropometrics & were in a position to give your expert opinion on the scientific findings that concluded Paul had been replaced.

I'm not giving any opinion, Paulcon. I'm merely pointing out the reality that the experts did not reach a definate conclusion.

It says so in the article.

Why is that so hard for you to understand?

Your comprehension skills are either severely retarded or you are deliberately falsifying what their conclusions were.

Either way, you are not helping PID by peddling such a ridiculous falsehood and are clearly engaging in deception and deceit to help your argument.

[astrochicken]

Why is that so hard for you to understand?

Your comprehension skills are either severely retarded or you are deliberately falsifying what their conclusions were.

Either way, you are not helping PID by peddling such a ridiculous falsehood and are clearly engaging in deception and deceit to help your argument.

Sorry Socrates.
Learn Italian or find someone to translate it for you and then come back.

Their methods and their evidence proves conclusively that there are severe discrepancies which are impossible when assuming that paul and faul are supposedly identical people, which they themselves, if you read it again, state. They do, however, draw the line at outing the imposter and imply that others, with their participation, should take it from there.
Understandable right? I'd like to see you take a multi-billionaire to court.

Learn italian and stop spouting shite please.

Faul/Paul, Gandalf/Dumbledore.. they all look the same don't they? LOL

[socrates]

Learn italian and stop spouting shite please

If it's "shite" - then give the exact quote where it says the scientists' findings "prove" Paul was replaced.

Then we'll see who is spouting "shite". :rolleyes:

Since you're obviously such an expert in Italian, shouldn't take you long to post this quote.

Buona fortuna! :D

[socrates]

Their methods and their evidence proves conclusively

Please try again. :(

How about this, oh expert on Italian?

Please translate for us:

Mentre Carlesi si limita a osservare: I dubbi sono molto forti e le discordanze numerose, ma non ci si può esprimere ancora con assoluta certezza.

Still waiting for the "proof" quote....

[ar20]

Please try again. :(

How about this, oh expert on Italian?

Please translate for us:



Still waiting for the "proof" quote....


Babelfish much? Like you speak fluent Italian...

The minute that article was about you'd have torn it to shreds if you spoke a word of it most likely.

I will agree with you though, it does say they haven't finalised their results.

The only reason I can think of is legal. Isn't it slander if a magazine outright comes out and says hes dead? I know we do it but we don't recieve any money or anything, although this is way over my head but I'm pretty sure if you're a magazine you can't actually come out and say PAUL MCCARTNEY IS DEAD.

Then again, the front cover does say "Paul is dead" doesn't it?

I don't know. I think they understand they could be sued, but that begs the question is the evidence they have not good enough to challenge him in court with?

I think I'll sit on the fence with this one myself unless the coverage starts to explode, but it looks like this'll pass by and nothing will change. I do not have high hopes for this continuing or be anything -- it looks like a one off.

[ar20]

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

http://img170.imageshack.us/img170/3888/faulisalive.gif
http://img21.imageshack.us/img21/9395/faul.gif

Are you for real? You're a gimmick poster, right? You cannot be serious.

[ar20]

- double post, apologies.

[socrates]

Like you speak fluent Italian...

How the hell would you know one way or the other?

The minute that article was about you'd have torn it to shreds if you spoke a word of it most likely.

It doesn't need "tearing to shreds". It's what it says. One forensic expert and one computer expert looked at comparison photos and found apparent discrepencies. Their conclusion was that the evidence presented casts doubts that the photos showed the same person but they cannot say with certainty that their conclusions are correct.

As toty said earlier, this does support the PID argument to a point - however, it would be good if the media in the UK and USA picked up on this story and asked their own experts to investigate this.

I will agree with you though, it does say they haven't finalised their results.
Indeed it does. But tell that to Paulcon and our resident Italian expert, astrochicken. :rolleyes:

The only reason I can think of is legal. Isn't it slander if a magazine outright comes out and says hes dead?

You mean libel. And it wouldn't be libel if what they said was true. If their evidence was conclusive proof - as Paulcon laughably claims - then they would be able to prove it in court.

I know we do it but we don't recieve any money or anything, although this is way over my head but I'm pretty sure if you're a magazine you can't actually come out and say PAUL MCCARTNEY IS DEAD.

As I said - you can if you have proof.

Then again, the front cover does say "Paul is dead" doesn't it?

That's a question, not an allegation.

I think they understand they could be sued, but that begs the question is the evidence they have not good enough to challenge him in court with?

No, it's not.

I think I'll sit on the fence with this one myself unless the coverage starts to explode, but it looks like this'll pass by and nothing will change. I do not have high hopes for this continuing or be anything -- it looks like a one off.

Probably, but I would like to see the US and UK media run with this and get their own experts in to do a more thorough investigation using better photos. I mean, they used the Pepper pic off an album for one comparison. How do they know it hadn't been altered to fit the sleeve or something? Photos are often edited for that sort of thing.

[socrates]

Astrochicken has logged off without giving us that quote....

Well there's a surprise.... :rolleyes:

[faulconandsnowjob]

The only reason I can think of is legal. Isn't it slander if a magazine outright comes out and says hes dead?
Actually, it would be more libel than slander. The thing about defamation, though, is that the truth is an absolute defense in any situation. There's no way Faul would ever sue, b/c then the defendants would be able to prove in court that he isn't the real Paul McCartney as part of their defense. We all know that's never going to happen. In USA, the standard of proof for a public figure/public matter to show defamation in USA is very high. He'd have to show actual malice - that they new it was untrue & they published it, anyway. Faul is screwed either way, b/c that is obviously not the case.

[ar20]

Gonna do a Fireman here and tilt the photos... Hell, he does it.

http://img208.imageshack.us/img208/6778/faulisalive4.gif
http://img444.imageshack.us/img444/7431/faulisalive5.gif


See here's what happens when you fade the same person, or is supposed to happen.

http://img505.imageshack.us/img505/6844/pitt.gif
http://img22.imageshack.us/img22/7710/johnlennon.gif

They're supposed to look the same! :eek: Shockeroony!

Regardless of haircut, age, whatever. The eyes are a window to the soul and they should stay the same throughout your years.

[ar20]

How the hell would you know one way or the other?



It doesn't need "tearing to shreds". It's what it says. One forensic expert and one computer expert looked at comparison photos and found apparent discrepencies. Their conclusion was that the evidence presented casts doubts that the photos showed the same person but they cannot say with certainty that their conclusions are correct.


Yeah, I found it interesting that they said they were going into it as a hoax and were surprised of their findings.


As toty said earlier, this does support the PID argument to a point - however, it would be good if the media in the UK and USA picked up on this story and asked their own experts to investigate this.


Absolutely, but I doubt it will happen.


Probably, but I would like to see the US and UK media run with this and get their own experts in to do a more thorough investigation using better photos. I mean, they used the Pepper pic off an album for one comparison. How do they know it hadn't been altered to fit the sleeve or something? Photos are often edited for that sort of thing.

I can agree with this, but here is where I have to dig you up.

Either you or toty.. possibly Fireman have been harping on about images not being altered or tampered with and now that's suddenly changed.

And also the whole "PID is DEAD ITS A DEAD HOAX" thing you were saying a few weeks ago. In the last week or so, Paul has been on Letterman being asked about PID as well as the Wired Magazine...

Doesn't matter now, but it's all very interesting. Speak of the devil kind of stuff... I had no idea these two things would just pop up in the same time-span.

