Trying to match up two different people

[FlamingPie]

Revolver said:

As we discovered in another recent thread, these "good" ones probably work because one or both photos are "morphed" slightly to better fit, or they were already altered at the source. That's another reason why fades are not reliable.

Here's the thing: If ever there's a fade between Paul and "Faul" and it matches up, you guys question the hell out of it, asking "that looks strechted, is that vintage? it looks morphed, and one pixel of the fade doesn't match up." yet if ever there's a fade in favor of PID, where it doesn't match up, you you don't question it as if it doesn't matter if it's vintage or not.

[Doc]

Well, that's part human nature, part "strategy bias" resulting from being on one pah'-ticulah' side; and part dogmatic orneriness. Which is a noun signifyin' the state of bein' ornery!

But, it is also giving some credit, believe it or not, to whoever the folks might have been involved in "instigating" the alleged switcheroo. I use "instigate" in a neutral way; right now I am "instigating" this post.

Would people who believe in PID think that those working the PR for PID would be cavalier about how convincing it was? Like, "Oh, those are good enough photos, even though they are inconsistant. Don't airbrush them or slick them up any, who cares? No one can tell the difference. What if they do? Just print 'em straight from the dark room. Why work so hard at making these match? Tra-la-la."

PID theorists must credit PID participants with thoroughness, attention to detail.

Or else, the argument comes back from PIA: "Do you think such planners would be that stupid? There's the crack in your argument, oh PID peoples----"they" would have been FAR more careful in their work than that...."

No one knows how anybody "was"--nobody knows anything at all. But you have to assume that big money would get the job done.

And I see the point you make and it's opposite: PID says PIA has done some faking; PIA says PID has done some faking.

Well, natch, it's a debate, right?

Both sides are right about one thing: there is always photographic
funny business in the advertising world.

It's still going on today!

All to garner an impression in the public eye; and it works on millions and millions of people every day. And when is it OK, and when is it not?

When it is truthful?

Tell me, just HOW does anyone ever prove that a product is 37% more effective against what, diaper rash? Compared to what?
Why not 38%? Where is the science to prove it?

Here we go out on the limb, yea, to the end of the branch--

The New and Improved Paul McCartney! At least 6% taller! (Contents may settle during shipping.) Now 8% more animated in videos! 4 out of 5 Dentists recommend that the New McCartney has Whiter Teeth! Brighter Clothes!

Fan Comments:

"Bag him up and take him home! He's out to outbag Bagism!"
-------John Lennon*

"When I hear his music, I start to radiate toward a point on the end of a trapezoid which bisects a rhombus; I lose gravity, I find homeostasis. I become naked, you become naked, the world becomes naked. "
------------Yoko Ono*

"Guaranteed to raise a smile!"
--------------Seargeante Peppar.*

"All in all a likeable chap; except when he goes near MY drumkit! Back away from the snare drum, Macca!"
-----------Richard Starkey*

"His songwriting got to be 11.8% better with each passing year. And he let me write for the string section."
-------------Sir George Martin *

"That b*st**d f*c**d up MY brilliant arrangements! How dare he!
In my book, he is 67.34% WORSE than eveh! Everyone LIKED the strings on "Long and Winding Road" but you, you ingrate! Why, when I get out of this mess, I'm gonna..........."

------------Phil Spector*

"Well, I didn't like the strings on "Long and Winding Road" so much, too syrupy!!! Where is the subtlety! Those tasteless Americans!"

--------------Sir George Martin, again.*

"Man, Macca is great and all that, but he really shoulda' let me play bass for him on "Long and Winding Road". Lennon stepped all over his (bleep) in that version! Too many wrong notes."

------------Jaco Pastorius*

"You insolent fool, Jaco! My late husband was a genius! You just don't understand him. Those "wrong notes" as you call them were art, they were expression, they were innner core of John's being, they were poetry, they were love......."

------------Yoko Ono*

"Yoko! This is supposed to be an advertisement for Paul's music, not John's bass playing, honey!"

--------------The Ad Agency*

"Okay, okay. Whatever.......my late husband seem to like him--he must be OK. John tolerate you---then, you not half bad. That good enough? I go now. Bite me, Jaco."

---------------Y.O.*

`* These people never said these things. This is fiction. [Like you couldn't tell.]

