|
|
Post by Jai Guru Deva on Oct 30, 2006 1:55:57 GMT -5
Please don't adjust your monitor, nor feel compelled to correct anything, for the images you see before you are purposely posted upsidedown. Sometimes it helps to look at things from a different perspective. You might see something you hadn't really noticed, or paid attention to, before...  
|
|
|
|
Post by fourthousandholes on Oct 30, 2006 8:40:28 GMT -5
Paul's head looks like an acorn, while Faul looks more like a potato? This bat's eye view makes me dizzy. There's a face in the bottom Paul's hair, near the middle.  |
|
|
|
Post by noodles on Oct 30, 2006 11:20:48 GMT -5
Notice how real Paul has two different head shapes. The two pictures on the left (top and bottom) show a longer face whereas the middle right picture shows a shorter rounder face. This is something I've noticed in pictures before and I'm guessing it's due to either doctored (stretched/squashed) pictures or an early double.
|
|
|
|
Post by Paul Bearer on Oct 31, 2006 3:30:07 GMT -5
Another way to make differences stand out more is by inversing the colour. Try that!
|
|
|
|
Post by beatlies on Oct 31, 2006 3:44:32 GMT -5
Notice how real Paul has two different head shapes. The two pictures on the left (top and bottom) show a longer face whereas the middle right picture shows a shorter rounder face. This is something I've noticed in pictures before and I'm guessing it's due to either doctored (stretched/squashed) pictures or an early double. You're right --the proportion of the different JPMs' facial features and ears are different too. They were using JPM doubles, one of which almost certainly was Dino Danelli. The Beatles were fraudulent in so many ways from the beginning. |
|
|
|
Post by noodles on Oct 31, 2006 4:10:34 GMT -5
Dino Danelli is an unlikely candidate due to the closeness of the facial features between Paul and the doubles. Dinelli's eyes for example, do not match Paul's eyes which would mean he would have had to have been surgically altered backwards and forwards between the two groups. It's seems more likely that the Paul doubles would be unknowns who could be permanently altered (or at least for long periods of time) rather than other celebrities who bear a resemblance to him.
|
|
|
|
Post by beatlies on Oct 31, 2006 4:50:14 GMT -5
Dino Danelli is an unlikely candidate due to the closeness of the facial features between Paul and the doubles. Dinelli's eyes for example, do not match Paul's eyes which would mean he would have had to have been surgically altered backwards and forwards between the two groups. It's seems more likely that the Paul doubles would be unknowns who could be permanently altered (or at least for long periods of time) rather than other celebrities who bear a resemblance to him. I disagree, with makeup Danelli would make an excellent JPM double. Also, I would not consider him a celebrity, except to a relatively small, niche group of Young Rascals fans. Yet I think celebrities could have been used as doubles/imposters for various other celebrities. Because I've come to see the entertainment media as just another arm of the shadow government, its propaganda/belief/opinon/emotion/mind-shaping "soft power" directorate; the "Mighty Wurlitzer." The CIA/NSA/MI6/BND etc. has dirt on everyone and can use anyone. Millionaire famed comedian/actor/musician John Dough? Just another pawn of bishop or knight to be moved around on the chess board. That said, of the imposter candidates named on TKIN for example, Barbara Luna, or Tommy Sands ...... are they highly successful actors? Yes, but celebrities? Hardly --- the same goes for Charlie Brill and Dino Danelli. Don Knotts, however, is a different story, he's definitely a celebrity; as are Marisa Sannia and Eric Clapton (fingered as a Beatle George double). |
|
|
|
Post by lili on Oct 31, 2006 13:28:17 GMT -5
All the Paul's look the same to me.  |
|
|
|
Post by Jai Guru Deva on Nov 12, 2006 4:23:49 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by That Latvian Guy on Nov 12, 2006 5:07:44 GMT -5
 Pay your attention to the chins! |
|
|
|
Post by Doc on Nov 12, 2006 6:19:03 GMT -5
well, and the necks. There is a difference in the "adiposity" of the neck and "jowl" areas.
Either Paul had a time where he lived on Doritos*, Bon-Bons and 12 course steak dinners, or there is something going on here with Latex.
*Yes, Doritos were around in 1965. I ate many a bag and I'm not thru yet.
|
|
|
|
Post by fourthousandholes on Nov 12, 2006 9:36:00 GMT -5
Either Paul had a time where he lived on Doritos*, Bon-Bons and 12 course steak dinners, or there is something going on here with Latex. BRINGING HOME THE BACON Procol Harum Bringing home the bacon, tender juicy steaks Breast-fed baby dumpling gobbling up the cakes Milk-fed baby dumpling, slobbering, goo-faced, mean Wet-nursed sour purse spot face, blubbering in the cream Emperor baby dumpling, loaded, bloated curse Mighty baby dumpling, stuffing 'til he bursts www.procolharum.com/w/w0706.htmwww.procolharum.com/tn+sq/gh_bh_bacon.htm"Gary Brooker told Rock (December 1972) 'Bringing Home The Bacon is about American menus … breast fed baby duckling, three-day-old honey-fed milk-fed fresh thin-sliced delicious gourmet veal, wrapped in a heavenly blessing of crushed bread crumbs and egg yolks grilled to your personal delight on a bed of lettuce garnished with dill pickles. Keith got all that off actual American menus.' Reid concurred, when he told Streetlife (15 May 1976) 'Bringing Home The Bacon was inspired by American hamburger joint menus.' However Reid did much more than merely transcribe menus: he transmuted them...." I've always felt that the songs on Procol Harum's "Grande Hotel" were clues about PID.
Paul was "bringing home the bacon" for the "little piggies" serving the crown.
The "Emporer baby dumpling" serving the wishes of the powers that were, essentially.
This could actually be a reference to Faul as well. |
|