There is a huge chunk in that article dedicated to how the teeth aren't the same. My thoughts are they actually have done quite a rigorous research but they've only published what they're findings are in WIRED.

It's like you said, there isn't any real science here unless they produce it and carry it on.

It's one of these things we'll just have to wait and see.

[faulconandsnowjob]

These crack me up. They're so OBVIOUSLY not the same person. :p It shocks me that anyone could fall for that.

http://img208.imageshack.us/img208/6778/faulisalive4.gif
http://img444.imageshack.us/img444/7431/faulisalive5.gif

[seamus]

LSD was big enough to fuck up Syd Barrett and a lot of people have had bad trips from it. So yes, it can be considered hard -- not heroin or crack/meth hard, but hard enough to mess the mind this is all I was getting at.

But you're right, it's not heroin and cocaine. But my point was how come his nervous habit doesn't come up when he's being asked about drugs (and it was considered hard at a the time, the 1960's) he just sits there nonchalantly.

Hope this cleared up what I was getting at.



Yeah, this is what I was meaning.

I wish people would stop picking apart at what I'm saying and address the points I raise. *shrugs*

jeez i was just trying to lighten the mood a bit :)

anyways... syd barrett was getting that stuff fed to him by the gram, without his knowledge.

[faulconandsnowjob]

Geeze. What do you know about Syd Barrett getting force-fed LSD?

[fireman]

No Ar20, i am very serious. and the quality of my comps speak for themselves.
You picked the funny last one, for yout point, but ignored the others.. yeah well, these are the tactics..


http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/comp1-1.gif

same dude

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/cvomp-2-1.gif
http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/symetri22.gif

same facial assymetry

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/newfade1.gif

same smile


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

same nose

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/classic_fade1.gif

same everything


http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/uppermost.gif
http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/uppermost_blink.gif



so lets all make a funny face and go home to our beds.

Good night!


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

[astrochicken]

Astrochicken has logged off without giving us that quote....

Well there's a surprise.... :rolleyes:


Classic trolling socrates. :rolleyes:

I have 2 kids, a CD to record, a book to write and a profession i go about most days and and despite living in the wrong time zone i do force myself to sleep most nights (excepting full moons) , so my sincerest apologies if my reply wasn't instantaneous or as quick as you would have liked.

"Mentre Carlesi si limita a osservare:"

Their studies are limited solely to observation, so yeah, they will still have to drag faul in to a court room.. to PROVE that he's dead.

Making PID'ers out to be delusional is backfiring.
I'd like to see this whole thing go mainstream especially after last week's letterman interview and this months cover story from the italian WIRED magazine.
There are a few posters, wasting their time, on what they've deemed a minor hoax and delusional crap and i really don't get their fascination with this topic. Thankfully readers can read both threads in their entirety and come to their own conclusions.

Personally, i can look at and listen to them and see and hear two entirely different people and thank fuck it's going mainstream.. i hope
the truth comes out before faul gets michaeled.

[faulconandsnowjob]

They can't stand it that the truth is coming out :p Sorry, but things have changed since we now have hard, credible science on our side. Who is delusional now? :p

Anyway, in the video for "Strawberry Fields Forever," it shows Faul 3 times when John sings "nothing is real."

@ 1:08, 1:54, & 2:40

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8A4r2RU1u3g

[faulconandsnowjob]

i hope
the truth comes out before faul gets michaeled.

Do you mean before they off him like Michael - & I'm assuming you mean Jackson - & gets turned into a saint? I'm already very annoyed that Faul gets credit for Paul's masterpieces. If they deify him when he goes, I will be quite irked.

But anyway, I wonder what people will think when Faul does die & they see all those pics of Paul. They'll probably be scratching their heads & thinking WTF?

[seamus]

Geeze. What do you know about Syd Barrett getting force-fed LSD?just the legend, faulcon, just the legend.

[faulconandsnowjob]

It wouldn't surprise me at all if they had. :eek:

[dream9]

What about Orange Sunshine and the Manson Family?

[faulconandsnowjob]

Different colored eyes

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

Different height

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

Different facial features

In 2009, two Italians, Francesco Gavazzeni (IT analyst) and Carlesi Gabriella (medico-legal), studied images of Paul McCartney taken before and after the alleged death, and claimed there is high probability that it is not the same person, based on analysis of the shape of the skull and jaw, the curve of the jaw, the ear of palate and teeth.[17].

17. ^ Wired Italia, "Chiedi chi era quel «Beatle»", July-August 2009

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

[faulconandsnowjob]

The faces simply don't match up.

http://i366.photobucket.com/albums/oo110/faulconandsnowjob/memphis_66_comp.jpg
http://img39.imageshack.us/img39/3143/halfanfhalf.jpg

[hunger]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3QtRk1OUYuU

[ivgg]

Different colored eyes

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




That's because a huge light-difference.

Hazell eyes looks green in light.

As long as PID'ers ignore that, they can't be taken seriously.

[ivgg]

The faces simply don't match up.

http://i366.photobucket.com/albums/oo110/faulconandsnowjob/memphis_66_comp.jpg
http://img39.imageshack.us/img39/3143/halfanfhalf.jpg

http://img197.imageshack.us/img197/2577/avatarf.gif

Same guy....

[faulconandsnowjob]

Except it's not the same guy, as has been proven by forensic science.

ASK WHO WAS THE "BEATLE"
********************/mw83db

... In the absence of fingertips and DNA samples of the methodology used all'antropometria identification and, in particular, to craniometria, based on some specific points. In the face of anyone, unchangeable and codified by the French nell'Ottocento Paul Broca. What are these? In scientific terms we could not define the distance between the pupils, the intersection between the nose and arched sopraccigliari the point where the base of the nose is detached from the upper lip, the shape of the jaw and Regulation, the ear. Then there's the shape of the skull...

The first step is to then find and select images to be able to proportion the best photos for quality and range, and provide measurements and comparisons...

Two images pre'66, made a comparison and carried on a single scale of reference for making the same proportions, show a perfect coincidence of the main key points. In particular, the mandibular curve, ie the line that leads to the computer to define the perimeter of the lower face, say from ear to ear via the chin, is substantially identical. The margin of error is less than one percent. "For the perfect coincidence between two images is virtually impossible," says Gavazzeni, by convention it is considered acceptable at most 2.5 percent of difference. Beyond this limit, the divergence is such as to suggest the difference in identity between the two entities in question. Since in this case the spread is less than one percent, the problem does not arise: the two photos certainly depict the same person. " It was at this point to search for other photos with similar characteristics, but after the alleged "incident"...

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

That McCartney, certainly portrayed in the first half of 1967, was flanked by another picture, a few years later, taken between 1971 and 1972. The aim was to repeat the operation of comparison already made with images from the early sixties and then proceed with comparative findings from two groups of pictures. Again, the two new images is a good compatibility. It only remains to compare the image data prior to the date of the alleged incident and subsequent ones. "The surprise was great," says Gavazzeni: The mandibular curve between the two sets of photos showed a discrepancy of over 6 percent, well beyond the threshold of error. But there was more. Changed the development of the mandibular profile: before 1966 each side of the jaw is composed of two curves Net, since 1967 appears to be a single curve. There is therefore a curve morphological different...

