|
Post by ph0neyprophet on Apr 3, 2009 10:05:10 GMT -5
Just because that's Paul singing, doesn't nessicarily mean that's him in the video.
If you watch closely, he somewhat has a "Let it Be" look to him.
Especially if you watch at the end of the clip, he has the exact hairline Paul had in Let it Be..
And one more thing that stands out.
If you've seen the Beatles, you would normally see Paul with the group, and John by himself, but in that particular song, Paul is by himself.
But, there's even more to it. Later in the movie, you see Paul in "Another Girl"
What is unique about this video? Note, how halfway through the song Paul is playing a girl while John is on drums, Ringo is on guitar, and George is playing bass.
So, is this the start of Paul "thinking" he's a woman, which is why he started looking girly come 1968?
|
|
|
Post by B on Apr 3, 2009 10:09:32 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by ph0neyprophet on Apr 3, 2009 10:39:33 GMT -5
Here's a better one for ya Which Paul looks like he was on Sgt. Pepper? Certainly Paul to the left appears much taller then George, but suddenly he's similiar in height? Something's not right. Keep in mind, there both performing "Help"
|
|
|
Post by mrshears on Apr 3, 2009 11:00:04 GMT -5
Not the same?
|
|
|
Post by DarkHorse on Apr 3, 2009 15:51:44 GMT -5
It's just the way he is wearing his hair in Help.
|
|
|
Post by FP on Apr 3, 2009 21:33:25 GMT -5
This sort of hurts the PWR case if you're saying they look enough alike to be in the same movie with no one noticing, plus it helps my case if you think Help! Paul is the same guy as Let It Be Paul. Anyone here still stick with the simple idea that Sep. '66 was the last appearance of the real Paul and everything after is "Faul", or does everyone think it's this inconsistent web of reshoots, doctoring, multiple Fauls, and reappearances of Paul?
|
|
|
Post by knowthe411 on Nov 24, 2009 3:41:38 GMT -5
The person in the "Night Before" 1965 video is Cecile Pearl Witherington, called Pearl. She was an SOE (Special Operations Executive) agent who began to fill for Paul in early 1965 or late 1964 when Paul began to step out of the spotlight to work on forming Apple Music and do more songwriting. She took male hormones to look like him. The real JPM was in Hard Day's Night (movie) but Pearl took over for Help!
You can tell Pearl mainly from her body language and the way she played guitar. JPM would shake his head a little while playing; Pearl kept her head still. JPM stood up straight with square shoulders; Pearl caved her chest in while playing. JPM kept his feet and legs spread like a guy while playing; Pearl had a habit of knocking her knees together while playing. In one photo I've seen of Pearl, she's sitting with the guys in a casual photo. Where the guys all have their elbows planted on their knees, Pearl has her hands wrapped around one knee - just like a girl.
|
|
|
Post by GN on Dec 26, 2009 9:29:11 GMT -5
The person in the "Night Before" 1965 video is Cecile Pearl Witherington, called Pearl. She was an SOE (Special Operations Executive) agent who began to fill for Paul in early 1965 or late 1964 when Paul began to step out of the spotlight to work on forming Apple Music and do more songwriting. She took male hormones to look like him. The real JPM was in Hard Day's Night (movie) but Pearl took over for Help! You can tell Pearl mainly from her body language and the way she played guitar. JPM would shake his head a little while playing; Pearl kept her head still. JPM stood up straight with square shoulders; Pearl caved her chest in while playing. JPM kept his feet and legs spread like a guy while playing; Pearl had a habit of knocking her knees together while playing. In one photo I've seen of Pearl, she's sitting with the guys in a casual photo. Where the guys all have their elbows planted on their knees, Pearl has her hands wrapped around one knee - just like a girl. Really a very good analysis Pauline ( I think her true name was Louise Marie Witherington ) has a throat electronic implant to modify her voice as told by Ernst Stavro Blofeld in "Diamonds Are Forever" movie. After this I am 100% sure that "Pauline" is "our" Faul
|
|
|
Post by Paul Bearer on Jan 4, 2010 2:38:02 GMT -5
This is just getting too silly and compliacted for words.
Paul was Paul until September 1966. Then it was no longer him. Simple.
