|
Post by misshim on Mar 26, 2012 5:37:19 GMT -5
Hi. I believe that Paul McCartney was replaced but did not die. I also believe that Faul was the one who married Linda and Heather. But I believe that the real Paul came back into the public eye around the beginning of the 80s. So there are two Paul Maccartneys in my oppinion.
Recently I started to wondering what if one of them dies while the other is still alive?
I think there are four possibilities:
1. Whoever dies last will be responsible for the official Paul McCartney death: -If Paul dies first his death will kept a secret until Faul dies. -If Faul dies first his death will kept a secret until Paul dies.
2. Paul's death will be the official McCartney death: -If Paul dies first Faul will get into hiding. Which leads to the question: Where could he go? I doubt he could return to his old life he left in the 60s. -If Faul dies first his death will be kept a secret. I don't find this possibility to be very likely.
3. Faul's death will be the official McCartney death. I find this more likely than possibility number 2 because Paul is logically the one who has an alternative life where he has been all throgh the 70s and where he probably still lives for most of his time.
4. Whoever dies first will be responsible for the official Paul McCartney death: I find this to be the most unlikely possibility.
What do you think?
|
|
|
Post by ramone on Mar 26, 2012 10:50:52 GMT -5
"Hi. I believe that Paul McCartney was replaced but did not die. I also believe that Faul was the one who married Linda and Heather. But I believe that the real Paul came back into the public eye around the beginning of the 80s. So there are two Paul Maccartneys in my oppinion.
Recently I started to wondering what if one of them dies while the other is still alive?
I think there are four possibilities:
1. Whoever dies last will be responsible for the official Paul McCartney death: -If Paul dies first his death will kept a secret until Faul dies. -If Faul dies first his death will kept a secret until Paul dies."
Yeah, I think JPM is probably still around but if he's surfaced it's been very sporadic. BPF (BillyPaulFaul) has been the front man for years and I think there's no reason to alter that. It's worked and works.
If JPM died it would probably stay under the radar. But you never know with this whole thing. If BPF died that might be the official deal - but JPM could come forward - at some point. That would blow a few minds.
|
|
|
Post by ramone on Mar 26, 2012 11:16:49 GMT -5
Hi. I believe that Paul McCartney was replaced but did not die. I also believe that Faul was the one who married Linda and Heather. But I believe that the real Paul came back into the public eye around the beginning of the 80s. So there are two Paul Maccartneys in my oppinion. Recently I started to wondering what if one of them dies while the other is still alive?I think there are four possibilities: 1. Whoever dies last will be responsible for the official Paul McCartney death:-If Paul dies first his death will kept a secret until Faul dies. -If Faul dies first his death will kept a secret until Paul dies. 2. Paul's death will be the official McCartney death:-If Paul dies first Faul will get into hiding. Which leads to the question: Where could he go? I doubt he could return to his old life he left in the 60s. -If Faul dies first his death will be kept a secret. I don't find this possibility to be very likely. 3. Faul's death will be the official McCartney death.I find this more likely than possibility number 2 because Paul is logically the one who has an alternative life where he has been all throgh the 70s and where he probably still lives for most of his time. 4. Whoever dies first will be responsible for the official Paul McCartney death:I find this to be the most unlikely possibility. What do you think? I agree, I think BPF is the one that married Linda. True there are some pics where he looks a lot like JPM, but overall there are numerous ones where he looks really really different. Sorry, I just don't think this guy: is this guy: I really doubt if the family man Bill had JPM pop into that family scene to replace him (the replacement) at times. What for? And wouldn't the kids catch on that this is a different guy? I would. Is it realistic to think little Heather - say around the Let It Be shooting - would be fooled into thinking that dad with a beard is her dad when he wasn't - just 'cause he has facial hair? Probably even less likely all those other years when he didn't have a beard. I think it very rare JPM would peek his head above the fence.
|
|
|
Post by ramone on Mar 26, 2012 11:24:57 GMT -5
Speaking of fences- I'd imagine an older JPM would look more like this guy - than this guy on the left -
|
|
|
Post by 65if2007 on Mar 29, 2012 0:30:15 GMT -5
I think that either JPM died in 1966 or was never replaced at all -- except maybe in a few photoshoots.
