|
Post by revolver on Dec 31, 2004 22:38:18 GMT -5
Something to take under advisement, yes. On second thought JoJo, a better title for that forum might be 'The Faul-is-Paul Hoax' or FIP for short. Not everyone here believes Paul died in 1966, but almost all agree Faul is not Paul. The debate isn't PID vs. PIA; it's PWR vs. FIP
|
|
|
Post by eyesbleed on Jan 1, 2005 11:31:27 GMT -5
I've brought this up before but no PIAers ever respond.Why aren't you guys working on finding out why there are obviously 2 Pauls? Granted, y'all concentrate on the pics that back up yer argument, yet you ignore the ones that obviously show something else. JPM does NOT have to be dead for their to be a replacement.... either permenent or temporary. PID could very well be WRONG, but that does not tell us why we see pis of another man using JPM's name. It seems to me that PIDers & PIAers SHOULD have a lot of common ground in trying to figure this out... but NOOO! See! Once again this idea has been totally ignored by the entire PIA camp. This could be a common bridge between the PID & PIA camps, but y'all are obviously afraid to acknowledge the existance of ANY pics of a JPM replacement even tho we all know they exist.
|
|
|
Post by pennylane on Jan 1, 2005 16:45:03 GMT -5
y'know, i've never considered the fact that JPM could actually be alive. It certainly takes on a new twist. everything does seem to point to the fact he is dead, but you never know. Today i'm feeling PID 80/20.. it fluctuates on ocassion. If JPM is alive.. wonder where he's hiding?
|
|
|
Post by -Wings- on Jan 1, 2005 17:03:35 GMT -5
That island in Greece?
|
|
|
Post by pennylane on Jan 1, 2005 17:17:49 GMT -5
well.. they did buy 6 of them
|
|
|
Post by eyesbleed on Jan 1, 2005 17:33:12 GMT -5
y'know, i've never considered the fact that JPM could actually be alive. It certainly takes on a new twist. everything does seem to point to the fact he is dead, but you never know. Today i'm feeling PID 80/20.. it fluctuates on ocassion. If JPM is alive.. wonder where he's hiding? Ya... I think most all of us are positive JPM was replaced for a time coz we know what we see. Some of these pics are obviously not JPM, others make it harder to tell, but we can conclude that there was/is a replacement. On the other hand, we don't have anything but intuition as to whether he actually died in 66. All the clues seem to suggest that . So does the change in overall mood, & the sudden fascination with death. I personally feel that he did die in 66 but there's not much to go on other than all these weird clues. Not exactly what you'd call "proof positive".
|
|
|
Post by pennylane on Jan 1, 2005 17:43:53 GMT -5
too true. either way, the man that calls himself 'Sir Paul" today is most definately NOT JPM. His mannerism and everything are so completely that of Faul's.
|
|
|
Post by JoJo on Jan 1, 2005 17:54:40 GMT -5
I think he is the one we see photographed with Linda on the magazine cover in 1969. Hope you don't mind, but here's a illustration of what you were talking about: Could just be one of those JPMish Bill photos but...
|
|
|
Post by ecenzo1 on Jan 1, 2005 21:37:05 GMT -5
I can't help but commend Eyesbleed for his open-minded admission that while he believes that PID, he freely admits there may be alternative answers to this mystery. And frankly, that's the point. It's a mystery. There are so many audio and album picture "clues" implying Paul's death and some sort of finality. While there are degrees to the "obviousness" of these clues, they are there, and in too large a number to be coincidence. There's the that darn auto accident...the incident which started this whole mess. The acknowledgement of which even shows up today in the "Free As a Bird" video. Why add it if there's nothing behind it. Some sort of continuation of a forty year old joke? I don't think it's that pat. Need I go on. The point is simple. Paul may or may not be dead, I'll leave that question to minds greater than mine. But SOMETHING did happen in the fall of '66 large enough in scale and scope to cause many people to stop and go "Huh, what's this? SOMETHING doesn't look right, what's up?" I know I don't have all the answers, but like Eyesbleed, I believe something happened and am willing to ask questions KNOWING FULL WELL WE WILL PROBABLY NEVER KNOW THE ENTIRE TRUTH. The whole point of PWR is that we ask rather than just accept. Besides, in searching for the truth let's not forget the one fact we can ALL agree on. The Beatles were and still are the greatest pop/rock group of all time...PEROID!
|
|
|
Post by JoJo on Jan 2, 2005 0:23:26 GMT -5
I know I don't have all the answers, but like Eyesbleed, I believe something happened and am willing to ask questions KNOWING FULL WELL WE WILL PROBABLY NEVER KNOW THE ENTIRE TRUTH. Maybe, but we may be scary close to it.. Hey I couldn't agree more, and it would seem no one's enjoyment of the music has been diminished by any change in perception of the history.
|
|
|
Post by Doc on Jan 2, 2005 0:31:46 GMT -5
Hope you don't mind, but here's a illustration of what you were talking about: Could just be one of those JPMish Bill photos but... Yes, yruly! It's one of those pics, and the cover pic from that issue as well, that goes either way. Funny the Penny Lane pics came up, those are Bill for sure, but I see how those images relate, with make-up and some imagination, to these mag pics. BUT, these pics have the naso-labial lines, the (at least seemingly) wide eye spacing, and WIDE eyes, from corner to corner of each eye, as opposed to Bill's rounder eyes. Bills are more circular, have more vertical dimension, it seems......of course let me concede that nothing is MORE expresive than the eyes, capable of so much varation. Well, the mouth too. (But we don't look to the nose, ears, or chin usually for expressions.....) But thanks for poasting........ I mispelled. OK it's roast, boast, toast, and coast. Why isn't it goast, moast, hoast, and POAST? Just sayin'.........Ah, yes, English. The world's favorite spelling joke. Except for French, mais c'est une autre d'affaire.......
|
|
|
Post by JoJo on Jan 2, 2005 1:16:40 GMT -5
Thought that was the cover, or a crop of it, sorry about that. Something else to look out for on ebay, or I could get off my *** and see if the library has it, hehe..
