Re: How many fauls were/is there? « Reply #25 on Jun 14, 2011, 6:39pm »
i dont understand how people think theres more than one Paul? I thought Paul was dead since '66 and they had Faul double him. Why would they need an extra double?
Re: How many fauls were/is there? « Reply #26 on Jun 14, 2011, 10:13pm »
It seems the Paul who allegedly died was not the first original by that name. It also appears there needed to be multiples of each Beatle. A good look at the many available pictures will show a short Paul, a medium Paul, and at least two taller Pauls, all before 1966. Also, both a short and tall George, a John with a wide nose or narrow. I haven't quite tallied them all up yet.
« Last Edit: Jun 14, 2011, 10:14pm by Silversong »
My mustache draws all the ladys......and the walrus....
Joined: Mar 2011 Gender: Male Posts: 124 Location: at Abbey Road, fixing a hole.
Re: How many fauls were/is there? « Reply #27 on Jun 16, 2011, 11:51am »
silversong's right. there were tall, short, medium sized pauls, but the one i believe "died" is the Budokan Paul. He was the best, in my opinion and would be missed very much because of his love for music, etc.
It seems the Paul who allegedly died was not the first original by that name. It also appears there needed to be multiples of each Beatle. A good look at the many available pictures will show a short Paul, a medium Paul, and at least two taller Pauls, all before 1966. Also, both a short and tall George, a John with a wide nose or narrow. I haven't quite tallied them all up yet.
I don't believe you. Please post a short Paul, a medium Paul and a tall Paul so I can show you where you are going wrong. There was only one impostor. Doubleback Fake Paul. I am an expert on him because I have studied this for a long time. I know what I'm talking about, trust me.
I saw you post these photos on Mommybird's site. One is Paul and the other is Doubleback Fake Paul. Surely you saw the differences?
« Last Edit: Jun 17, 2011, 12:07pm by truthseeker »
My mustache draws all the ladys......and the walrus....
Joined: Mar 2011 Gender: Male Posts: 124 Location: at Abbey Road, fixing a hole.
Re: How many fauls were/is there? « Reply #29 on Jun 18, 2011, 2:40pm »
ok this is @ dewubbs or watever and everyone else who cant see the multiple faul thing. look. the first 3 are the same. same chin eyebrows and nose. at the end this guy has a bigger like nose and just a diffrent face alltogether. undeniable evidence
ok this is @ dewubbs or watever and everyone else who cant see the multiple faul thing. look. the first 3 are the same. same chin eyebrows and nose. at the end this guy has a bigger like nose and just a diffrent face alltogether. undeniable evidence
They're all Doubleback Fake Paul. I should know, I'm an expert on him. And that's him. And the nose isn't any bigger than the others. And he is clearly squinting in the last pic because it's sunny so that's why his eyebrows are shaped differently.
And you call me stupid?!
Paul is dead.
« Last Edit: Jun 18, 2011, 5:11pm by truthseeker »
My mustache draws all the ladys......and the walrus....
Joined: Mar 2011 Gender: Male Posts: 124 Location: at Abbey Road, fixing a hole.
Re: How many fauls were/is there? « Reply #31 on Jun 18, 2011, 6:13pm »
well truth seeker, heres to your double back theory. im making a new thread, called disproving doubleback. I respect your theory, i guess so you should respect ours.
They're all Doubleback Fake Paul. I should know, I'm an expert on him. And that's him.
Paul is dead.
Uhhhh, no you are not an expert.... far from it. You've got pics of Bill labeled Paul, pics of JPM labeled fake Paul. It's a total mess. Several people here have tried to correct you, or simply clarify things on your confusing thread. It would serve you well to learn to take criticism & learn from your mistakes as thewalruswaspaul suggested yesterday, because you are far from being an "expert"
They're all Doubleback Fake Paul. I should know, I'm an expert on him. And that's him.
Paul is dead.
Uhhhh, no you are not an expert.... far from it. You've got pics of Bill labeled Paul, pics of JPM labeled fake Paul. It's a total mess.
It's obvious you cannot tell real Paul from Doubleback Fake Paul. That's why I'm more of an expert on the impostor than most on here. You all seem to believe that just because a photo is from 1965 or 1964 than it has to be Paul because you have been brainwashed by the illuminati controlled media to believe it is him.
This goes deeper than any of you here can imagine. You don't know the half of it. So keep believing the lies you are told and believe the media lies while I and others try to uncover the real truth.
Total, absolute refusal to accept any criticism or corrections to your theory..... Oh ya, that will get you far
I'm pointing out facts I believe to be true. You are the one refusing to consider them or accept corrections to your preconceptions of Faul. That won't get you far, thank you very much. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
Paul is dead.
« Last Edit: Jun 19, 2011, 11:41am by truthseeker »
My mustache draws all the ladys......and the walrus....
Joined: Mar 2011 Gender: Male Posts: 124 Location: at Abbey Road, fixing a hole.
Re: How many fauls were/is there? « Reply #38 on Jun 19, 2011, 3:06pm »
thanks eyesbleed. truthseeker, i dont like you, but i CAN say that you are right about one thing: this goes deeper than we imagine it. But this wasnt meant to be an Occult beatles discussion, but why don't you let us in on the other 'half" of this stuff.
seeker - I'm guessing there are AT LEAST a few here that are way ahead of you when it comes to certain things.
Well, I am not so sure about that lol!
I'm very sure about that. There are 3 things that are pretty clear to most people here. 1.Paul is Paul 2.Bill is Bill 3. you're confused
You are not the superior instructor, and could learn some things from a lot of people here. Try being open to other theories besides your own because yours is kinda messed up.
Try being open to other theories besides your own because yours is kinda messed up.
That statement is hypocritical. You want me to be open to other theories then claim mine are messed up. Why don't you take your own advice and be open to my theories?
And if they are messed up, then please explain why.
Paul is dead.
« Last Edit: Jun 20, 2011, 6:57pm by truthseeker »
And if they are messed up, then please explain why.
Paul is dead.
Anything prior to Sept 66' is moot......period. Your delusions of a "doubleback crossover fake Paul" were contrived by someone who never had any credibility with this subject at any time. You say Paul is dead? Hogwash, here we are 45 years later with no body, no witnesses and not even a mild form of leakage in any venue. He wasn't so special that a public death had to be avoided had he actually died.
With all this being said, feel free to play your "Illuminati" card, as it is a great way to show you have nothing left to stand on.
And if they are messed up, then please explain why.
Paul is dead.
Anything prior to Sept 66' is moot......period. Your delusions of a "doubleback crossover fake Paul" were contrived by someone who never had any credibility with this subject at any time.
You say Paul is dead? Hogwash, here we are 45 years later with no body, no witnesses and not even a mild form of leakage in any venue. He wasn't so special that a public death had to be avoided had he actually died.
'You say Paul was replaced? Hogwash. Here we are 45 years later, with no witnesses and not even a mild form of leakage in any venue. He wasn't so special that a secret replacement had to be introduced had he actually left The Beatles.'
The same dismissive line of reasoning you apply to a possible dead Paul can equally apply to a possible replacement. A replacement you believe is real. Your argument therefore contradicts your very own claim, by repudiating that Paul is dead and that Paul was replaced.
« Last Edit: Jun 21, 2011, 6:08pm by truthseeker »