The Real Paul McCartney - 1980

[ph0neyprophet]

Here's more evidence regarding Paul McCartney. Now I know he didn't die, but he wasn't around exactly often. Infact, for a long time, it felt like he was dead half the time. Notice the sarcasm, the jokes, and that smile and voice Paul had in his interviews before he "died."

Amazingly, some time (whenever this movie was produced) that all somehow came back. My guess is early 80's, but if anyone knows, that'd be great.



Note the early joke about "10 years" because for whatever reason, during a ten year period, didn't Paul's appearence, singing voice, and style change dramatically?

Funny, then in 1980, he releases an album called McCartney 2 and looks/sounds/writes like his old self.

[ramone]

Thanks for the vid.

But, of course, it's the same old bill.

The real dude:

[JS2]

From my point of view, that's JPM, cause he wasn't replaced
From yours, that's JPM, come back temporarily.
Either way, JPM.
And IMO, going off the posts here (about singing styles) If he was replaced, JPM sung Wonderful Christmas Time.

[plastic paul]

I was thinking that myself, having heard it a few times over the last couple of weeks, however it still has that sort of whiney Faul sound too at times...

[Jude]

Nov 25, 2008 0:01:37 GMT -5 @ph0neyprophet said:

Here's more evidence regarding Paul McCartney. Now I know he didn't die, but he wasn't around exactly often. Infact, for a long time, it felt like he was dead half the time. Notice the sarcasm, the jokes, and that smile and voice Paul had in his interviews before he "died."

Amazingly, some time (whenever this movie was produced) that all somehow came back. My guess is early 80's, but if anyone knows, that'd be great.



Note the early joke about "10 years" because for whatever reason, during a ten year period, didn't Paul's appearence, singing voice, and style change dramatically?

Funny, then in 1980, he releases an album called McCartney 2 and looks/sounds/writes like his old self.

Err...he did? I don't remember pre-67 McCartney writing anything like "Frozen Jap" or "Temporary Secretary". Coming Up was originally recorded by Wings in 1979, and "Goodnight Tonight" is a recording from the London Town sessions. Then there's the B-side "Check My Machine" which certainly isn't like anything that any man who ever called himself Paul McCartney had created before (with the possible exception of "Carnival of Light").

I agree that he did look a bit different going in the 80's, but I can't put my finger on exactly what it is that changed.

[Jude]

Dec 26, 2008 12:03:38 GMT -5 JS2 said:

From my point of view, that's JPM, cause he wasn't replaced
From yours, that's JPM, come back temporarily.
Either way, JPM.
And IMO, going off the posts here (about singing styles) If he was replaced, JPM sung Wonderful Christmas Time.

IMO, he was either completely replaced or he wasn't replaced. It sort of irks me when people think that certain songs were sung by JPM and others weren't, even when it's songs from the same album. You know what I mean? There are songs where John sang whiny--"Oh Yoko", "Gimme Some Truth"---and others where he didn't--"Imagine", "Jealous Guy"--but those are all songs from the same album and were certainly sung by the same person.

[trutha]

^ Why does it irk you that some people think Paul sang some songs & Faul sang others on the same album? Couldn't Paul have laid down tracks prior to whatever happened to him happened to him? For ex, my ex-boyfriend's band is currently cutting a new CD, but some songs were recorded a year ago. Some of the vocal tracks could have been recorded even before that.

[ph0neyprophet]

I could have sworn I've heard things about the original Paul being a fan of classic music. In 1980, he started writing more and more of it.. Coming Up seems like a really old-style song, something which JPM would have written.

And if you notice, you see how Paul in the interview acts like more of the pre-66 Paul. Much more laid back, funny, little expressions. You can see the pre-Faul/Paul much more in that interview.



See a difference? Notice any fake eyebrows?

[mommybird]

His face looks strange. There's something not quite right in it's configuration. His nose looks different. His upper lip looks thin and his teeth look different from Paul's.
Oh, and his ears look fake.

[trutha]

^ I agree. Not Paul.

[B]

from the top of the page: (advertisement)

Paul McCartney's IQ = 119
Smarter Than Paul McCartney? Take a Real IQ Test Now!
www.Celeb-IQ-Quizzes.com

That's not a bad score if you're a regular chump, but that would have to be disappointing for someone (fake or not) in that role.

(And yes I am! )

[mommybird]

My hubby scored 184 on the WAIS-R ( Welcher (?) Adult Intelligence Scale Revised ) when he was in college.
Compared to him, I'm retarded ! ;D

[ph0neyprophet]

There's Paul.



There's Faul.

You can distinguish the two because the real Paul has some special gaze in his eyes. I don't know what it is.