Death clues -- numerous and repeated -- make no sense to me at all unless they're a) true or b) a joke or c) a ritual of some sort.
But clues betokening a sudden and violent death in a car accident make no sense to me at all if there was simply a substitution for a still-alive-and-well human being. That's just too much of a double-bind for me to believe in.
|
|
|
Post by iameye on Mar 29, 2012 7:26:13 GMT -5
I think that either JPM died in 1966 or was never replaced at all -- except maybe in a few photoshoots. Death clues -- numerous and repeated -- make no sense to me at all unless they're a) true or b) a joke or c) a ritual of some sort. But clues betokening a sudden and violent death in a car accident make no sense to me at all if there was simply a substitution for a still-alive-and-well human being. That's just too much of a double-bind for me to believe in. The violent death was an accident.
|
|
|
Post by iameye on Mar 29, 2012 8:27:45 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by 65if2007 on Mar 29, 2012 22:41:26 GMT -5
Well, after the current McCartney dies, they should find a way to do a re-shoot or a photoshop over a sign that reads "We Were".
|
|
|
Post by B on Mar 30, 2012 7:39:27 GMT -5
Ah, but the sign actually reads "I you was".
And hopefully we still are.
|
|
|
Post by iameye on Mar 30, 2012 7:45:46 GMT -5
Ah, but the sign actually reads "I YOU was". And hopefully we still are. Read it in the present tense I am I
|
|
|
Post by 65if2007 on Mar 30, 2012 13:06:45 GMT -5
I'm intrigued by iamaphoney's suggestion that it is actually (or also) a veiled reference to "Aiwass".
|
|
|
Post by iameye on Mar 30, 2012 18:00:50 GMT -5
I'm intrigued by iamaphoney's suggestion that it is actually (or also) a veiled reference to "Aiwass". Aiwass you, I am I.
|
|
|
Post by cherilyn7 on Aug 2, 2012 10:11:02 GMT -5
It actually reads"I WAS you" with finger pointing......i believe when "Faul" dies the truth may leak out. He is actually not 70 (as JPM would have been) but about 77 as the replacement was older!
|
|
|
Post by ramone on Aug 4, 2012 11:09:20 GMT -5
Speaking of fences- I'd imagine an older JPM would look more like this guy - than this guy on the left - No takers for man behind fence pic? I'm surprised.
|
|
|
Post by B on Aug 4, 2012 12:29:24 GMT -5
We knew it was Jim Morrison. ;D
|
|
|
Post by linus on Aug 4, 2012 13:39:41 GMT -5
AppleAnd B, isn't Billy Idol supposed to be Jim Morrison?
|
|
|
Post by ramone on Aug 6, 2012 11:10:14 GMT -5
Speaking of fences- I'd imagine an older JPM would look more like this guy - than this guy on the left - No takers for man behind fence pic? I'm surprised. What I find interesting is how the features match pretty closely between fence guy and JPM. The nose is basically a dead ringer. General shape of head seems close; as well as ears - at least what can be scene from the angle. Eyes have that look about them ( incl brows). and beard pattern too. JPM had a sparse area right below lip then it filled in fairly heavily. Seems similar with fence guy. Not saying this is him - but, can you imagine if this was? It'd be the only (basically current) pic of JPM to surface at this point. An amazing find it would turn out to be.
|
|
|
Post by ramone on Aug 23, 2012 15:53:11 GMT -5
"Despite whatever was, or is going to be said, our dear boy still walks amongst us. Maybe closer than you think. And yes, one and one and one is three. So, now you have me narrowed down a tad tighter. One sauntered back to the abyss from whence he came, one went on to put the "Paul" experience to good work, and the other... Nuff said for now.
Apollo"
|
|
|
Post by iameye on Aug 27, 2012 21:13:54 GMT -5
'til you could feeler disease lol
|
|
|
Post by linus on Aug 28, 2012 18:37:01 GMT -5
well, what if ALL of the Pauls and Fauls and 'phoneys and Billys, and... all come forward at once! How many people still wouldn't believe it?
|
|
maxwell
Help!
