|
Post by eyesbleed on Nov 5, 2004 19:18:35 GMT -5
It was PWRs responding to my debunking of the clues that suddenly were saying that the clues weren't important because they were misinfomation designed to confuse the masses. It was them who said the important information was the photographs and voice, not the clues. . I certainly never said that the clues were misinformation. I was referring to all the William Cambell & related crap that's repeatedly brought up. The clues are there... plain as day... just like all the pics showing 2 different men. The various album clues are there to help those few who are aware of something being very wrong. The various album clues are one of the things that tells me that JPM was replaced because he died, but it would take a lot more than a bunch of creepy/hidden album clues to convince me... or anyone else, that PID was actually true. That's why I say they are more for fun. But I never said that the clues were misinformation.
|
|
|
Post by JoJo on Nov 5, 2004 20:52:49 GMT -5
Or more precisely, how the clues were presented, indeed, how they were made "clues" in the first place. For a brief period of time, they were discussed widely in mainstream media, and debunked, and with far more expertise than anyone here could ever hope for..
|
|
|
Post by kazu on Nov 6, 2004 16:44:23 GMT -5
Just throwing this thought in. Since it is generally thought by both sides that images may not be acurate for what ever agenda is convenient, then the idea will always go back to mannerisms, writing style and things like that. These things are opinions, But these things do change over time. Sometimes quickly due to major events. That is only my opinion That said, I'll get back to the fun. I have never seen Paul's body change except for a few distorted videos. Propostionately, he matches a lot more than not. His face also matches more than not. People always seem to grab the onesy-twosy wierd shots like this to drag through the mud. But Paul always had wierd expressions. But, before 66, you have to find them in videos. I have some.Here he is obviously making some wierd face. And yes his chin changes. Like in the from a hard day's night. His chin is the wierd flat thing with the cleft. Just like the wierd shot above. More Paul wierd stuff. But how about this expression. Don't know why his chin is pointy now, but I have seen his chin change in a hard day's night. Must be some muscle thing. His weird expression does a ppear more relaxed in the image on the right. I can make my chin more square if I tense it. No bit mystery there. After looking above, I can only conclude that Paul's nose is sometimes pointier, His chin is sometimes pointier, his eyebrows are sometimes round and sometimes straight. Basically his face is more expressive than most other people. You can see this in live movies or concerts. Not interviews or anything else, but mostly when he is singing or clowning around. So then this all goes back to compamring images is only fun and proves nothing. But fun is good.
|
|
|
Post by -Wings- on Nov 6, 2004 16:51:54 GMT -5
I've been saying for some time that there are two possible scenarios: Paul was either replaced, or he is in fact Elastic Man (or perhaps Plastic Man).
|
|
|
Post by FlamingPie on Nov 6, 2004 17:41:54 GMT -5
Great post Kazu!
|
|
|
Post by JoJo on Nov 6, 2004 21:57:28 GMT -5
I can only conclude I'm seeing what I want to see, because that is one bad hair day or something. Actually I was pretty much indifferent from when I was was 7 untill when I first reexamined it about a year ago.. Admittedly it's satisfying to find a really bizarre one, but please find one pre 67. And a clear one of course. Another freaky one, my scan, but of course it was used previously by others.
|
|
|
Post by FlamingPie on Nov 6, 2004 22:44:20 GMT -5
I don't see anything strange about that one...
|
|
|
Post by Doc on Nov 7, 2004 5:02:51 GMT -5
When all this debate about PID/PIA/PWR/NIR finally ends, it is going to be at high tea, I have the feeling.
OK, that just isn't like any image of Paul McCartney I can remember from anywhere. Earlier OR later. Trying to twist my mind around that one. Like if you posted a picture of Tori Spelling and claimed it was Britney Spears......Who thinks that looks like Macca at any other time?
Am I blind? Fade that one!
I should not have said that.
We are all in the fiery pits of hell, here (allegorically). Sentenced to sifting thru Beatle memorabilia till kingdom come. And the "busses" are running slow tonight.
