I just want some feedback here

[strawberryfields]

To be perfectly honest, I was hoping to make some kind of impact, even the smallest kind. I really just wanted an answer to a question.

I respect your opinions but I just can't help but feel as if believing in PID is somewhat...depressing. How can you enjoy his work if you think Paul died and this guy replaced him? It must be pretty hard to.

Talking about the whole PID issue is just something I like to do. I don't feel as if this is a waste of time, even if I'm not making any difference. I don't know why, I just enjoy it. If I am wasting your time, I'm sorry.

[jonna]

i've never been a paul fan. i liked john and i liked the beatles so this doesn't depress me at all

[strawberryfields]

Jonna said:

i've never been a paul fan. i liked john and i liked the beatles so this doesn't depress me at all

Okay. Fair enough.

Revolver said:

Yes, I know all about the camera angles, lighting, lens, focal length, etc. arguments. But PIA seems to only worry about those factors when dealing with photos that don't look like Paul.

...because that is exactly why they don't look like Paul.

I can see why you would ask this, though. But really, when you look, those factors make some pictures of Paul look different than Paul, and Faul different than Faul.

I understand why you would see a different guy in the LSD interview. He does look different when you first look at it. When I first saw it I really thought it wasn't him. But when you actually try to make evidence and really analyze it, it all matches up, which is exactly what my thread is about.

[revolver]

StrawberryFields said:

I respect your opinions but I just can't help but feel as if believing in PID is somewhat...depressing. How can you enjoy his work if you think Paul died and this guy replaced him? It must be pretty hard to.

There's no question ignorance is bliss. It would be nice to believe that Paul never died or was replaced, but we know too much to believe it anymore.

[revolver]

StrawberryFields said:

...because that is exactly why they don't look like Paul.

That argument begs the question. Here's your logic:

If the post-66 photo does look like Paul then the camera angle, distance, etc. must have been the same as in the Paul photo. If the post-66 photo doesn't resemble Paul then the camera distance, lens, etc. must have been different.

Each argument rests on the unproven assumption that the photo is Paul.

[ReallyReallyDead]

StrawberryFields said:

That bottom one he posted is new (I think), and I just debunked it myself.

Really? I don't see it on the MFH board.

[eyesbleed]

Revolver said:

There's no question ignorance is bliss. It would be nice to believe that Paul never died or was replaced, but we know too much to believe it anymore.

I'm actually a much bigger fan post PID-awareness. Especially the later music. Sgt.P on. The mood of the music & the lyrics all make so much more sense now.
The fact that they quit touring & then split up too soon also make logical sense now. Everything ties together logically now.
Some of that later stuff is so deep, it was kinda like hearing it for the first time again. Yes, I've definately become a much bigger fan of the later stuff.

[eyesbleed]

StrawberryFields said:

I respect your opinions but I just can't help but feel as if believing in PID is somewhat...depressing. How can you enjoy his work if you think Paul died and this guy replaced him? It must be pretty hard to..

see above post ;D

StrawberryFields said:

Talking about the whole PID issue is just something I like to do. I don't feel as if this is a waste of time, even if I'm not making any difference. I don't know why, I just enjoy it. If I am wasting your time, I'm sorry.

Ya we appreciate yer courtesy, but the fades are a waste of time really. We've seen lots of fades & are pretty much over fades. Once you see the 2 different people, you can't ever go back to not seein' them. No number of fades is gonna change that.

Could there be other explainations other than JPM dyin' in 66? Sure.... although I personally think he did die then, there are other possible explainations as to why this other guy is being passed off as JPM.
None of us claim to know the answers.
In fact the more I look into this stuff, the more questions arise.

StrawberryFields said:

I can see why you would ask this, though. But really, when you look, those factors make some pictures of Paul look different than Paul, and Faul different than Faul..

I don't agree with this argument at all. I have never seen a pic of John, Ringo, or George that didn't look like them. Pre or post 66... doesn't matter.
JPM always looked like JPM thru 66, but unlike the others, he supposedly went thru some drastic changes.
Go from the Revolver interview to the trip to Africa.
There's no way anybody could convince me those are the same guy.
Most of us here can instantly distinguish between JPM & Bill.... either by a photo comparison or an audio comparison... doesn't matter.
Once you notice the differences they become way too obvious to ignore.

[-Wings-]

I agee with eyesbleed. I've become a much bigger fan of the Beatles, especially the Beatles post '66, since figuring out that there was some merit to the whole "Paul is dead' thing. It's almost like a really good mystery novel set to the best rock band of all time.