The Greys are packing KY jelly.
Posts: 77
|
Post by maxwell on Aug 28, 2012 19:19:01 GMT -5
It actually reads"I WAS you" with finger pointing......i believe when "Faul" dies the truth may leak out. He is actually not 70 (as JPM would have been) but about 77 as the replacement was older! Based on Faul's age given during The Magical Mystery, Faul is 5 years older than Paul. I think the Faul lookalike could be a relation of Faul's, rather than an older Paul. He has the same non-level eyes. Sometimes Paul had a noticeably non-level left eye. Maybe Paul /Faul had an eye op'? Re: the PID clues, many of them lyrical clues are deeply sorrowful or anguished, suggesting that Paul did die in a car accident. Which would explain the drastic deterioration in Paul's talent and style, post 1966. The main stumbling block of PID to me is that the remaining 3 Beatles would let an outsider take the reigns of the band, post 1966. Apologies for the cross-themes here, but it's expedient.
|
|
maxwell
Help!
The Greys are packing KY jelly.
Posts: 77
|
Post by maxwell on Aug 28, 2012 19:26:39 GMT -5
I'm intrigued by iamaphoney's suggestion that it is actually (or also) a veiled reference to "Aiwass". Aiwass you, I am I. I don't mean to be rude iameye, but your posts wind me up a bit. Why are you being cryptic? You keep hinting at cosmic clues. If we're missing some amazing insight please just spell it out. This should be a site for dialogue, not entertaining egos.
|
|
|
Post by linus on Aug 29, 2012 18:38:31 GMT -5
I think the Faul lookalike could be a relation of Faul's, rather than an older Paul. He has the same non-level eyes. Sometimes Paul had a noticeably non-level left eye. Interesting that you say “sometimes”. Maybe Paul /Faul had an eye op'? Can a person’s eye socket really be moved with surgery? Re: the PID clues, many of them lyrical clues are deeply sorrowful or anguished, suggesting that Paul did die in a car accident. Which would explain the drastic deterioration in Paul's talent and style, post 1966. Or maybe that’s why they created the PID clues, as an excuse for their deteriorating talent & style. However, a perceived “drastic deterioration in Paul's talent and style” is a matter of opinion. Hello Goodbye went #1. Hey Jude was certified gold less than three weeks after it’s release, it spent 9 weeks as #1 on US charts, and is still frequently included on professional lists of the all-time best songs. How many people list Blackbird as their favorite song? Get Back and Let It Be are two of their most well-known songs. How many people think their post-66 era has much more depth and dynamics. Etc. etc. Most of the Beatlemania-era songs were written By Lennon and McCartney in tandem, building on and complimenting each other’s strengths, it’s only natural that when they starting writing on their own that the quality would diminish to some degree. And how much was George Martin responsible for the quality added to their songs? No Martin during the Wings years… The main stumbling block of PID to me is that the remaining 3 Beatles would let an outsider take the reigns of the band, post 1966. To maintain the illusion of continuity, would be my guess. Also, according to 'the story', George was becoming disillusioned with being a Beatle, and John was becoming a drug-addicted couch potato. Who else was going to take the reigns, Ringo? I don’t subscribe to any particular one of these theories, but these are the explanations I have thought of. My two centavos. It’s possible the clues could also be eluding to things other than (just) Paul dying. Beatlemania suffered a fatal blow in 1966 with the Jesus comment, the snubbing of First Lady Marcos, etc. The Beatles as a band started to die during the recording of Revolver, as they were no longer writing as a team and were going separate directions musically. The last track on Revolver, which was the first to be recorded for the album, is inspired by the Tibetan Book of the Dead. Death, rebirth, the cycles of life are themes that run abundantly through their work. But, by the mid-60s, They were evolving out of their Beatlemania cocoons. Where was it I recently read that it’s no accident Revolver ends with the line “the end of the beginning…” Whereas their previous works were brightly colored and charged with enthusiasm, Revolver’s themes revolved mostly around loneliness, death, chaos, tyranny, uncertainty and despair. We hear in Revolver that they had learned over the last three years that they no longer