One more for the Paul is Dead theory... why not?

[truegroup]

Originally Posted by white light

Yes he was. Sutcliffe's replacement on bass guitar was Paul McCartney.

Well duhhh...but he was already in the band

Lol. The walrus was Faul, looking through a glass onion.

Clearly the line “them freaks was right when they said you were dead” from Lennon’s How Do You Sleep, indicates someone stating that Paul was replaced by Faul (otherwise why use the word “freaks”?), rather than someone pissed off with his old friend for splitting up the band.

.

Just above this big pile of shite you've just parroted is a series of pictures.... showing to anyone with a brain that it is the same person.
Also included is a voice print analysis....same bloke. The facial recognition by the magazine "experts" proven to be bullshit.

[white light]

Originally Posted by truegroup

Well duhhh...but he was already in the band







Just above this big pile of shite you've just parroted is a series of pictures.... showing to anyone with a brain that it is the same person.
Also included is a voice print analysis....same bloke. The facial recognition by the magazine "experts" proven to be bullshit.

Apologies if my satire is less obvious than I thought it was. I'm on your side in this. Reread the big pile of shite and you may get what I said.

[truegroup]

Originally Posted by white light

Apologies if my satire is less obvious than I thought it was. I'm on your side in this. Reread the big pile of shite and you may get what I said.

Satire is impossible amongst people who routinely make posts beyond belief.

[white light]

Originally Posted by truegroup

Satire is impossible amongst people who routinely make posts beyond belief.

So is attempting to change people's ingrained beliefs. That's why I resort to satire, even if only for myself, on threads as ridiculous as this.

[techman]

Why does this topic provoke such verbal abuse?.

There's a new kid on the PiD block on YouTube by the name of AD Clarke. He regularly posts new videos giving his opinions on various PiD clues and theories, though he does seem to be of the opinion that Faul/Billy Shears replaced original Paul rather than considering there maybe, or may have been, two or more Paul doubles throughout the entire Beatles years. Some good stuff,though I do find his constant "laughing" very annoying and offputting as it gives the impression he's not taking himself seriously, and the constant and random jump cuts is very weird.

[kiwi_]

Kinda seems like you give too much credence to the opinions of others rather than just deciding for yourself

[techman]

I don't trust every person in the PiD camp, and I don't buy the claim that Vivian Stanshall or Phil Ackril replaced Paul and became Billy.

Its very hard for someone to do their research off their own back given the limited resources, though my own intuition says that there were many Paul doubles throughout the years.

I find this site interesting:

http://thefab4dozen.blogspot.com/201...id-motifs.html

As Mark Devlin has discovered once you start delving down the PiD rabbit hole, it becomes a mind f**k, meaning the more you research and think you've tussed what was going on you com e across evidence that makes you rethink your previous thoughts regarding Paul and Fa ul. One minute you're sure the person pre 66 is the original Paul then you look a photo of video from the same time frame and notice what appears to be Faul.

In this video, I noticed Faul has the same mannerisms as the "Paul" seen in the interview they did in about Aug 66 where they talk about the media slating them regarding the bigger than Jesus remark, yet that can't be right if we're to assume Faul hadn't replaced the dead Paul at that date (unless Faul was already on the scene interchanging roles with the "real" Paul?).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LmuqczpRW7M

Videos like this make me more convinced that there have always been more than one Paul rather than Paul dying and then being replaced with an imposter lookalike.