|
|
Post by Red Lion on Dec 8, 2004 22:24:36 GMT -5
Found this observation on the other forum (credit to SK).   Notice the separation on Faul's earlobe whereas Paul has none. |
|
|
|
Post by FlamingPie on Dec 8, 2004 22:46:00 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by pennylane on Dec 9, 2004 5:40:07 GMT -5
^ Kenya pics. There, his earlobes look pretty attached to me. *shudders* those kenya pics scare the socks off me! |
|
|
|
Post by Red Lion on Dec 9, 2004 11:51:03 GMT -5
60IF is not at issue here. The Kenya pics are too poor in quality to make any sort of accurate distinction on the earlobes. Faul may resemble someone in those Kenya shots, its just not Paul Mccartney.  |
|
|
|
Post by FlamingPie on Dec 9, 2004 14:56:37 GMT -5
60IF is not at issue here. The Kenya pics are too poor in quality to make any sort of accurate distinction on the earlobes. Faul may resemble someone in those Kenya shots, its just not Paul Mccartney. Fine, I'll find a bunch of vintage pics in the Paul McCartney section showing how the ear can sometimes look like it is or isn't attached. |
|
|
|
Post by JoJo on Dec 9, 2004 17:23:20 GMT -5
My stuff gets around! ;D (which is a good thing of course) You'll be hard pressed to find an angle as good as this one, there are a couple of contenders in my album cover scans, but not quite the right angle. The magazine: Teen World, April 1965. |
|
|
|
Post by JoJo on Dec 9, 2004 17:46:19 GMT -5
Dug around a little more, and here's a couple that illustrate. We've seen these before, but I made a hi res scan of the ear. Pretty good:   Very good:   Hope this helps.. |
|
|
|
Post by DarkHorse on Dec 9, 2004 19:33:37 GMT -5
How can you tell? The pictures are so unclear you can barely see any detail whatsoever.  |
|
|
|
Post by revolver on Dec 9, 2004 23:08:40 GMT -5
Found this observation on the other forum (credit to SK). Notice the separation on Faul's earlobe whereas Paul has none. Unless the left photo was altered, (not likely) that's pretty strong evidence. I suppose PIA could say, well he got ear lobe detachment surgery.  with that argument. Regarding Kenya that looks like a detached lobe to me.  BTW, according to Chinese medicine, detached lobes are a sign of stronger adrenal glands and an overall hardier constitution. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Lion on Dec 9, 2004 23:29:28 GMT -5
Unless the left photo was altered, (not likely) that's pretty strong evidence. I suppose PIA could say, well he got ear lobe detachment surgery. You took the words out of my mouth. We need not even discuss the fact that there is zero resemblance in those photos either. BTW thank you Jo Jo for the blow ups. |
|
|
|
Post by Girl on Dec 11, 2004 15:22:15 GMT -5
Same here.  |
|
|
|
Post by JoJo on Dec 12, 2004 10:07:58 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Red Lion on Dec 12, 2004 12:09:09 GMT -5
Sometime many years later...    OUCH!! There is no longer need for debate about a replacement. We only need to find out what happened to the original Paul Mccartney. Great find JoJo.  |
|
|
|
Post by JoJo on Dec 12, 2004 12:20:07 GMT -5
OUCH!! There is no longer need for debate about a replacement. We only need to find out what happened to the original Paul Mccartney. Great find JoJo. That's more of an OOPS, and thanks RedLion. What happened to the original? A lot more difficult proposition.. |
|
|
|
Post by FlamingPie on Dec 12, 2004 16:05:51 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by JoJo on Dec 12, 2004 16:25:17 GMT -5
Well, the left ear is the subject of discussion. And what is the source of both pics? (just wondering)
|
|
|
|
Post by revolver on Dec 12, 2004 17:48:05 GMT -5
Well, the left ear is the subject of discussion. And what is the source of both pics? (just wondering) According to this link it's not impossible to have one attached and one detached, even though one gene controls attachment of both earlobes. Detached is the dominant gene, attached is recessive. We need more photos of Paul's/Bill's right ear to see whether it was attached or not. But the left ear looks pretty much decided. |
|
|
|
Post by revolver on Dec 12, 2004 18:11:16 GMT -5
I just checked my own (attached) earlobes in the mirror. From the side, they can look detached depending on how the light hits them and where the shadow falls. So we shouldn't trust side photos to reveal the true facts here. The photos of the left ears that JoJo posted are indisputable IMO. It looks like the smoking gun to me. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Lion on Dec 13, 2004 1:07:14 GMT -5
It looks like the smoking gun to me. Yup. The PIA charade is all over. There is just no getting around this. |
|
|
|
Post by eyesbleed on Dec 13, 2004 7:37:56 GMT -5
Yup. The PIA charade is all over. There is just no getting around this. I'd love to see how our favorite crew of PIAers would explain this one away. I think this is the best find in a long long time.  |
|
|
|
Post by FlamingPie on Dec 13, 2004 17:46:19 GMT -5
I'd love to see how our favorite crew of PIAers would explain this one away. I think this is the best find in a long long time. I'd be able to disprove this pretty quickly if "Faul" didn't always have hair covering his ears, or you'd let me use non-vintage pics. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Lion on Dec 13, 2004 20:56:34 GMT -5
let me use non-vintage pics. TILT!!! |
|
|
|
Post by JoJo on Dec 13, 2004 21:08:15 GMT -5
I'd be able to disprove this pretty quickly if "Faul" didn't always have hair covering his ears, or you'd let me use non-vintage pics. No, the lobes aren't always covered, and think about this, they shouldn't change. Post 66 Paul should always have an attached earlobe, catch him just once (and it's been more than once) without this feature, and there's some explaining to do.. Photo fakery is a problem...it happens, believe it. I bought the book "The Beatles Story" written by Billy Shepherd, (couldn't resist with a name like that) from the UK version of Amazon, and posted this pic on the other forum. Mine said inside "first published in 1964", which leaves out when it was actually published.  TotalInformation posted the same pic from a 1964 version:  Does this tell you something? It should say: deliberate planning. If it's here, then it's elsewhere.. That's why you need vintage photos..(mine on the left, TI's on the right)   |
|
|
|
Post by FlamingPie on Dec 13, 2004 21:57:58 GMT -5
TILT!!! Huh? JoJo, my guess is they edited out George in the recent pic, so you just see Paul and Ringo goofing around. In other words, getting rid of George highlighted what they wanted you to see. img16.exs.cx/img16/7469/doctoredcomp0if.gif^ They didn't touch Paul's face at all. |
|
|
|
Post by revolver on Dec 13, 2004 22:14:55 GMT -5
I'd be able to disprove this pretty quickly if "Faul" didn't always have hair covering his ears, or you'd let me use non-vintage pics. You can look for more photos if you want, FP. But I don't see how that will explain away the ones that RedLion and JoJo have already posted. Paul's left earlobe was clearly attached, and Bill's wasn't/isn't.   It appears that Paul's right lobe was attached also:  |
|