believed that the word love would set you free. Only to have their utopian view of love arise again in All You Need Is Love, tortured in the White Album, and resurrected again in The End. Author Kevin Courrier puts it well: An even larger question remained though as to why Paul became the subject of this conspiracy. “There was no Beatle whose combination of traits both real and perceived, personal and popular, positioned him better as designated corpse than Paul McCartney,” thought author of Magic Circles Devin McKinney. ”John was too loud, George too quiet, Ringo too human. Paul was perfect – perfectly beautiful, so beautiful he was unreal enough for it to function as pure myth and magic. Like his generation and its great social experiment, he was an infant in a grown body, both flesh an spirit, an ethereal presence circling the earth in a radiant membrane of evanescent purity. What had once made Paul a god among humans now place him squarely on his back upon the alter of myth.” Paul was also the cute Beatle. If Lennon represented the pleasure principle of the Beatles, McCartney was the group’s sole source of the possibilities offered by pleasure. He embraced the world around him and didn’t perceive it as suspiciously as Lennon or Harrison. But because of their skepticism, Lennon and Harrison also represented the reality principle of the Bealtes (which is perhaps why they became such likely targets of assassins). Paul had represented the Impossible Dream of what the Beatles could actually be. Unlike Lennon, his music had the expressed purpose of not questioning reality, but making reality somehow bearable, or perhaps a happier burden to carry. So he would never be a target of some deranged fan’s wrath. But when the Beatles’ dream had died after 1966, it made sense to some listeners that the impossible dreamer, Paul, should likely be gone as well.
|
|
maxwell
Help!
The Greys are packing KY jelly.
Posts: 77
|
Post by maxwell on Aug 29, 2012 19:49:35 GMT -5
I don't know whether PID is real or allegorical. I know the clues are real, despite the Beatles' earnest denials over the decades.
But there was a radical change in Paul's image and personality after 1966. He went from a quiet and chic man - with a gregarious alter-ego (practically living in London clubs), to a domineering and crude man - with a retiring alter-ego (hiding out in farms and manors thereafter).
The parting in his hair swapped from left to right. Paul always parted his hair from left-to-right, and 'Faul' always parted his hair right-to-left. It's said that he began using his right hand, when Paul was a straight lefty.
Re: talent, that's up for interpretation of course. Although I believe an expert identified 2-3 Pauls in the later Beatles' album/s. I've also heard that 'Faul' relied heavily on session musicians in his solo work. To me, John's solo work is much better than Faul's.
Re: eye socket surgery. Sure it's possible, they'd reshape it. The eye just rests in the socket.
Re: your idea of PID as a gimmick to breathe new life into a dying band. That's bull. The Beatles were never bigger. Creatively they may have stalled. That quip with Jesus only effected the Bible Belt, and Lady Marcos the Philippines - a small market. Besides, the extent and the intricacy of the PID conspiracy is too ambitious. They carried on hiding PID clues in their solo work decades later. Paul or Faul is still hiding PID and BILL clues today.
Re: John. Sure, they all dabbled in various drugs at one time or another. While John was receptive to Paul's / Faul's new musical direction ie psychedelics /heavy rock. But John was always the brains and talent of the group.
They were all old school friends and a tight-knit group. I can't imagine they'd let an outsider - a replacement - come in and take over.
|
|
|
Post by iameye on Aug 29, 2012 19:59:45 GMT -5
What happens if one of the Paul McCartneys dies?It would be catastrophic. Re: talent, that's up for interpretation of course. Although I believe an expert identified 2-3 Pauls in the later Beatles' album/s. I've also heard that 'Faul' relied heavily on session musicians in his solo work. To me, John's solo work is much better than Faul's.
Re: eye socket surgery. Sure it's possible, they'd reshape it. The eye just rests in the socket.
They were all old school friends and a tight-knit group. I can't imagine they'd let an outsider - a replacement - come in and take over.
Unless the in/outsider was......well. it would have to be special really lol
|
|