He isn't dead.

[cyndaquilfire35]

I honestly took an open minded approach to PID. I really did. But the evidence just doesn't stack up.
Sure, some of the clues in the songs sound creepy, but if you try to fit them together it just doesn't make sense.
And there's also the matter of forensics, which you seem to like to brag about.

 

You can't fake hand lines. Sure, his ears may look a bit weird in old photos with crappy lighting, but I think hand lines outweigh that.
And I think this shows that the "sudden face change" was all just natural aging.
 

And for anyone saying he has scars on his face from plastic surgery, no, he doesn't. This is why he has the scars
and also why his teeth appear to look different.
 www.beatlesbible.com/1965/12/26/paul-mccartney-moped-accident-liverpool/


And as for references to car crashes in Beatles songs, those were actually referencing the death of their friend Tara Browne.
 www.beatlesbible.com/1966/12/18/tara-browne-dies/


And for all of you saying there are backwards messages... Bullshit. I've listened to most if not all of the supposed
backwards messages and I couldn't make out a single word until PIDers said "Oh, it says this, you should hear it saying this."

As for the supposed replacement, Billy Shears Campbell, or whatever name you refer to him now, he doesn't exist.
Fred LaBour, pretty much the granddaddy of the Paul Is Dead myth, had this to say:

 "I made the guy up. It was originally going to be 'Glenn Campbell,' with two Ns and then I said 'that's too close, nobody'll buy that,'
so I made it William Campbell." And you still have to consider how incredibly unlikely it is they found someone who looks,
sounds and acts just like Paul on such short notice. It just doesn't make sense.



But anyway, I know there's a lot more to it. So I want you all to provide me with cold, hard smoking gun evidence
that the real Paul is actually dead. Hit me with any evidence you have. I'm still open-minded.
Who knows? Maybe there is some odd way that the evidence really does fit together.

[B]

Living is easy with eyes closed!

[B]

I'll comment on this:

You can't fake hand lines.

Those pictures aren't worth the paper they're not printed on. Can you honestly tell me you can see them well
enough to determine that they're identical? I sometimes do palmistry, and I can't see enough detail there to make such a call.

Most peoples' Life, Heart, and Head lines show up in a relatively similar fashion. I would expect Paul's hands
to be somewhat similar to Faul's in that respect, but I can't make a determination that they're identical looking at what you've posted.

For instance, if we look at Paul's left hand (on our right), it appears that his heart line comes up to the spot between his index and middle finger.
In the pictures of Faul, I don't see that it does, although it might. It's just that the photo quality is too indistinct to tell.

There are threads here where we've compared the two, not to mention that Faul's feet are different, and that he
appears to have six toes in some of the pictures. If you want to go that route, we can, but not with the photos above.
They don't show enough.

[cyndaquilfire35]

They seem similar enough to me. The first photo is a bit iffy, but you can see all the big lines are in the right place.
If they found someone with near identical hand lines, that just makes the whole theory more incredibly unlikely.
And "Paul has six toes"... What are we supposed to take from that? That he was a mutant all along?

[B]

You don't seem to understand that virtually everybody's hands have "big lines in the right place", and that most hands are similar.
Look at your friends' hands, and you will see that this is so. It's the details that matter.

I did not say that "Paul has six toes"; I said Faul appears to, in some photographs. "Faul" is the replacement.

You wrote: "I honestly took an open minded approach to PID. I really did. But the evidence just doesn't stack up."

My impression is that you've taken anything but an open minded approach, and that you aren't the least bit interested in
being objective about anything related to the matter. Of course, that's just my opinion, based on what you've posted so far.

Here is a question I would ask you: Why would the Beatles spend 3 years putting "Paul is dead" clues in their records,
and then, in addition, "Faul" continue to include such clues in his solo recordings, if there was no point to it?

I am not saying Paul IS dead, but whether he was dead or replaced, what would be the point of saying he was dead if he clearly wasn't?

Wouldn't it seem they would almost have to have replaced him for the clues to have any meaning?

[cyndaquilfire35]

Here's an updated version of the pic: i.redd.it/oo53hx6d2cmx.png

Well, of course I was a bit skeptical. But at the same time I found it fascinating and I still do. I've watched most if not all of
iamaphoney's content and some of it truly had me thinking hard, but I was able to find the real explantions. Thing about IAAP is
a lot of his "evidence" is taken out of context or otherwise misinterpreted. He's most likely just some artist trying to promote himself.
Like I said before, I think most of the clues are open to interpretation. Now I do think IAAP has some form of legitimacy.
He's associated with a film company related to Apple, but this was most likely just to avoid copyright scares.
As far as I know only one of his videos actually got taken down for copyright reasons.

[chica]

Sept 17, 2016 9:09:52 GMT -5 cyndaquilfire35 said:

For years the Bealtes called PID'ers a bunch of nutters and said they hadn't put any messages in their lyrics. Then on April 25, 1975 Lennon said in an interview with Tom Snyder they had put subliminal  meassages in their lyrics about what was going on in their lives:



Oh crap maybe you're right. All these years I thought they were saying Hey Jude and maybe it was Hey Dude. ROFL

[cyndaquilfire35]

Sept 22, 2016 12:55:56 GMT -5 chica said:

Sept 17, 2016 9:09:52 GMT -5 cyndaquilfire35 said:

For years the Bealtes called PID'ers a bunch of nutters and said they hadn't put any messages in their lyrics. Then on April 25, 1975 Lennon said in an interview with Tom Snyder they had put subliminal  meassages in their lyrics about what was going on in their lives:



Oh crap maybe you're right. All these years I thought they were saying Hey Jude and maybe it was Hey Dude. ROFL

Difference between hiding clues saying someone is dead and just giving subtle hints about events in their lives.

