Has anyone gone to the press about this lately?

[jerriwillmore]

Just wondering if anyone presented the changing gifs, etc to a newspaper, TV station or so on. They might debunk you, or prove he is dead after all. There should also be experts working on this case, not amatours. If anyone wants to give it a go, tell us what happens. ;D

[Doc]

No. "The press" would laugh someone black and blue about these things.

Besides, for what? Things are best the way they currently are.

just my 2¢ worth.

[xpt626]

jerriwillmore said:

Just wondering if anyone presented the changing gifs, etc to a newspaper, TV station or so on. They might debunk you, or prove he is dead after all. There should also be experts working on this case, not amatours. If anyone wants to give it a go, tell us what happens. ;D

this is a discussion forum.

we are here talking with others about what we see and hear (or don't see and hear).

animations (GIFs, fades) are unreliable. We don't even present them as "evidence" to each other.

if you are interested in scandals and threats of "legal action", you might want to check another forum.

[-Wings-]

Personally, I wouldn't even want to know for sure. Part of the fun of this is always wondering, keeping that spirit that made people dig through their albums searching for clues three and a half decades ago.

[revolver]

I think the smoking gun was found quite a few years ago, when the voice analysis was done on the Beatles' music. Truby found three different voice prints for 'Paul'.


At the urging of a Miami disc jockey, Dr. Henry M. Truby, director of the university's language and linguistics research laboratory, put the McCartney riddle to a "sound fingerprint" test.
After 20 hours of running experiments on dozens of Beatle records dating from the early 1960's, the professor said there is "reasonable doubt" that three voices popularly attributed to McCartney are produced by the same set of vocal chords.
"I hear three different McCartneys," Truby said.
...
Truby said experiments on a sound spectograph machine indicated there were six different voices on the records he tested. Three were clearly identified as those of Beatles John Lennon, George Harrison, and Ringo Starr. The three others sound "roughly" like the same person, the professor said, but the spectograph-which makes sound "fingerprints"-show a different authorship.
"I cannot conclude that the same voice appears in these early and late passages," said Truby, who has spent 20 years in scientific audio studies.

1969 UPI story


"We had experts on. We had a man a doctor [sic] Henry Truby from the University of Miami who specialized in voiceprints. He was the man who used to record baby's cries at birth and twenty years later be able to pick out the individual babies just by their voiceprints. And Dr. Truby told me on tape on television [sic], Rick Shaw and I made a little documentary on it and Truby appeared and said, 'It's defiinitely not the same person. All my research shows it can't be the same person.' Then we called Dr. Truby to come back and do retakes. He shut up. He clammed up and said, 'No. I can't say anything more about this.'"


From the Beatle Brunch interview, Robey Younge talking about Dr. Truby.

Short of a DNA test or Faul's confession, the voiceprints are probably as close as we'll ever get to proof.

[Doc]

I think that no one from here has any intentions of pursuing any such thing as that. I certainly hope not. If anyone might, I hope they reconsider, and decide to participate here as entertainment, or
a kind of puzzle pursuit, amd actually, also, an in depth review of the monumental amount of work that all the Beatles and their producers left to us.
I mean, no one could study it all and NOT get hit in the face with a "clue" sooner or later, even the die-hard PIA'ers have to admit to noticing a "curiosity" now and then. Part of what makes it all so fascinating........

No, let's go on never really "knowing," I don't wanna "know" know, ya' know! Ya' know?


I prefer the sort of, kind of, "half-knowing" shadowy, woo-woo
type of knowing that we sort of, but not quite have here.

Evidence? Proof?

Wha'-choo-talkin'-bout, Willis?

Exibit A--

Forgetabout it.

Exibit B--

See Exibit A.

Conjecture is a more gentlemanly game.

....with respect, of course...................

But as for me,

[eyesbleed]

DoctorRobert said:

I mean, no one could study it all and NOT get hit in the face with a "clue" sooner or later, even the die-hard PIA'ers have to admit to noticing a "curiosity" now and then. Part of what makes it all so fascinating........

I don't recall any PIAer's admitting to seeing anything out of the ordinary......well, except for FP.

That was my main problem with that crew.
According to them, there was NEVER a replacement... not even temporarily & ALL these weird pics are indeed JPM.
Ya... right..... give me a break.... & give them some glasses. If they'd take a cue from FP & be a little more honest about what they're seeing, they'd have a lot more credibility.

Anyway... the thread subject..
There's LOTS of stuff goin' on right now that the press either won't touch or can't touch.

But there's several things that I get worked up over enough, that I wish I had the time to be more of an activist, but the whole PWR thing isn't even on my list.
There are so many other things that are so much more important goin' on right now.

[JoJo]

DoctorRobert said:

I prefer the sort of, kind of, "half-knowing" shadowy, woo-woo
type of knowing that we sort of, but not quite have here.

I laughed at that one, I'm sure that word (is it a real word? Well never mind) has been directed at us on more than one occasion. ;D

Why don't you go to the press with this? That has been said in sarcasm a number of times. (not you Jerri) Nope, we don't wanna, and no we ain't changing our minds. Just Talking here..

[DarkHorse]

eyesbleed said:

That was my main problem with that crew.
According to them, there was NEVER a replacement... not even temporarily & ALL these weird pics are indeed JPM.

That's because they are fans, avid fans. It's very hard to admit something like that to yourself. Most fans don't wanna believe it and their mind won't let them believe it.


The only way the story of PID will get out into the public is for someone to write a book about it with comparison pictures, etc and then go on tour promoting the book. The forums and websites are not near enough. One thing that is good about the forums is that many minds get together to gather as much info as possible to make a future book a possibility. The question is who wants to write it and who is qualified to write it. There is still much evidence that needs to be uncovered.

[revolver]

DoctorRobert said:

I think that no one from here has any intentions of pursuing any such thing as that. I certainly hope not. If anyone might, I hope they reconsider, and decide to participate here as entertainment, or
a kind of puzzle pursuit, amd actually, also, an in depth review of the monumental amount of work that all the Beatles and their producers left to us.

In my previous post, I was trying to point out that all of this credible information was brought to the press a long time ago and nothing came of it - what would be the point of doing it again? I think we're in agreement on that.

I believe this board exists for more than just entertainment value, though. Most people here have already been convinced of the replacement. They just want more details on the how and the why.

I prefer the sort of, kind of, "half-knowing" shadowy, woo-woo
type of knowing that we sort of, but not quite have here.

I prefer finding the answers. Flipping back and forth between believing PWR vs. the conventional story, would consume too much of my brain's CPU time.

[Doc]

Revolver said:

In my previous post, I was trying to point out that all of this credible information was brought to the press a long time ago and nothing came of it - what would be the point of doing it again? I think we're in agreement on that.

I believe this board exists for more than just entertainment value, though. Most people here have already been convinced of the replacement. They just want more details on the how and the why.





I prefer finding the answers. Flipping back and forth between believing PWR vs. the conventional story, would consume too much of my brain's CPU time.

Granted. Yes, I am a reticent one. I do want, I suppose, to know the answers, that are knowable, but, I think, slowly.

Call me "McChicken". I don't think I can ever hover in the inbetween again, either, thought I have tried firmly at least twice. I just slip back to the PWR
mindset again.......