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

Gabriella Carlesi adds an additional element: "Compared to the previous picture, that of Sgt Pepper's show clearly that the commessura lip, that is the line formed by the lips of the two, it was suddenly stretched. Which obviously is not possible and that the whiskers can not camouflage. In other words, the phenomenon is all too frequently these days, the lips can be inflated and increased in volume, but the width of the lip commessura can not vary that much. May be slight, but this is not the case for the photos examined: here the difference between the before and after is too strong to have been caused by any surgery. And more, always under the mustache of the McCartney Sgt Pepper's, maybe it was trying to hide something else: what the experts call it the nose-spinal or sottonasale. This is the point between the two nostrils where the nose begins to fall off the face: "This is also in this case a distinctive feature that medicine can not alter surgery. It can change the shape of the nose but not the nose-cord, "says Gabriella Carlesi. "And McCartney from the first group of photos and the second point that clearly varies...

The challenge was made intriguing, would go ahead because other important issues waiting to be examined. Starting with the one in which Gabriella Carlesi excel and for which enjoys international fame: dental identification. More McCartney sings and shows you smiling more Carlesi collects food items for his doubts: "To me the proof of evidence is the shape of the palate, yet more than the teeth." ...

There are impossible things and things that are possible but at the cost of operations long, painful and never perfect. Especially if done in the sixties. Now, careful examination of some pictures of McCartney before and after the 1966 autumn leaves, it must be said, in amazement: "First of all there is right upper canine," observes Carlesi Gabriella. "In the photos prior to 1966 is known as protruding relative to the line of teeth. It's the classic case of a tooth that lack of space it ends up misaligned, pushed out by the pressure of other teeth. It is curious that the same dogs in the photos from 1967 forward, but without ever protruding apparent reason: the images show that the space would have to be aligned with the neighboring teeth. It's like if you wanted to recreate is a detail in a mouth where quell'anomalia would have never been able to express. " The real crux of the reasoning of dental identification suggested by Gabriella Carlesi covers the whole palate of McCartney that before 1966, appears close to the point of justifying various misalignments of the teeth, although in less obvious forms of upper right canine. After the publication of Sgt Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band, however, the palates of McCartney widens considerably, to the point that the front teeth does not rotate on its axis more as before. With the only on, than the usual canine. "A change of the shape of the palate, Carlesi concludes, 'in the Sixties was not impossible but would be very traumatic, the result of an actual intervention maxillo-facial. In practice McCartney should have been subjected to an operation that would involve the opening of the suture palate, broken bone and then a long prosthetic and orthodontic treatment. In other words, for a change so sensitive in the sixties to McCartney would be required not only a particularly painful and bloody, but also the use of a fixed orthodontic multiband then, for over a year. Which would not have been possible to hide and would be obvious repercussions on the performance of a vocal professional singer. "But above all," concludes Gabriella Carlesi, "reasons that Paul McCartney might have to undergo such an ordeal?"...

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

Technically called trago. All we have two, one by ear, but the characteristics are different for every human being. "In Germany, a recognition procedure craniometrico, identification of the right ear even tantamount to fingerprint, ie the collection of fingerprints," recalls Carlesi. But what trago? It is the small cartilage covered with skin that overhangs the entrance to the ear and ear canal, like the whole ear, not be changed surgically. How then to explain the differences between the right ear of Paul McCartney in a previous snapshot to 1966 and probably a built in the late nineties? It is not only to betray trago a different conformation as well as other parts, just above the ear canal entrance, measurements and dell'antelice propeller. Things that ordinary mortals might seem irrelevant or unclear, but instead, every day, allowing the experts to locate and identify persons, bodies, photographs...

[ivgg]

http://img197.imageshack.us/img197/1475/piacomp.gif

[ivgg]

Except it's not the same guy, as has been proven by forensic science.

ASK WHO WAS THE "BEATLE"
********************/mw83db


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



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



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

Come on...

Only one article!!!

You call this proof?:D

[faulconandsnowjob]

Many of us can see that they don't have the same faces. In addition, they have different colored eyes & are different heights. Now, we have a team of forensic scientists concluding that Paul was replaced. What more do we need? A dead body?

[ivgg]

Many of us can see that they don't have the same faces. In addition, they have different colored eyes & are different heights. Now, we have a team of forensic scientists concluding that Paul was replaced. What more do we need? A dead body?

Still, it are only a few pics.

And one of those is doctored.

http://img11.imageshack.us/img11/3267/doctored1.gif

[faulconandsnowjob]

Still, it are only a few pics.

And one of those is doctored.


More on how photos have been tampered with - for one, to make Faul's head seem rounder.

ASK WHO WAS THE "BEATLE"
Fabio Gigante Andriola and Alessandra | 15 July 2009


... And the surprises do not end there because the relentless Gavazzeni, like a boxer who feels close the ko of the opponent, not the spring taken on the photo where McCartney, unaware, mentions a somewhat smug 'perplexed: "To the naked eye is known what will be a constant in the photos from that moment on, a couple of photo retouching fairly obvious to an expert eye. There is a gray area that covers the outside corner of left eye. Only for some time not seen before. And going to peep at that point, where for years there was one dark spot, now there is a cross between a scar and a sign of skin stretched like an aesthetic touch. The most immediate explanation is that probably, already in the sixties, has been made for an action on the eyes but it is still something imperfect, that for a long time has gone forward a mask. " Then there is a detail concerning the conformation of the skull: "Indeed, the impression is that the shape of the head was given a 'more rounded', Gavazzeni says:" So in the reduced effective length, by a trick used at the time and realized that being printed. Eff CTIVITIES change the conformation of the skull of an adult is something impossible. Yet, judging from the photos, is exactly what it shows...

********************/mw83db


Looks to me like the Sgt Pepper pic of Faul on the far right is a blend of Faul & Paul.
http://i366.photobucket.com/albums/oo110/faulconandsnowjob/sgt_pepper_blend.jpg

I'm not sure how they did it, but they could overlay negatives to blend images together by the early 1900's.

[ivgg]

This article was a pidder set up.

These "scientists" were fed photos from the pidders. Then the pidders use the article as proof when it was them who set it up in the first place.
You're still no step forward, Faulcon!!!

[formosan termite]

Guess what. Another was found.

Remember the teeth comparison?

http://i32.tinypic.com/2wlwwmf.jpg


Guess where was found the EXACT SAME comparison...


Yep, on this site again:

http://digilander.libero.it/jamespaul/show-case.html


http://i30.tinypic.com/2h58vbd.gif

LOL! This is hillarious.

Some scientific proof! All of these photos from the magazine article came from the PID website of Sun King. The same genius that says that Paul was replaced by the clone of a female WWII spy, who also happened to be the real Paul's mother. That is right. This scientific proof came from the guy who states that Paul was replaced by the female clone of his own mother.

So. These scientists did not get the idea on their own. They did not go to archives and get authentic original photos. These photos came from a PID website with a heavy PID bias. The pidders created this mag article and then, without giving everyone the full story, came out and declared that it is scientific proof of PID. It was NOT an independent scientific analysis. This article and faulconjob are frauds.

[formosan termite]

Here is the other evidence of this fraud that faulconjob is perpetrating.

Great observation.

Which proves how unscientific the Wired article is. So much for faulconpoop's "proof". LOL! :D

The scientists should have used original photos, not dodgy photos handed to them by who knows?

Question is, who chose the photos to be used and where did they get them from? A PIDDER?

Let's look at the ear photos used:

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/p7.jpg

Exactly the same photos as in Sunking's comp here:

http://digilander.libero.it/jamespaul/animations/ears_comparison.gif

http://digilander.libero.it/jamespaul/animations.html

What a coincidence! :eek:

(Thanks to Fireman for the above)

Something's very fishy about this Wired article and the photos used.