{Doctor Robert must be having a rough night. Did you see that run-on nonsense he posted last night? When does he sleep? That vampire. Did he ever start on Paxil? 'Bout time we dropped some hints. He may need something more comprehensive though...}

Actually, this is a draft of a press release for Doctor Robert's new book, "Eccentric Mind Pathways, and the Genesis of the Psycho-Aberrant Blog Tradition", due for release on 9/11/2004, the only date befitting such a disasterous work. Published by "Pyramids and Penguins Unlimited":, in Sheisterville, Indianna, this is a work surely to fall short of it's intended purpose. Whatever that may be.

Dr. Robert* garnered these reviews:

"Tawdry, but tantalizing."
----Sir George Martin*

"Disasterous"
-----John Lennon*

"He laid it all bare for us. He became naked. But we did not."
----Yoko Ono*

"Just keep him AWAY from my drums."
----Richard Starkey, MBE*

"Dr. Robert, don't you fret."
---Jaco Pastorius*

"Guaranteed to raise a smile!"
-----Sargent Pepper*

"We will publish almost anything. We went out on a limb for this one--to the end of the branch!"
------"Pyramids and Penguins Limited"*

" I want my money back. And when I get out of here, I am coming after it. Do you know how much I PAID for that orchestra arrangement of Long and Winding Road? I lost money, man. I was robbed."
-----------Phil Spector*

"Well, you were robbed then. that awful arrangement. What did you pay, a hundred dollars a note? I should have done that chart."
--------Sir G.M*.

DISCLAIMER:* Again, all made up. None of those people said any of that written above.

Jees, this post was 87% longer than was really needed. I must learn to edit, not go so far out onto a limb.

31.7% less far out.

Yo know what I think? I think this entire post was Doctored.

[eyesbleed]

Flaming said:

Here's the thing: If ever there's a fade between Paul and "Faul" and it matches up, you guys question the hell out of it, asking "that looks strechted, is that vintage? it looks morphed, and one pixel of the fade doesn't match up." yet if ever there's a fade in favor of PID, where it doesn't match up, you you don't question it as if it doesn't matter if it's vintage or not.

First off, after lenghty discussion, we all came to the conclusion that fades were unreliable & could easily be used by either side. Not just PIA fades, but all of them.
Have you seen me make any fades?
So yer wrong there.
Secondly, as much as you guys have labored over this, y'all haven't yet presented a perfect match.

Granted, y'all have done some excellent & surprising fades recently, but there's always something a little off.

That alone SHOULD tell ya something.

[jonna]

Flaming said:

Here's the thing: If ever there's a fade between Paul and "Faul" and it matches up, you guys question the hell out of it, asking "that looks strechted, is that vintage? it looks morphed, and one pixel of the fade doesn't match up." yet if ever there's a fade in favor of PID, where it doesn't match up, you you don't question it as if it doesn't matter if it's vintage or not.

and yet it never goes the other way right?
get real, this is a discussion board, we are all here to discuss and we take your critisizm and you need to learn to take ours

[FlamingPie]

Jonna said:

and yet it never goes the other way right?
get real, this is a discussion board, we are all here to discuss and we take your critisizm and you need to learn to take ours

We ask you if it's vintage a lot less often then the PIDers do.

Wait, Revolver, you just said fades aren't reliable... *looks at your avatar*

[jonna]

whats your point flaming?

this is a pid site don't forget it

[revolver]

Flaming said:

We ask you if it's vintage a lot less often then the PIDers do.

Wait, Revolver, you just said fades aren't reliable... *looks at your avatar*

Not that this horse hasn't been beaten to within an inch of it's life but... My avatar is designed to show that the so-called "stretched" version of Faul is actually the accurate one. My point is that one or two exceptional fades don't override all the other photos that contradict it.

With regards to photo comparisons, the majority should rule. If the majority of Faul photos look one way and a few look different, we should go with the majority. The majority of Faul photos don't look like these:



Here's how he really looked then and now:



Note these are overlays of stills, not fades.

[DarkHorse]

Revolver said:

My point is that one or two exceptional fades don't override all the other photos that contradict it.

With regards to photo comparisons, the majority should rule. If the majority of Faul photos look one way and a few look different, we should go with the majority.

Exactly! The majority should rule all the time.

Just because FP and matchbox are clever enough to find fades now and then that matchup(somewhat) doesn't mean that they should hold any water.

Never have they matched up perfectly anyway.

[Doc]

Which speaks to my main point.

The central idea in ALL of this is one of persuasion, and how to accomplish it.

1) There must be a need for persuasion. (Buy this.)

2) There must be a well defined, rational goal of persuasion. (We need to make money. Sell this to them.)