Public transportation in and out of Hades. Who knew?
|
|
|
Post by eyesbleed on Nov 7, 2004 10:04:51 GMT -5
The first thing I noticed is that the hair part still has to make that magical journey to the other side of the head, as JoJo showed so well a while back.
|
|
|
Post by Girl on Nov 7, 2004 10:45:03 GMT -5
Is that a silver candleabra, or a glass one? Sometimes it looks like glass, sometimes silver... Based on the reflections in that photo alone (not the right answer for those who have seen the film), can anyone tell for sure?
|
|
|
Post by kazu on Nov 7, 2004 19:18:21 GMT -5
I guess I don't understand why the hair part is so important. My pictures since high school until now, many years later have my hair parting on the left, right, middle and varying degrees in between. For many reasons. 1: I sleep on my right ride. 2: I got married and had to shift how I sleep. 3: I received a bump on my head and tried to hide it. 4: My hairline is not the same on both sides, so I combed it the way that looked better.
These are only my reasons. How can we even speculate about hair direction and call that a reason to be a replacement?
|
|
|
Post by Goldfinger on Nov 8, 2004 9:52:28 GMT -5
There are these things in the face called muscles. They expand and contract and you can move them voluntarily! They are not hard and fixed. There are other parts to the face including skin, fat and cartilage. The skin and fat are elastic and can be stretched many different ways. Cartilage, while hard, is more elastic than bone. Therefore, the face can change shapes depending how muscles move.
|
|
|
Post by Goldfinger on Nov 8, 2004 11:33:04 GMT -5
Are these trumpet players the same? Yes, they are. They appear different because faces are elastic and can change depending on what the muscles are doing.
|
|
|
Post by Doc on Nov 8, 2004 21:12:23 GMT -5
Agreed. Dizzy Gillespie was well known for his exceptionally elastic cheeks. Chipmunks everywhere saught to emulate his storage capacity. Ah, but, so many comparisons seen here, not all, but many pictures of Paul shown are in "repose". Relaxed, neutral.
This whole business of comparing is tricky, I admit, because we are dealing with nuances, subtleties. Not pop-eyed, drop-jawed, overcharged looks of grotesque mugging befitting of a sugared-up teen on his first drunk. Although, if you find a few like that, don't hesitate to post 'em.
|
|
|
Post by DarkHorse on Nov 8, 2004 21:16:45 GMT -5
Dizzy Gillespie was well known for his exceptionally elastic cheeks. Chipmunks everywhere saught to emulate his storage capacity.
|
|
|
Post by Girl on Nov 8, 2004 21:30:37 GMT -5
I won't repeat the quote, DH, but I thought of posting exactly that till I scrolled down and saw yours... oh, what the hey, it's that good.
|
|
|
Post by Jai Guru Deva on Nov 9, 2004 3:54:35 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Goldfinger on Nov 9, 2004 8:28:11 GMT -5
Agreed. Dizzy Gillespie was well known for his exceptionally elastic cheeks. Chipmunks everywhere saught to emulate his storage capacity. True, but it was eventually declared a failure because the shape of the little mouths and the position of the teeth made it impossible for them to play the little trumpets.
|
|
|
Post by Doc on Nov 10, 2004 0:48:59 GMT -5
Gol-dern, guy, touché!<br>
(minutes are elapsing....................................the big hand has moved several numbers ahead.............test pattern on TV...........)
I am still giggling over a certain picture in my mind of cute little chipmunks TRYING to play the, and, oh yes, perfect, "little trumpets".....well, they sure as h*ll couldn't play the big ones!
So, do you think Selmer, Yamaha, Schilke, or Getzen would manufacture those? Piccollo trumpets would seem large and low by comparison.....
But thats not funny.
Chipmunks trying to master the trumpet. THAT is funny.
Thank you for bringing to me the laughter tonite, sir.
|
|
|
Post by eyesbleed on Nov 10, 2004 7:36:48 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Goldfinger on Nov 10, 2004 9:49:09 GMT -5
So, do you think Selmer, Yamaha, Schilke, or Getzen would manufacture those? Piccollo trumpets would seem large and low by comparison..... Actually, it was Benge.
|
|
|
Post by Doc on Nov 11, 2004 2:34:13 GMT -5
Benge?
What a relief. Then I know they'll soon follow up with euphoniums (euphoniusses? euphonics? euphonias? euphoniae?) and cornets, maybe an alto trumpet.....a whole marching chipmunk band.
|
|
|
Post by Doc on Nov 11, 2004 2:37:32 GMT -5
ah, yes! But, is it the original Alvin singing? My ears say, no. It must be Fal(vin). Actually, Mr. Bagdasarian depicted there on the cover looks a bit like Paul.... Hmmmmm....could it be............entered the cartoon dimension........
|
|
|
Post by pennylane on Nov 11, 2004 4:11:55 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by JoJo on Nov 11, 2004 8:40:44 GMT -5
|
|