Look's like those scientists have been set up with some dodgy PID photos.

[ivgg]

You see, Faulcon, those "scientists" haven't proven anything!!!

Nice try, no price!!!

PID is still a hoax, a myth.

[supertzar]

Guess what....

I am getting the impression Wired Italy is more of a trashy tabloid than its' American counterpart. I would expect an article with this quality of "research" to appear in something like The Weekly World News.

http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/images/WWN%20cover.jpg

[socrates]

http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/images/WWN%20cover.jpg

Hmmm.. that pic looks doctored to me.

:D

[formosan termite]

Hillary changed the part in her hair. That proves she was replaced.

[ivgg]

http://img15.imageshack.us/img15/1696/eyesfade.gif

I guess this is not new for you, but for me a good reason to believe Paul never died.

[formosan termite]

http://img15.imageshack.us/img15/1696/eyesfade.gif

I guess this is not new for you, but for me a good reason to believe Paul never died.


Masterpiece.

But, careful. Fraudconjob will say it can't be the same person because the pupils were more dilated in one photo than the other.

[socrates]

Masterpiece.

But, careful. Fraudconjob will say it can't be the same person because the pupils were more dilated in one photo than the other.

That's too sensible for faulconpoop. She'll say it can't be the same person because the second pair of eyes obviously belong to a shapeshifting android from the planet Thaaarg. :)

[faulconandsnowjob]

That's too sensible for faulconpoop.

lol How old are you? 12? What an immature brat you are. :p Oh, & how long did it take for you to come up w/ that one? i bet you had to rack your brains. I mean, really, if you can't figure out people don't grow 2 inches, change eye color, & rearrange their faces in their mid-20's, then you must not be very bright. Actually, how do you even function in society being that mentally challenged?

[socrates]

lol How old are you? 12? What an immature brat you are. :p Oh, & how long did it take for you to come up w/ that one? i bet you had to rack your brains. I mean, really, if you can't figure out people don't grow 2 inches, change eye color, & rearrange their faces in their mid-20's, then you must not be very bright. Actually, how do you even function in society being that mentally challenged?

Now, now, faulconpoop - temper, temper! :)

Hmmm, "mentally challenged", that's ironic coming from someone who cannot understand that camera angles can make someone appear shorter than they really are, or that light and reflections can alter the appearance of eye colour or thinks that a scientist admitting they have doubts about the accuracy of their evidence means said evidence is "proof". :rolleyes:

Or what about someone who seriously thinks that the illuminati downloaded Paul's mind into Faul's brain? :eek:

Those are the characteristics of someone who is "mentally challenged".

[ivgg]

I mean, really, if you can't figure out people don't grow 2 inches, change eye color, & rearrange their faces in their mid-20's, then you must not be very bright.


The funny thing is: what you say is not true.

Check out the facts about the hoax:


http://maccafunhouse.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=pid&action=display&thread=3799

[formosan termite]

Fraudconjob,

It takes a mentally challenged person to keep saying that the eye color changed. It did not. That isn't even in dispute. Unless you think Paul McCartney lied about his own eye color in 1965.

It is also a mentally challenged person who thinks that someone downloaded Paul's mind into Faul's brain.

I think this is just a temper tantrum because that silly article that she said was "proof" of PID has been shown to be a fraud based soley on photos from Sun King's PID website. What scientist would do an independent study based soley on data from an obviously biased source? A scientist would use original authentic photographs from an archive, not images from a biased website that could have been manipulated using any one of many softwares available.

It was an article by pidders, then used by pidders to declare that science has proved them right.

[socrates]

The funny thing is: what you say is not true.

Check out the facts about the hoax:

http://maccafunhouse.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=pid&action=display&thread=3799

Facts don't interest her, unfortunately. :(

Paul had brown eyes.

http://img242.imageshack.us/img242/9052/2paulbook1vu6.jpg

See?

Some people can just not accept reality. :confused:

http://thumbs.dreamstime.com/thumb_4/1098372471Gz8mAj.jpg

[faulconandsnowjob]

Focrates can't even come up w/ good insults. How pathetic is that? :p

Brown or hazel isn't the same as green. Didn't they teach you that in kindergarten?

http://i366.photobucket.com/albums/oo110/faulconandsnowjob/card2.jpg
http://img242.imageshack.us/img242/9052/2paulbook1vu6.jpg

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

Do you see how this isn't the same color, or is that too complicated for you?

http://img392.imageshack.us/img392/4628/screenhunter439us7wd6.jpghttp://img155.imageshack.us/img155/6675/green1gc6.jpg

Only a complete idiot would think someone can change eye color, facial features, & grow 2 inches in their mid-20's.

[socrates]

Only a complete idiot would think someone can change eye color, facial features, & grow 2 inches in their mid-20's.

And who, pray tell, has actually claimed any of this? :confused:

Talking of idiocy:

Is it possible they made a copy of Paul's mind somehow & downloaded it into Faul's brain?
-Faulconpoop

Of course it's possible. The thing is, if that is the case, they botched it. And by the time they realized it, Paul was dead.
-Grannybird
http://only1rad.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=faker&action=display&thread=163&page=2

http://thumbs.dreamstime.com/thumb_4/1098372471Gz8mAj.jpg

[formosan termite]

Focrates can't even come up w/ good insults. How pathetic is that? :p

Brown or hazel isn't the same as green. Didn't they teach you that in kindergarten?



No. Only an idiot would say that hazel eyes can't look green.

Can you read?

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

Hazel

This iris shows a mixture of brown, green, and amber colors.Hazel eyes are due to a combination of Rayleigh scattering and a moderate amount of melanin in the iris' anterior border layer.[7][25] Hazel eyes often appear to shift in color from a light brown to a medium golden-green. A number of studies using three-point scales have assigned hazel to be the medium-color between the lightest shade of blue and darkest shade of brown. Hazel mostly consists of Brown and Green. The dominant color in the eye can either be green or light brown/gold.[46][47][48][49][50][51][52] This can sometimes produce a multicolored iris, i.e., an eye that is light brown near the pupil and charcoal or amber/dark green on the outer part of the iris (and vice versa) when observed in sunlight. Hazel is commonly found in Europe, the Middle East, Americas, Central Asia and parts of South Asia.



The fact that hazel eyes can shift in color is common knowledge. Makeup companies even give advice on how deal with that fact.

http://www.essortment.com/all/makeuphazeleye_tuyd.htm

You fool. As I have said, my wife and one of my sons have hazel eyes. Sometimes they look brown, sometimes GREEN. The hell with what I learned in Kindergarten, I look into hazel eyes EVERY DAY. And yes, sometimes they look green. (And sometimes gray, but that doesn't happen very often.)

[socrates]

Eye color tips for changing hazel eyes

A short 'how to do' of choosing the right colors of and applying makeup for the purpose of changing hazel eyes.

If you are one of those lucky people that have hazel eyes, you can change the look of them as fast as you can apply new makeup. All of the colors that are contained in your peepers can be brought out, one by one, with a few makeup tips for changing your hazel eyes.

How do I bring out the green specks in my hazel colored eyes?