People coming here for the first time to find the truth will think we are idiots when they read this.
|
|
|
Post by mrpostman on Jan 5, 2010 4:33:43 GMT -5
This is just getting too silly and compliacted for words. Paul was Paul until September 1966. Then it was no longer him. Simple. People coming here for the first time to find the truth will think we are idiots when they read this. Dear Paul Bearer, please don't take this personal. But i have been reading through the PID forums like this one and the TKIN and PID-MISS him forum and believe me, this thread is not the only one that makes you look like "idiots" (your words). At first i thought you guys pulled a big prank, like a mockumentary on tv. Now that i realize that you might honestly believe all this stuff about Paul being dead and replaced, i am speachless. There is this guy who believes that Paul is some Granny, there is this chick who bellieves Paul is Aleister Crowleys son, there all this random talk about egypt gods. Who do you think is coming here, other then for pure entertainment? "Paul is a clone", "Paul is a guy called Junior Campel", "Paul is some guy from Star Trek", "Paul is Billy Shears"... Paul even is John Lennon (!!!!!) invanddis.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=TAR&action=display&thread=5222 Other things i read on PID forums are that Paul was replaced by several different lookalikes, that Paul was a magician, that Paul was a member of the illuminati, that all the other Beatles were replaced too, that Paul is canadian, that Paul is a gypsy ( ?), and even that Paul is Neil Aspinall the Beatles roadie and Apple manager!!!! 60if.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=Essential&action=display&thread=2694 Sorry if i am disturbing the forum-peace and sorry if i sounded too harsh. I really have an honest question to end with. Are you serious about all this or is it all a big joke? mrpostman
|
|
|
Post by ramone on Jan 5, 2010 10:39:43 GMT -5
'Are you serious about ALL this or is it all a big joke?'
ALL might be the key word here in the interrogative.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Bearer on Jan 5, 2010 18:39:05 GMT -5
In the early stages of 60IF, the story was simple and uncomplicated. Over the years, I think a number of disinfo agents have crept in to make the story so complicated and bizarre, that anyone coming here to find the simple truth wouldn't know where to start.
|
|
|
Post by B on Jan 5, 2010 21:20:37 GMT -5
Mrpostman, you have to realize that these forums are about tossing out ideas people have had in attempting to solve the riddle(s) of PID/PWR. They are not an official dossier on the history of Paul McCartney! TKIN started in around 2000, and is where many of us got started, as far as internet analysis of the material is concerned. NIR-PWR came into existance in about 2004, when some of the TKIN members came to feel they were being hoodwinked, and unfairly treated at TKIN. Posts there were disappearing, or being altered by the admin from what had originally been posted. Members were finding themselves banned with no clear reason given for it. PID Miss Him was formed for those who were of the opinion that Paul was dead, and not just replaced. In the roughly ten years that have passed, MANY ideas have been tossed about in the forums; some more likely than others, but I don't think it is "disinformationalists" among us, trying to invalidate the boards.
People get upset, sometimes, that there is no "official" story here of what happened to Paul, but Paul's personal fate doesn't seem to be the focus of the clues that have been given by the Beatles anyway, so it makes it hard to say with any certainty what, if anything, became of him. JoJo has bent over backwards to allow posters at this forum the opportunity for freedom of expression. That is somewhat lacking in some of the other forums. Better that we, at times, come across as foolish than that the truth, whatever it is, be restricted from being spoken or written.
When you write "this thread is not the only one that makes you look like "idiots", I take it that the "you" is inclusive of not only posters here, but at the other sites as well, particularly since when you belittle the notion put forth that Paul is Neil Aspinall, you cite a link to a thread at TKIN!
The world is a pretty strange place, and at times the truth of any given situation may be stanger than seems 'reasonable'. Often, however, the truth is even stranger than what might seem to be the case. Or, as Arthur Conan Doyle put it:
“Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth.”
|
|
|
Post by GN on Jan 6, 2010 4:51:33 GMT -5
Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth.
|
|
|
Post by mrpostman on Jan 6, 2010 9:41:03 GMT -5
Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth. Ok, Sherlock, then you think by making up a document about Paul Mccartneys death, you eliminated the possibility that he is alive? And that proofs in reverse that Paul is some 80 year old grandma and Crowleys son? Good bye fellas!
|
|
|
Post by skyward on Jan 6, 2010 19:16:20 GMT -5
You can not explain how a distinctly shorter woman was able to pull off playing the role of JPM.
Don't give me this nonsense about how she was stooping her back and bending her knees throughout her whole entire life to fool people into thinking she was short.
How tall was Linda McCartney? How tall would Pearl have to be to match the height of a man who would be several inches taller than Linda?
How did Pearl look so manly while running around in men's swim-trunks?