3) There must be understood, praticable methods of persuasion.
(They like the product, the producers, and their photographs.)

4) There needs to be a way to measure the success of persuasion. (Trade magazines, annual profits, customer mail!)

5) There should be alternatives for countering the possible failure of persuasion. (Do a media blitz, or ad campaign, or hype.)

6) There should be a gauge for measuring the ultimate outcome of the persuasion. (Total units sold over "X" years vs. profits.)

McDonald's is one of many companies that know how to do this.

"Billions and billions sold" is one of their claims, but how is it proven? It might be assumed, but how is it proven?

Is that an empirical fact, or is it just more, "persuasion?"

Well, it serves as good persuasion!

But where does a true claim end, and the persuasive hype begin?

That's subjective, too, isn't it?

Depends on how you look at it. If you look at subjective advertising OBJECTIVELY, there is an exact point where the science stops and the hyperbole starts.

If you look subjective advertising SUBJECTIVELY, then you can kinda say however you feel at the moment.

[Let me indulge in a bit of reflective misdirection.

I ask objectively, why do we subject ourselves to this?

Will your answer be objective, or subjective?

If you claim to answer objectively, I might shout "correct!"

If you claim to be answering subjectively, I might have to object, on grounds that, in my subjective opinion, I perceive you to be projecting a subjective objectivity, and this fails in your objective. You might resent becoming subject to my self-protection, and try to overcome my objections by injecting a deflection.
At which point, I would be forced, to your abject horror, to redirect to an entirely new subject. Which you would, correctly, reject. Which leaves us in a disconnect.]

Let me interject this: we'll all disagree on where the fantasy starts, and the cold facts begin. Where opinion and science collide.

Universal, "de facto" liscense exists for most all commercial advertising. Adverts appeal to "subjective" critical thinking. Don't PR pictures of the Beatle's and every other rock star on the planet fall into this category?

We can't make objective claims using what is, essentially, benign propaganda. These pictures are made and sold to us for product, not term papers.

Ronald the Burger Clown will become OBJECTIVE when at last a McDonald's TV spot features a diseased aterioscopy picture, and lists HDL and tri-glyceride blood values on average for their regular customers.

But, you know, I eat there every other day. That's just a little too objective fo' me. An' everyone else.

[FlamingPie]

Jonna said:

whats your point flaming?

this is a pid site don't forget it

PID? Not everyone here believes he's dead, just replaced, which is why it's called "Paul Was Replaced"

But either way, I know it's a PWR forum, we all do, I'm just trying to see if there's a way that I can PROVE he's alive whithout there being any way it can be deniable. I always think "this is it, this thread is it, there's no way someone can argue against this, this is practically proof!"

But I'm always wrong. Someone says something that neither of us can prove and the thread goes down the drain.

[Doc]

Well, no, actually, then you aren't ever wrong by raising your points.
The points you raise are a subjectively valid as anyone else's ever.

Your objective (proving something one way or the other once and for all by jingies) may lay eternally frustrated (or at least, for many moons) but then that remains also true for everyone else.


JMO:PIA/PID/NIR/PWR looks like a subject that will remain objectively unproveable into the long future.

But remain "subjectively" discussable for ages to come.

Until somebody on one of the 23,481
PID/PIA discussion boards worldwide (in the year 2199 A.D.) finally posts, "Why are we still discussing this? Anybody got it figured out, yet? Come on guys, its only been 237 years. Give it a rest."-------Signed, Sun King the 12th.

Why not? We are overdue for some irony.

[eyesbleed]

Flaming said:

But I'm always wrong. Someone says something that neither of us can prove and the thread goes down the drain.

Well, ya know.... y'all have done some excellent fades lately. At first look, some of those have me doin' a doubletake.
99% of the Beatle fans out there would be convinced by your best fade.
When a fade gets that good, it could get a "fence-sitter" to reconsider alternate possibilities.

So, I do think yer wrong, but I also think y'all have done some surprisingly good work.
Most people out there wouldn't consider those fades to be failures; but we are yer worst possible audience for premiering a "shocking new fade"!
We're gonna pick it to death..... guaranteed!
Of course ya already know that.

I can see it now...
FP's checkin' out his new fade for the first time & he gets all tingly.....
THIS ONE IS IT!!.

"I...Flaming Pie.... will single-handedly bring down the entire PID internet community with this undeniable-proof-in-the-form-of-a-fade!!!"
YIPPEEE......(as he jumps up & down in front of his computer)

Then we have to come along & screw up his wet-dream!