I showed this picture to someone, and she said it looked like two pictures merged together. Maybe, Linda's hand doesn't seem to be quite touching his leg, more like as if it's resting on a board. Also, she would seem to be sitting on his right leg, but something's a little bit off there maybe, it's like she riding just a little bit low. Another issue, not what you're talking about of course..
|
|
|
Post by Doc on Jan 2, 2005 3:31:34 GMT -5
I wonder if Paul? is sitting with his legs crossed, her hand resting a right leg, hidden in ther poor contrast underneath his higher up right leg. Then, her left hand is reaching all the way over and resting on the invisible (to us) right leg, I think the left one is the one we see, which makes him of course a human pretzel. Bingo. Paul left the Beatles to join the circus, and become the world's first contortionist guitar player. GuiTar-Zan.
|
|
|
Post by xpt626 on Jan 2, 2005 5:15:56 GMT -5
...In my new, current mood, I am tending to think that Paul McCartney, the original, actually DID live through some kind of ordeal. I contemplate there IS a continuing replacement, the man we know as Sir Paul. I fear the first Macca suffered a permanent debilatation...might still be alive today...out of the public eye... Scatterdome had a theory along those lines. I can't really elaborate, because I don't have the concentration needed to absorb his posts. They are very intricate and detailed, and after about ten seconds my mind starts hearing Charlie Brown's teacher... mwoppp-mwop-mwop-mwoppp...I'm sure anyone interested can find it easily by doing a search over at TKIN. I've never felt personally that the pieces put themselves together for that type of scenario, I still lean to PID.
|
|
|
Post by Doc on Jan 2, 2005 5:24:54 GMT -5
Yes, JoJo, I think the cover shot (I could be reversed) is the one that is out doors on a Scottish farm--kind of treeless prairie, in front of a fence I think, and he and the family are standing. He has the same blank expression on his face. I think...and holding, or someone was holding, a shepherd's crook.......
Mary had a little lamb, whose fleece was white as snow......
xpt--somebody dies in all this. COuld there have been--odd thought here---TWO Paul's, or rather, an original Paul, and some kind of stand-in/poseur for Paul, PIOR to Faul. perhaps one of those was killed, and one remained, the one reluctant to perform.... maybe the original wrote songs better than he played bass.....just a thought...someone plays fantastic bass on those early albums...
But Lennon said," and, I was so nervous about things in the beginnning, 'cause early on PAUL WASN'T VERY STRONG..."
What did he mean? PErhaps, since he took up the bass only as Sutcliffe quit on them mid-stream, it took a learning curve of time for Paul to come up to snuff. Well, truly all indications are he grew tremendously fast as a bassist.
I just don't know........everything is enshrouded in half shadow.....the Phantom lurking.......bum-bum-bum-bum-BUMMMMM!
|
|
|
Post by pennylane on Jan 2, 2005 8:33:06 GMT -5
watching Paul play bass in footage pre 67.. he is so comfortable with the bass, like it's actually part of him. After that.. the little footage we do see of Faul.. not so comfortable, but it sounds just as good. Faul's face, bass playing and singing.. doesn't necessarily mean it has to be one man. But pre 67.. definately one man.. Paul McCartney. I lean towards PID, there are too many things that indicate death, and the loss is just too evident. And the "Life" pics.. i still see Faul there. But who knows really.
|
|
|
Post by xpt626 on Jan 2, 2005 10:34:56 GMT -5
I lean towards PID, there are too many things that indicate death, and the loss is just too evident. And the "Life" pics.. i still see Faul there. me, too.
|
|
|
Post by Girl on Jan 9, 2005 8:48:19 GMT -5
About 95/5 for me too... I agree with xpt...
Also, (not counting anyone involved with the business aspect of the Beatles- they would keep quiet anyway) I feel the number of individuals privy to this information would have been VERY limited.... certain immediate family members only... if even them. I have toyed with the idea that perhaps even THEY were never informed of the death... (hey, it's not the wildest theory out there after everything we've read [img src="http://galeon.hispavista.com/akostuff/img/Dunno2[1].gif"] )
I mean, how often did they get to see each other, anyway? I asked a friend in Florida what he thought about the whole PID thing, and at first he offered the usual arguments about how could someone be good enough to replace Paul, etc. etc, but he also mentioned the matter of the courts and probate, saying that if Paul had died, who inherited his fortune? Or did Billy "inherit" everything of Paul's, lock stock & barrel? My feeling is that in fact Billy took over Paul's life in every way and that no such records would be found to exist. After all, it had to look like Paul never died, right? They would have used other means to keep people quiet.
But isn't it remotely possible that they could have tried to pass Faul off on even Paul's family? And if not, people back in the day were more easily influenced into silence than people would be today. I don't think they could pull it off today. People are much more outspoken, and communications technology has made this a much smaller world. In those days all you had was snail mail and no call display.... prank calls were a breeze... (ah, the good old days... ;D)
And I always come back to the examples shown here of some really good celebrity impersonators that could fool just about anyone....
|
|