The same principle applies here. Choose a brighter green shade such as an emerald color and get the shade in three different intensities. Apply and blend the same way you would when trying to enlarge your golden specks. Finish with black eyeliner and mascara here too. This is a good evening look.

http://www.essortment.com/all/makeuphazeleye_tuyd.htm

:D

[socrates]

http://img26.imageshack.us/img26/3695/screenhunter19.jpg

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Do_hazel_eyes_ever_turn_green

[socrates]

http://img87.imageshack.us/img87/6162/screenhunter21.jpg

http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Eye_color

[socrates]

http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/282/screenhunter20.jpg

http://img259.imageshack.us/img259/5876/screenhunter22.jpg

http://raven.theraider.net/showthread.php?t=18391

:D

[socrates]

http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/8725/screenhunter23.jpg

http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt48800.html

:D

[faulconandsnowjob]

The noses are not the same

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

[socrates]

http://img41.imageshack.us/img41/3234/screenhunter24.jpg

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/I_have_hazel_eyes_and_sometimes_they_seem_really_g reen_but_I_want_to_make_them_seem_even_more_green_ so_what_can_I_do&src=ansTT

[socrates]

http://img32.imageshack.us/img32/7812/screenhunter25.jpg

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=changing+eye+color

:D

[socrates]

http://img194.imageshack.us/img194/8863/screenhunter26.jpg

http://www.drug3k.com/forum/Optical/My-eyes-change-colors-alot-Is-it-normal-133204.htm

[socrates]

http://img194.imageshack.us/img194/5237/screenhunter27.jpg

http://www.rateitall.com/i-1074601-hazel-eyes-basically-light-brown.aspx

:D

[socrates]

http://img148.imageshack.us/img148/4138/screenhunter28.jpg

http://virgorising.tribe.net/thread/86e6f912-12d1-48e6-8514-637ee218c49d

The Faul Has Green Eyes lie - DEBUNKED!

Faulconpoop: 0
Reality And Truth: 1

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

[supertzar]

The noses are not the same


Ahahahaha! In context this is hilarious!

[socrates]

The noses are not the same

Ahahahaha! In context this is hilarious!

Yeah - I nearly spilt my coffee! LOL!

Faulconpoop desperately attempts to derail the topic by posting a completely unrelated statement amidst a barrage of evidence which completely obliterates her stupid 'green eyed' claim.

CLASSIC!

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

[formosan termite]

The noses are not the same

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

FRAUDCONJOB LESSON #1

When your eye color and magazine arguments are getting blown out of the water, change the subject quickly to the nose.

Note A. - Use black and white fuzzy pictures from two different sides of the face. Anything to make them look as different as possible. Check.


Problem is they look similar to me. Although as a side, the tip of the nose does begin to droop once you start getting into your 20s because it is just cartilage and soft tissue. My neighbor gave me some exercise to do where run your finger up the tip of your nose to push it up. I don't know if it works.

[fireman]

The noses are not the same




aaahhh.....:confused:

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

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/newfade1.gif

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/another-comp1.gif

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

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/sidebyside2.gif

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/classic_comp1.gif


ALWAYS THE SAME NOSE FAULCON!!

:rolleyes:

[theenlightenedone]

Great posts socrates.

I suspect my eyes hazel.

I wanted to check eyecolor.

My eyes look green when light and brown when darker.

Not sure if hazel.

But they look different depending on light.

That I know.

[formosan termite]

aaahhh.....:confused:

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

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/newfade1.gif

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/another-comp1.gif

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

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/sidebyside2.gif

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/classic_comp1.gif


ALWAYS THE SAME NOSE FAULCON!!

:rolleyes:

MASTERPIECE!

I wonder how Fraudconjob will try to change the subject now?

[triso]

Paul is alive, all the pics of before/after are exactly the same. He was an aragont idiot before he suposidly died and he still is. Have you heard the Lennon song slagging of Paul "How Do You Sleep".

So Sgt. Pepper took you by surprise
You better see right through that mother's eyes
Those freaks was right when they said you was dead
The one mistake you made was in your head
Ah, how do you sleep?

Lyrics point to the Paul Is Dead hoax.. it's just Lennon being sarcy and witty as always.

Peace.

[theenlightenedone]

Paul is alive, all the pics of before/after are exactly the same. He was an aragont idiot before he suposidly died and he still is. Have you heard the Lennon song slagging of Paul "How Do You Sleep".

So Sgt. Pepper took you by surprise
You better see right through that mother's eyes
Those freaks was right when they said you was dead
The one mistake you made was in your head
Ah, how do you sleep?

Lyrics point to the Paul Is Dead hoax.. it's just Lennon being sarcy and witty as always.

Peace.

Arrogant idiot?

Explain.

[ivgg]

[QUOTE=triso;1175937]
Those freaks was right when they said you was dead
[QUOTE]


If those freaks was really right, John would not sing freaks, he would sing: "Those observant people was right when they said you was dead."

So in fact, John is singing Paul is alive.

[triso]

Arrogant idiot?

Explain.

Ah, i personally find Paul McCartney arrogant, my opinion. I like him though, like his music.

If those freaks was really right, John would not sing freaks, he would sing: "Those observant people was right when they said you was dead."

So in fact, John is singing Paul is alive.

That's what I'm saying, John his singing about the Paul Is Dead hoax, I'm sure if anyone would know about the imposter, it would be John

[theenlightenedone]

Ah, i personally find Paul McCartney arrogant, my opinion. I like him though, like his music.



That's what I'm saying, John his singing about the Paul Is Dead hoax, I'm sure if anyone would know about the imposter, it would be John

He may be arrogant, but does that make him idiot?

[triso]

No it doesn't, but not getting a prenup does

[taylor84]

I too find this theory very interesting, i first heard on the radio the presenters were talking about it, i looked into it, who knows, i have a couple of Beatles LPs and in some of the lyrics, their are clues, i also read in 1969 on the Mystery tour lp or ep their was numbers in the bookleat if you put a mirror next to it and read them you could ring 3 different numbers.

On page 23, the Beatles are all wearing carnations, but Paul's is black while the other Beatles have red ones. Paul denied that the black carnation had any significance at all. As he explained in the Life article, "I was wearing a black flower because they ran out of red ones." [2]

And on the final page, a hand is over Paul's head. This instance of a hand over Paul's head isn't as effective as a clue to Paul's death as the Sgt. Pepper cover photo, though. Several people have their hands raised and many are positioned over other people's heads in this picture. For example, the man standing second to Paul's left has a hand above his head as well.

A number of conspiracy theorists have pointed to a strange image appears in the booklet of Magical Mystery Tour. On the left is the image as it appears in the booklet, but on the right is the image rotated ninety degree clockwise and blurred slightly.

With a little imagination you can see a skull in this picture. It occupies the left side of the picture, with the beret of the person seated at the table forming the eye and the hair of the woman seated next to him the mouth. Once you've accepted that this is a skull, it's easy to see the damage to the top of the head. This grisly image suggests the damage to Paul's head as a result of his car crash. The puzzling thing about this picture is that, unlike the other images in the booklet, this one does not appear in the movie.

Then there's the whole business about the word "Beatles" on the cover of Magical Mystery Tour revealing a secret phone number. As Rolling Stone pointed out, it's not exactly clear what that phone number is supposed to be. It could be "231-7438, 834-7135, 536-0195, 510-6643, 546-3663, 624-7125, no telling what city, maybe London" [3]If you turn the album cover upside down and hold it in front of a mirror you can see the numbers 8341735, which is a stretch because the threes, the seven and the five (could it be a two?) are backward. If you simply hold the album cover upside-down, the numbers could be 5371438. And what about the area code? ANYway, supposedly when a person dialed this number they would receive information about Paul's death, or the person would be able to take a trip to "Magical Beatle Mystery Island"—or perhaps even speak to Paul in the hereafter. Stories abounded about the strange responses that callers received from the party on the other end of the line. According to Philip Norman in Shout! The Beatles in Their Generation, this phone number actually belonged to a journalist for The Guardian who was nearly driven crazy by the numerous phone calls from people hoping to connect with the late Paul McCartney. [4]

One of the best known "Paul is dead" audio clues comes at the end of "Strawberry Fields Forever". As the song is fading out for the second time, John apparently says "I buried Paul."