[eyesbleed]

DoctorRobert said:

Ronald the Burger Clown will become OBJECTIVE when at last a McDonald's TV spot features a diseased aterioscopy picture, and lists HDL and tri-glyceride blood values on average for their regular customers.

But, you know, I eat there every other day. That's just a little too objective fo' me. An' everyone else.

That ad sounds good to me!
Coz I NEVER eat fast food.
When I'm workin', I've got a luchbox-cooler with 3 different fruits inside....(& sweets)
That's fast food...... as soon as I open my lunchbox, it's ready!!

So bring'em on, I say!

[FlamingPie]

eyesbleed said:

So, I do think yer wrong, but I also think y'all have done some surprisingly good work.
Most people out there wouldn't consider those fades to be failures; but we are yer worst possible audience for premiering a "shocking new fade"!
We're gonna pick it to death..... guaranteed!
Of course ya already know that.

I can see it now...
FP's checkin' out his new fade for the first time & he gets all tingly.....
THIS ONE IS IT!!.

"I...Flaming Pie.... will single-handedly bring down the entire PID internet community with this undeniable-proof-in-the-form-of-a-fade!!!"
YIPPEEE......(as he jumps up & down in front of his computer)

Then we have to come along & screw up his wet-dream!

Yeah, that pretty much sums it up.

[xpt626]

eyesbleed said:

......Then we have to come along & screw up his wet-dream!

and now, a musical interlude by Kip Adotta....

Wet Dream
by Kip Adotta

It was the 41st of April, being a quadruple leap year.
I was driving through downtown Atlantis.
My Barracuda was in the shop, so I was in a rented Stingray, and it was overheating.
I pulled off into a Shell station.
They said I'd blown a seal.
I said, "Fix the damn thing and leave my private life out of it, okay pal?"

While they were doing that I walked over to a place called "The Oyster Bar" -- a real dive.
But I knew the owner -- he used to play for the Dolphins.
I said "Hi, Gil!" You have to yell, he's hard of herring.
Gil was also down on his luck.
Fact is, he was barely keeping his head below water.

I bellied up to the sandbar.
He poured me the usual -- Rusty snail, hold the grunnion, shaken, not stirred.
With a peanut-butter and jellyfish sandwich on the side -- heavy on the mako.
I slipped him a fin - on porpoise.
I was feelin' good. I even dropped a sand dollar in the box for Jerry's squids.
For the halibut.

Well, the place was crowded.
We were packed in like sardines.
They were all there to listen to the big band sounds of Tommy Dorsal.
What sole.
Tommy was rockin' the place with a very popular tuna, Salmon-chanted evening,
And the stage was surrounded by screaming groupers -- Probably there to see the bass player.
One of them was this cute little yellowtail, and she was giving me the eye.
So I figured this was my chance for a little fun.
You know, piece of pisces.
But she said things I just couldn't fathom.
She was too deep. Seemed to be under a lot of pressure.
Boy, could she drink. She drank like a- She drank a lot.

I said "What's your sign?" She said, "Aquarium."
I said, "Great! Let's get tanked!"
I invited her up to my place for a little midnight bait.
I said, "C'mon, baby, it'll only take a few minnows."
She threw me that same old line, "Not tonight. I've got a haddock."

And she wasn't kidding either, cause in came the biggest, meanest looking haddock I'd ever seen come down the pike.
He was covered with mussels.
He came over to me, he said "Listen, shrimp, don't you come trollin' around here."
What a crab. This guy was steamed. I could see the anchor in his eyes.
I turned to him, I said "A-balone. You're just bein' shellfish."

Well, I knew there was going to be trouble, and so did Gil, cause he was already on the phone to the cods.
The haddock hits me with a sucker punch.
I catch him with a left hook. He eels over.
It was a fluke, but there he was, lyin' on the deck, flat as a mackerel. Kelpless.
I said, "Forget the cods, Gil, this guy's gonna need a sturgeon."

Well, the yellowtail was impressed with the way I landed her boyfriend.
She came over to me, she said "Hey, big boy, you're really a game fish. What's your name?"
I said, "Marlin."

Well, from then on, we had a whale of a time. I took her to dinner. I took her to dance.
I bought her a bouquet of flounders. And then I went home with her.
And what did I get for my trouble?
A case of the clams.

[revolver]

xpt626 said:

and now, a musical interlude by Kip Adotta....

More nautical puns than you can shake a fish stick at.

[FlamingPie]

DarkHorse said:

Nope.

Because MJ as a kid matchs up pretty well with him as a young adult.