[B]

ph0neyprophet, If I pause the first one at 7 seconds, and the second at 11, I can see differences that
are significant, with the one you call Paul having a broader face. We have discussed the existence of two "Faul"s on this board in other threads, and what you have
posted here would fit in with those discussions, but (and I mean no disrespect by this) for those of us
who are old enough to remember what "the real/original" Paul looked like, neither of those gents is him!
Your bio lists your age as 18, and in your lifetime, the only 'Paul McCartney' you would have known
would have been the one who looked pretty much like those fellows do. But for us geezers, we
remember a Paul who had a small forehead, so that his hair came down over his eyebrows;
who had, as one person once described it, "chipmunk cheeks" (like a squirrel with nuts stored in
the sides of its mouth), and a voice that went a notch deeper and had a resonance that we haven't
heard much of beyond Sgt. Pepper. He was also not quite so tall.
Now, having just posted a slew of posts about clones myself, and possible Beatle clones at that,
I am not going to say you're not on to something here, but the question then is:
If the fellow on the top truly is Paul McCartney, then how did he end up in a body that looks
like this "Faul" person, and not so much like the McCartney we all remember?
It is my opinion that it may be possible that perhaps some of the soul of the person who was in the
body we oldsters knew as Paul McCartney ended up in a cloned "Faul" body (a "Rubber Soul"
one might call it), but unfortunately, that would be hard to prove.
I appreciate your posts here, so I am not trying to discourage you, but for many of us, it is not
easy to accept the notion that the person on the top is a "Paul who never died" Paul McCartney,
which is to say, the "original", if you will. This is all a bit strange, and I don't really expect you to
have an answer, because for most of us, all we can do is speculate.
Perhaps some day an "insider" will come forth with the details of what actually took place, but
that doesn't seem too likely, as he would not be believed, as the tale is (seemingly) so strange.

[ph0neyprophet]

We all have different interpretations of this whole thing about Paul being dead. The majority of the people on these forums believe it's a government cover-up. I do not.

Now some of this might shock some people, it might haunt you, you might not even believe in it.

The answer is located in one place, and one place only. The bible. If you have read about the end of the world, it pretty much points to two accounts on Youtube. Iamaphoney and Youknowmyname231.

In a spiritual perspective, Paul is dead, but really his spiritual outlooks on life have changed. As for this double, the second coming of the man himself isn't far away.

God is indeed making Himself known . . .

Love is all you need.

YKMN231

[mommybird]

LetterB, your response to phoneyprophet was very concise & well thought out.
You touched on a few things & I think that you might very well be right ( to a certain extent).
Phoneyprophet, it seems that you have your own opinions/beliefs concerning all of this.
Kudos to you...

[ph0neyprophet]

I'm just trying to be realistic here. Clearly the first video, all the way up top, that's a different Paul compared to the Wings interview with Geraldo.

"I don't know, I'm sure I've done something in 10 years but I can't remember."

[mommybird]

And there's the rub...
How many Faul McCartneys have there been over the past 40 + years

[thisone]

Hence "thisone"! I hope that answers your question!

I heard my missus listening to that particular song on YouTube and thought "hey that's appropriate!!"

I woulndnt buy or buy into his music. I actually think he should be boycotted for having the nerve to have played in the Zionist Entity recently. He's obviously a supporter of ritualistic mass murder.

[Jude]

Dec 31, 2008 11:53:44 GMT -5 thisone said:

He's obviously a supporter of ritualistic mass murder.

Oh really?


Thanks for the laugh.

[mommybird]

He's obviously a supporter of ritualistic mass murder.

Thisone, you ask anybody, I am definitely NOT a big fan of Sir Paul.
However, I can't comprehend why you would make a statement like that concerning him.
This man is a vegan. He doesn't even support the death of animals.
He sat on an ice floe with Lady Heather to protest the slaughter of baby seals.
And lets not forget his support for the ban on landmines.

If anything, this guy is vying for Sainthood...

[thisone]

Thats the media Paul MB!! The "illuminati" puppet!

I'll quote his ex - "The world is not ready for the truth about PaulMcCartney".

[mommybird]

Okay. I hadn't realized what direction you were coming from.
Lady Heather saw a side of "Paul" that she obviously didn't like.
She also tried very hard to allude to the fact that he was hiding a huge secret.
Gee, I wonder what that could be...

[LOVELYRITA]

Letter B made a good statement regarding how we can't accept Faul as being Paul.

Some of us believe Paul actually died, while many believe he was replaced but still alive.

To think this same man Bill/Faul is the same as Paul is a choice you can make. But there is audio as well as physical evidence to show the differences in their appearance and vocals. One can even discuss the difference of style.

Faul's wonderful xmas song is typical of Bill's kitschy music that he sometimes creates. I'm not saying all of Bill's works are "kitsch" but the ditties can fall into that category. He's done alot of great music, he's made some okay stuff, and then these ditties that appear occasionally.

Anyhow, you are entitled to your opinion. But keep in mind your opinion, or my opinion is just that opinion. Opinions cannot be used as evidence or be accepted as truth for all to follow.

[JS2]

Dec 30, 2008 18:06:47 GMT -5 @ph0neyprophet said:

There's Paul.



There's Faul.

You can distinguish the two because the real Paul has some special gaze in his eyes. I don't know what it is.

IMO exactly the same person. Especially the voice. Pause on vid one anywhere in the middle of talking, and just before he answers in vid 2, and play one after the other. No difference what so ever. And personally, i think Wonderful Christmas Time is brilliant! But there again, i think Paul is Paul, so we think different . Anyway, people here seem to instantly dislike most of "F"aul's stuff, so blah.