[theenlightenedone]

"Clues" interesting.

But not evidence.

Phone number, don't see it.

"I buried Paul = Cranberry Sauce"

[formosan termite]

Yes, you can plainly hear on the Anthology version of SF that John is saying "Cranberry Sauce".

And yes, the whole phone number thing on MMT was also a false clue.

See this link for the whole history of the original PID story.

http://www.recmusicbeatles.com/public/files/faqs/pid.html

The word "Beatles" when held to a mirror is actually a phone number! The number is: 2317438.

REALITY: Try it. It's really 23L (backwards) TA38. That's as close as it comes to a real phone number! Some people report having tried to call the number, however, or variants on the number, and have reported different effects. A Rolling Stone article of 29 November 1969, by John Burks, has more information about the numbers; also see Andru Reeve's book "Turn Me On, Dead Man".

There is also a raised hand behind Paul's head, the the Indian sign for death as well as the four armed "Shiva" in the lower portion of the photo who is pointing its left back hand at Paul.

REALITY: The hand is just waving; it is no Indian sign for death (none exists). In alternate shots of the cover photo, in fact, Paul *isn't* placed under this hand and the Shiva doesn't point at him. If it were an intentional clue, all photos would have been arranged the same.

[faulconandsnowjob]

Faul's cheeks look so fake :rolleyes:

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

[ivgg]

Faul's cheeks look so fake :rolleyes:

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


Nice try, but you fail again.

Another quality, another face expression, etc.

[formosan termite]

Faul's cheeks look so fake :rolleyes:

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

Not as fake as that phony Wired article.

What? You are now saying Faul has "rubble" cheeks? Do they faul off, too?

[socrates]

Faul's cheeks look so fake :rolleyes

LOL! Just like it "looks" like Paul didn't have freckles. :rolleyes:

Er.....

http://img9.imageshack.us/img9/914/screenhunter56.jpg

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

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

Your observational skills have already been totally discredited.

'Fake cheeks'. LOL!

I hear carrots are good for eyesight. Faulconpoop should order a couple of tons right away. She obviously needs 'em.

http://media.kansan.com/img/photos/2007/08/29/carrot_man_with_glasses_t260.jpg

[fireman]

Faul's cheeks look so fake :rolleyes:

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


http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/53273heathrow_2sept1965_big.jpg


So James Paul had these "fake cheeks" too? lol.

What are "fake cheeks" anyway? :D

:rolleyes:

[socrates]

What are "fake cheeks" anyway?

These?

http://i29.tinypic.com/fo20s9.jpg

Either that or they did the boob job in the wrong place!

:D

[supertzar]

Damn, PID is getting pulverized into nothing. The true believers will never admit even one single detail, though. That is the definition of closed-mindedness.

[theenlightenedone]

Why we need two threads?

One enough.

Moderator should close one.

Not needed.

[socrates]

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

Oh dear......

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kljcUvDV838

[theenlightenedone]

I think Paul learn control nail-biting.

Maybe not do during tv-interviews.

He is a professional.

After all.

[socrates]

Maybe not do during tv-interviews.

Yes he does:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kljcUvDV838

[theenlightenedone]

Yes he does:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kljcUvDV838

Well not in all.

Some he does.

Some don't.

Same with Paul before 67.

I believe.

[humito]

here is proof paul is cloned...........exclusive pic

paul mc cartney number 3.:D


http://www.freakingnews.com/pictures/11000/Paul-McCartney--11369.jpg




the pants are used to help with the transference of the old pauls mind i think............

[socrates]

here is proof paul is cloned...........exclusive pic

paul mc cartney number 3.:D


http://www.freakingnews.com/pictures/11000/Paul-McCartney--11369.jpg




the pants are used to help with the transference of the old pauls mind i think............

LOL.

I just saw this book on Amazon...

http://img269.imageshack.us/img269/9265/screenhunter31.jpg

:eek:

[formosan termite]

LOL.

I just saw this book on Amazon...

http://img269.imageshack.us/img269/9265/screenhunter31.jpg

:eek:

LOL!
Classic! Masterpiece. Still laughing.

[faulconandsnowjob]

It's been PROVEN Paul was replaced in 1966. People are just in DENIAL about it.

http://only1rad.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=faker&action=display&thread=1511

[fireman]

It's been PROVEN Paul was replaced in 1966. People are just in DENIAL about it.

http://only1rad.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=faker&action=display&thread=1511


No.. it has been proven that this article is a fraud, just like everything else in PID fantasy-world:

http://maccafunhouse.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=essentials&action=display&thread=3860


If you really think these are pictures of two different men, then it's hopeless:

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/diverse%20photos/PIA-collage.gif

So many different angles, so many facial expressions, always the same guy..

[socrates]

It's been PROVEN Paul was replaced in 1966.

Lie:

A false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/lie


.

[socrates]

No.. it has been proven that this article is a fraud, just like everything else in PID fantasy-world:

http://maccafunhouse.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=essentials&action=display&thread=3860


If you really think these are pictures of two different men, then it's hopeless:

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/diverse%20photos/PIA-collage.gif

So many different angles, so many facial expressions, always the same guy..

Masterpiece!

[faulconandsnowjob]

No.. it has been proven that this article is a fraud, just like everything else in PID fantasy-world
That's an outright LIE.

If you really think these are pictures of two different men, then it's hopeless:
You just have NO eye for detail. It's pathetic.

[faulconandsnowjob]

"I buried Paul = Cranberry Sauce"

Not very good eyes & not very good ears, either, b/c he clearly says "I buried Paul." You people are so suggestible. Somebody tells you it's "cranberry sauce," & that's what you hear. Just like someone tells you some taller, dorkier guy w/ different color eyes & different facial features is Paul & you believe them. Pathetic. :rolleyes:

[socrates]

Not very good eyes

You just have NO eye for detail. It's pathetic.

Says the person who hadn't noticed Paul had freckles!

http://img63.imageshack.us/img63/4869/wwwmyemoticonscomgigglexh7.gif

[diamond dogs]

here is proof paul is cloned...........exclusive pic

paul mc cartney number 3.:D


http://www.freakingnews.com/pictures/11000/Paul-McCartney--11369.jpg




the pants are used to help with the transference of the old pauls mind i think............

He does look remarkebly (facial) like his brother Mike McCartney in the pic..

http://www.artinliverpool.com/blogarch/mike-mccartney-live8-1.jpg

[theenlightenedone]

Not very good eyes & not very good ears, either, b/c he clearly says "I buried Paul." You people are so suggestible. Somebody tells you it's "cranberry sauce," & that's what you hear. Just like someone tells you some taller, dorkier guy w/ different color eyes & different facial features is Paul & you believe them. Pathetic. :rolleyes:

You hear "I buried Paul" because you listen to Fred Labour old stuff.

He admitted making everything up.

And I'm not PIA because I was told.

Remember, I was PID first.

I realise PID was stupid.

You should too.