And Pearl is now dead, are you suggesting that she is still alive and still carrying on the role?
|
|
|
Post by GN on Jan 8, 2010 8:45:31 GMT -5
In the early stages of 60IF, the story was simple and uncomplicated. Over the years, I think a number of disinfo agents have crept in to make the story so complicated and bizarre, that anyone coming here to find the simple truth wouldn't know where to start. "You better see right through that mother's eyes"
|
|
|
Post by GN on Jan 8, 2010 8:52:40 GMT -5
You can not explain how a distinctly shorter woman was able to pull off playing the role of JPM. Don't give me this nonsense about how she was stooping her back and bending her knees throughout her whole entire life to fool people into thinking she was short. How tall was Linda McCartney? How tall would Pearl have to be to match the height of a man who would be several inches taller than Linda? How did Pearl look so manly while running around in men's swim-trunks? And Pearl is now dead, are you suggesting that she is still alive and still carrying on the role? That's not a pony Please folllow the path. Don't miss a post from me.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Bearer on Jan 8, 2010 16:02:09 GMT -5
I dig a pony! So...the pony was replaced with... a horse, and noone even noticed. Since we're on about improbable theories, perhaps I should mention in the original dream I had many years ago about Paul's death, and five years before coming across 60IF, that I had got the impression in the dream that Paul had died of NATURAL CAUSES (not whacked and so on) and that it had occurred in October 1963. Are we sure then, that the Paul from the cavern days is the same one that appeared on The Ed Sullivan Show? Maybe there have been several Paul replacements.
|
|
|
Post by B on Jan 8, 2010 16:30:08 GMT -5
I'd like to hear more about that dream, Paul Bearer.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Bearer on Jan 8, 2010 17:01:01 GMT -5
I've written it up elsewhere. OK, found it.
I had a powerful dream a few years ago (about 1996) in which I saw the four Beatles young and then Paul died (still young). The night before I'd been listening to the newly-released Flaming Pie album and it was like I was spritually reacting to that music. The dream was so powerful that when I woke up it almost felt like The Beatles were in the room. Yet I didn't understand the dream for some time and I had forgotten all about the PID rumours. I think it was about 4 to 5 years before I came across 60IF and then the dream made sense. IF I hadn't had that dream maybe I would have had some doubts or needed more confirmation but from this dream I felt God was telling me something.
|
|
|
Post by B on Jan 8, 2010 17:21:26 GMT -5
Interesting. Thanks. Did he seem to have died from a disease? How was the information presented in the dream? I'm just curious.
|
|
|
Post by GN on Jan 9, 2010 5:13:56 GMT -5
I dig a pony! So...the pony was replaced with... a horse, and noone even noticed. Since we're on about improbable theories, perhaps I should mention in the original dream I had many years ago about Paul's death, and five years before coming across 60IF, that I had got the impression in the dream that Paul had died of NATURAL CAUSES (not whacked and so on) and that it had occurred in October 1963. Are we sure then, that the Paul from the cavern days is the same one that appeared on The Ed Sullivan Show? Maybe there have been several Paul replacements. I don't know about BEFORE "Meet the Beatles!" release ...
|
|
|
Post by revolver on Jan 10, 2010 12:53:22 GMT -5
This is just getting too silly and compliacted for words. Paul was Paul until September 1966. Then it was no longer him. Simple. I agree. Occam's razor: the simplest theory that matches the known facts is the most likely. That's my theory, and I'm sticking to it.
|
|
|
Post by Serviceable Villain on Jan 15, 2010 10:44:54 GMT -5
...and that it had occurred in October 1963. Are we sure then, that the Paul from the cavern days is the same one that appeared on The Ed Sullivan Show? Maybe there have been several Paul replacements. This is one thing that has really bothered me. All over the internet there are numerous facial comparisons between Paul and "Faul." After looking at countless numbers of these comparisons I began to ask myself why the "true" pre-1967 Paul had so many fluctuations in his appearance. Granted, few people look EXACTLY the same from year-to-year and camera angles can do funny things, but what's up with the many faces of Paul McCartney before 1967? Here is a collection of photos of what is commonly assumed to be the true James Paul McCartney. Why are there so many differences? -The 3rd pic on the top row doesn't really look like any Paul OR Faul that I've ever seen in any other picture or video. -The first pic in the second row and the Butcher Cover pic show Paul with a very swollen looking face. -The pic from the 1962-1966 Red Album also looks way off from most any other picture of JPM I've ever seen. Yes, its a funny angle but the rest of the group looks consistent with other photos I've seen. -Looking at the 2nd pic in the second row, the face strikes me more of the face usually associated with Faul. -Compare the bottom two photos. Most people think of the authentic JPM as the second photo: Rounded face with the slightly downward slanted puppy-dog eyes. Yet the photo of young Paul to its left looks more like Faul's long, narrow head with the exaggerated, slanted right eyebrow. What gives?
|
|