SunKing and the gang told you Paul is dead.

You didn't realise it self.

You was told he was dead.

Hypocricy, I believe it's called.

Also.

You feel strong calling people "pathetic" FAILcon?

You feel superior?

You are the pathetic one.

[formosan termite]

That's an outright LIE.




No. Absolute truth.

This thread sums up the recent findings about the article that appeard in the italian "Wired magazine". The article is supposed to provide "scientific proof" that Paul was replaced... ::)
See also this thread at NIR:
http://invanddis.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=5735



So i looked at that article again, and i smelled something REALLY FISHY :)


Check this out:

this is a scan of a page of that article, taken from NIR
http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/p5.jpg


take a look at Sgt.Pepper-Paul! Something strange?



http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/p6.jpg



mmmmhhh.....



let's see...

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/Beatles-Lonely-Hearts-LP1179.jpg



mmmhhh....





mmmhhhhhhhhh.....






http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/doctored1.gif




>:(DOCTORED!!!! >:(



Conclusion: they used a massivly streched picture to do a analysis of face measurements?

[formosan termite]

Next.

Ear photos. Not from original authentic photos. From Sun King's website

The next thing that struck me, was the source of the pictures they used.
Some of them looked awfully familiar... ::)



http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/p7.jpg

See the ear comparison? That looked awfully familiar to me!

Guess what?




http://digilander.libero.it/jamespaul/animations.html



http://digilander.libero.it/jamespaul/animations/ears_comparison.gif


It's exactly the same, that SUNKING used! >:(


:P

[formosan termite]

Next.

These (LOL!) "scientists" took the teeth comp photos right from Sun King

Detective Diabolo found more...
;D

Now check this one out:

http://i32.tinypic.com/2wlwwmf.jpg


Guess where i found the EXACT SAME comparison...


Yep, on this site again:

http://digilander.libero.it/jamespaul/show-case.html


http://i30.tinypic.com/2h58vbd.gif


>:(

[formosan termite]

Scientific method

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

Experiments - Once predictions are made, they can be tested by experiments. If test results contradict predictions, then the hypotheses are called into question and explanations may be sought. Sometimes experiments are conducted incorrectly and are at fault. If the results confirm the predictions, then the hypotheses are considered likely to be correct but might still be wrong and are subject to further testing. The experimental control is a technique for dealing with observational error. This technique uses the contrast between multiple samples (or observations) under differing conditions, to see what varies or what remains the same.

Test Your Hypothesis by Doing an Experiment: Your experiment tests whether your hypothesis is true or false. It is important for your experiment to be a fair test. You conduct a fair test by making sure that you change only one factor at a time while keeping all other conditions the same.

You should also repeat your experiments several times to make sure that the first results weren't just an accident.

The hypothesis for these "scientists" was that Paul was replaced. You can see above about the scientific method. In the scientific method, you must use multiple samples. You use control factors and change the factors one at a time while keeping all other conditions the same. In this case, control factors could be testing measurements of pre 67 photos against each other to see if the measurements always matched between pre 67 photos. The same should have been done on post 66 photos to see if all measurements matched. Then when testing pre 67 against post 66, you would test many different samples to make sure variances were always the same. And, as you can read above, these experiments should be completed several times to make sure the final results are accurate.

Most of all, the data to be tested should not be tainted in any way. The testing should be on random data free from any bias.

In this article, there was very little data tested. There were no control tests done to make sure measurements always matched the hypothesis. They show no tests in that article of comparisons between photos of Paul and Paul and between "Faul" and "Faul". Several such tests should have been done on multiple original photos to show that the measurements always matched.

Most of all, though, the data used for testing was biased and tainted. They did not use original vintage photos, but images off the internet. And, worse, all of the data used were from a website biased toward the PID point-of-view.

Ok, faulcon, show your scientific background. Avoid insults and calling everyone stupid and paid disinfo agents, and be scientific. Describe your scientific training. Please, in detail, show how these "scientists" in the Wired article followed the scientific method described above. Provide the multiple random samples used. Describe what control factors were used in the testing. And please let us know how using only data from a PID website does not taint the final results of the experiments. Honestly answer the following question. If People Magazine put out an article claiming to prove that Paul is alive, and the only evidence they presented was from MaccaFunhouse, would you accept that as being truly scientific? I wouldn't.

[faulconandsnowjob]

You hear "I buried Paul" because you listen to Fred Labour old stuff.

He admitted making everything up.
So? Paul was still replaced. You don't even know that the PID "rumor" didn't come from Fred Labour, do you? I think "ignorant" is the word.

And I'm not PIA because I was told.
You're PIA b/c you ... what? Can't look at evidence & come to a reasonable conclusion?

Remember, I was PID first.
Then that makes it even sadder.

I realise PID was stupid.
Whatever. It's been proven Paul was replaced.

You should too.
I should, too, what? Think a guy can change his facial features, his eye color & grow over 2 inches in his mid-20's? Sorry, but that's just STUPID.

You didn't realise it self.
English isn't your first language, is it?

Hypocricy, I believe it's called.
Denial, ignorance, stupidity

You feel strong calling people "pathetic" FAILcon?
Oh, aren't you clever." Failcon" How long did it take you to come up w/ that one? Loser.

You feel superior?
At least I can figure out people don't go thru bizarre metamorphoses in their mid-20's.

You are the pathetic one.
LOL! NOw, that's just pathetic. :rolleyes:

[faulconandsnowjob]

Scientific method



I understand that this is probably beyond your comprehension, but when forensic SCIENTISTS (unlike you) conduct a biometrical analysis & conclude that Paul was replaced, it's convincing. Some dumb guy on the internet desperate to discredit them b/c he doesn't want the truth about Paul having been replaced from coming out.. not so convincing.

[faulconandsnowjob]

This bug-eyed guy is supposed to be Paul? :p Ok.. Some people will believe anything.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v204/WlarusGirl/early_faul.jpghttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v204/WlarusGirl/paulski2.jpg

[faulconandsnowjob]

This dorky guy w/ the weak chin is supposed to be Paul? Ha ha ha! :p

http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b375/Cavern61/THA003_Paul_McCARTNEY_6.jpg

Here's Paul. Notice he did not have a weak chin.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v455/JPM/serious.jpg

[faulconandsnowjob]

What color are those eyes? Sure looks like BROWN to me. Good luck arguing it's *green.* lol :p

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a386/Beatlesagain/Beatle_Paul_3.jpg

[theenlightenedone]

You're PIA b/c you ... what? Can't look at evidence & come to a reasonable conclusion?

Yes. But obviously you can't.

Then that makes it even sadder.

So PID sad now? I thought it was hip thing to be.

Whatever. It's been proven Paul was replaced.

Where?

I should, too, what? Think a guy can change his facial features, his eye color & grow over 2 inches in his mid-20's? Sorry, but that's just STUPID.

You don't read our posts, do you?

English isn't your first language, is it?

Common sense isn't your first sense, is it?

Denial, ignorance, stupidity

Yes, that fits you.

Oh, aren't you clever." Failcon" How long did it take you to come up w/ that one? Loser.

Jealous my nicknames better? "Focrates" That's real clever.

At least I can figure out people don't go thru bizarre metamorphoses in their mid-20's.


You can? That new to me.

LOL! NOw, that's just pathetic. :rolleyes:

Whatever "Ms. Lawyer" You are superior bla bla bla.

Smite us "sheeples.

We're just "dis-info" afent, aren't we?

Lower beings.

...

People like you make me sick.

[faulconandsnowjob]

Keep it coming PIA'ers. You're just showing how desperate you are when all you can do is call people childish names :p

[theenlightenedone]

Keep it coming PIA'ers. You're just showing how desperate you are when all you can do is call people childish names :p

Sure thing.

Ms. Lawyer.

Sure thing.

[faulconandsnowjob]

I love this close-up shot of Faul's eyes from SFF.

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

Just in case you missed that some ugly, dorky guy was pretending to be Paul, they show you his eyes are the WRONG color. :p

[faulconandsnowjob]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/paul_faul-1.jpg

[theenlightenedone]

I love this close-up shot of Faul's eyes from SFF.

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

Just in case you missed that some ugly, dorky guy was pretending to be Paul, they show you his eyes are the WRONG color. :p

We argue a bit.

I get last word and you quickly change to eye-color again.

Scared?

[dream9]

I think it's the PIAers who are scared. They created an entire board just to try and stop the truth getting out about PID. They discuss us all the time. They are obsessed with us. We could care less about them.

[faulconandsnowjob]

Scared? That doesn't even make any sense. The truth is Paul was replaced. All the facts & evidence - such as difft eye color - support that.

[faulconandsnowjob]

different eye color

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

[faulconandsnowjob]

I think it's the PIAers who are scared. They created an entire board just to try and stop the truth getting out about PID. They discuss us all the time. They are obsessed with us. We could care less about them.

LOL! That's so pathetic :rolleyes:

[dream9]

Hey faulcon, notice how after the Wired article came out how the PIAers from maccafunhouse started coming over here to try and stop this discussion? It seems to me that they are the scared ones.

[faulconandsnowjob]

Hey faulcon, notice how after the Wired article came out how the PIAers from maccafunhouse started coming over here to try and stop this discussion? It seems to me that they are the scared ones.

I totally agree. What I find hilarious is how they proclaim to know more about forensic science than forensic scientists :p

[theenlightenedone]

LOL! That's so pathetic :rolleyes:

It's pretty clear who's obsessed with something here Faulcon...

[theenlightenedone]

I totally agree. What I find hilarious is how they proclaim to know more about forensic science than forensic scientists :p

Where we say that?

All we did was post links.

And point out faults in the study.

Based on real studies.

REAL studies go through hundreds of tests and PEER REVIEW.

Without that, a scientific study is useless.

[faulconandsnowjob]

Different eye color

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

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

What on earth could explain that? It must be anything but that Paul was replaced. What do forensic scientists know, anyway? :p

[faulconandsnowjob]

Yeah, these eyes are really not looking too green to me

http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d196/Beatlesphotos/65lookingfine.jpg

http://img155.imageshack.us/img155/8043/cheezeymoustache6vc7fq3.jpg

[faulconandsnowjob]

And point out faults in the study.
Non-scientists finding "faults" in their study. lol OK, where's your PhD in craniometry? :p

Based on real studies.
Based on your hallucinations more like

Without that, a scientific study is useless.
Yeah, especially when it doesn't support your pre-conceived notions :p

[theenlightenedone]

WIRED "study" took images from SunKing site.

A site biased toward PID.

Study was done for what could easliy be called "tabloid"

Only few tests.

With bad pics.

No peer review.

Sounds like superb work.

Not.

[faulconandsnowjob]

WIRED "study" took images from SunKing site.

A site biased toward PID.

Study was done for what could easliy be called "tabloid"

Only few tests.

With bad pics.

No peer review.

Sounds like superb work.

Not.

You just don't like being proven wrong.

[theenlightenedone]

You just don't like being proven wrong.

Neither do you.

[faulconandsnowjob]

Neither do you.

Except I'm not wrong. I have science on my side. You don't. :p

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v455/JPM/TPUDec65001.jpghttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v419/TheFaker/faul_early.jpg

[theenlightenedone]

Except I'm not wrong. I have science on my side. You don't. :p

What is this "science" you speak of?

Oh you mean tabloid study with 5-6 tests and no peer review?

I see.

[faulconandsnowjob]

What is this "science" you speak of?

Oh you mean tabloid study with 5-6 tests and no peer review?

I see.

I mean the experts in forensic science.

[theenlightenedone]

I mean the experts in forensic science.

Right.

[faulconandsnowjob]

But you don't need to be an expert in forensic science to tell that these guys aren't the same:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v455/JPM/proper-paula.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v419/TheFaker/67y_coat.jpg

[theenlightenedone]

But you don't need to be an expert in forensic science to tell that these guys aren't the same:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v455/JPM/proper-paula.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v419/TheFaker/67y_coat.jpg

Right.

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/newfade1.gif

[faulconandsnowjob]

1965 v 1967

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v462/OnlyBeatles/james_paul_bill.jpg

[theenlightenedone]

1965 v 1967

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v462/OnlyBeatles/james_paul_bill.jpg

Right.

http://img183.imageshack.us/img183/1980/pep63hp.gif

Why doesn't Faul match up with Faul?

Explain.

[faulconandsnowjob]

Right.

http://img183.imageshack.us/img183/1980/pep63hp.gif

Why doesn't Faul match up with Faul?

Explain.

Why don't you try using a comp that doesn't use a doctored photo?

[faulconandsnowjob]

Why don't you explain why their faces don't match up?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v204/WlarusGirl/james_paul_mccartney_genuine_ahdn_help.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v204/WlarusGirl/facelonger.jpg

[theenlightenedone]

Why don't you explain why their faces don't match up?

Why don't you explain why thier faces DO match up?

http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n20/khanmfh/fades/66_67fade.gif

[faulconandsnowjob]

Are those faces supposed to be matching up? :p

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a386/Beatlesagain/Paul2.jpghttp://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y60/Trueclues/Bill1975AA.jpg

[theenlightenedone]

Are those faces supposed to be matching up?

Well enough to proove they're the same man.

[faulconandsnowjob]

Well enough to proove they're the same man.

Forensic science has proven Paul was replaced. You have nothing. :p

[theenlightenedone]

Forensic science has proven Paul was replaced. You have nothing. :p

How many times are you gonna bring that up? Whenever we post proof that PIA all you say is:

"Whatevah, Paul Was Replaced, proved by SCIENCE... Suckahs!"

Can't you at least try to come up with something new?

[faulconandsnowjob]

How many times are you gonna bring that up? Whenever we post proof that PIA all you say is:

"Whatevah, Paul Was Replaced, proved (sic) by SCEINCE (sic)... Suckahs!"

Can't you at least try to come up with something new?

Some people, lawyers, for example, find forensic science quite convincing. It's more convincing than some guy on the internet giving his non-expert opinion.

And I would never use such poor grammar or misspell "science." lol

[faulconandsnowjob]

Round face

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/3296697.jpg

Long face

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/56170243.jpg

[theenlightenedone]

Some people, lawyers, for example, find forensic science quite convincing. It's more convincing than some guy on the internet giving his non-expert opinion.

And I would never use such poor grammar or misspell "science." lol

As I've said, English is not my first tounge.
And it's quite funny how you refeer the people that made the WIRED article as "experts" Well... maybe they are, but thier work certainly isn't very professional
:cool:

[faulconandsnowjob]

As I've said, English is not my first tounge.
And it's quite funny how you refeer the people that made the WIRED article as "experts" Well... maybe they are, but thier work certainly isn't very professional
:cool:

Yes, they are experts, & you are not in a position to judge their professionalism, b/c you are not an expert.