[cyndaquilfire35]

More evidence: i.imgur.com/OjHxMaf.png

Exact same facial markings. If you look closely you can even see they have the same freckles.

[cyndaquilfire35]

Sept 24, 2016 15:23:31 GMT -5 michelle said:

Sept 22, 2016 17:35:43 GMT -5 cyndaquilfire35 said:

More evidence: i.imgur.com/OjHxMaf.png

Exact same facial markings. If you look closely you can even see they have the same freckles.

If you compare Mike McCartney to Mike McCartney you'll get good results. Right?

What now?

[delysid]

PAUL MCCARTNEY IS BIG LEGGY

[chica]

Oct 30, 2016 17:54:36 GMT -5 delysid said:

PAUL MCCARTNEY IS BIG LEGGY

Tina Foster did a nice job of height fluctuations.   plasticmacca.blogspot.com/search?q=Height+differences

[delysid]

Nov 3, 2016 9:39:19 GMT -5 chica said:

Oct 30, 2016 17:54:36 GMT -5 delysid said:

PAUL MCCARTNEY IS BIG LEGGY

Tina Foster did a nice job of height fluctuations.   plasticmacca.blogspot.com/search?q=Height+differences

Ugh. I can't abide another visit to the narcisstic shambles that is Tina Foster.
She redefines 'fake' and the utter transparency of her censorship of any comment that detracts from the right-wing agenda she's using PID to front is puke-inducing.

Plastic is right. That site is like a blog she posts to herself (she certainly comments on herself ad nauseam and without the slightest idea that this is not only transparent to intelligence but to website analysis).

I keeping with her operational standards, I encourage nobody to visit it so that it really IS her mirror.

[chica]

Nov 3, 2016 15:45:29 GMT -5 delysid said:

Nov 3, 2016 9:39:19 GMT -5 chica said:

Tina Foster did a nice job of height fluctuations.   plasticmacca.blogspot.com/search?q=Height+differences

Ugh. I can't abide another visit to the narcisstic shambles that is Tina Foster.
She redefines 'fake' and the utter transparency of her censorship of any comment that detracts from the right-wing agenda she's using PID to front is puke-inducing.

Plastic is right. That site is like a blog she posts to herself (she certainly comments on herself ad nauseam and without the slightest idea that this is not only transparent to intelligence but to website analysis).

I keeping with her operational standards, I encourage nobody to visit it so that it really IS her mirror.

I really doesn't make any difference how you feel about that person. You need to learn to pick the meat and leave the bones.

[delysid]

There ain't no meat on those bones, Boss.

[delysid]

Sept 18, 2016 8:28:00 GMT -5 B said:

You don't seem to understand that virtually everybody's hands have "big lines in the right place", and that most hands are similar.
Look at your friends' hands, and you will see that this is so. It's the details that matter.

I did not say that "Paul has six toes"; I said Faul appears to, in some photographs. "Faul" is the replacement.

You wrote: "I honestly took an open minded approach to PID. I really did. But the evidence just doesn't stack up."

My impression is that you've taken anything but an open minded approach, and that you aren't the least bit interested in
being objective about anything related to the matter. Of course, that's just my opinion, based on what you've posted so far.

Here is a question I would ask you: Why would the Beatles spend 3 years putting "Paul is dead" clues in their records,
and then, in addition, "Faul" continue to include such clues in his solo recordings, if there was no point to it?

I am not saying Paul IS dead, but whether he was dead or replaced, what would be the point of saying he was dead if he clearly wasn't?

Wouldn't it seem they would almost have to have replaced him for the clues to have any meaning?

With respect, what you're doing here, as many are (and not just in PID these days), is taking as established the still-spurious idea that '...the Beatles spend three years putting "Paul Is Dead" clues in their records'.
The chief reason this is a highly spurious idea is that the clues are actually being put in by those looking for them.
Who could deny this? This entire board is about that activity and clues have now been put in to justify the most outlandish claims.


Having said that, I actually do think that there was some of this going on from the fabs.
But, as per McCartney's one or two lines of criticism of John Lennon on the "Ram" album, it's not reasonable to assume that McCartney was lying when he claimed that Lennon saw the whole album as being about him when it wasn't.
There was a movie, 'Blow Up' by Antonioni that came out at the time which explores this very idea artfully. And there's no doubt that it was one of the big influential movies of the period so it's safe to assume a certain presence of the idea.
Similarly, among the things going on around the band that they used creatively, I do think there was a certain recurrent subject of death, being as both writing principals had been devastated by the deaths of their mothers and, to quite some degree, as they have themselves said, were fired into their ambition by it, if just to avoid thinking about it. That it comes through is understandable.

I've also no doubt that there was a general humourous thing around at the time in ALL of the bands about regular reports that one of them had died. People assume this to have been a Beatle exclusive but there are threads of reported-death throughout the history of many of the contemporary acts, backgrounded by more records by Buddy Holly, for example, emerging after his death than before.
That they may have played with this theme is not an untenable idea.
What is untenable is that clues 'found' later were not placed by the finders.
That is especially true of everything found during the 'web period' of PID.
Now we have 'evidence' of, well, you name something we haven't had 'evidence' for.

McCartney and Montauk? Seen it.
McCartney as Satan? Regular as clockwork
McCartney and The NWO? Bored by it.
McCartney as secret author of The Bible? Any day now



What is REALLY boring though is to see someone who expressed their opinion after consideration of PID/PWR dismissed as being 'with eyes closed'.
I've no time for that kind of dismissal, considering that the evidence stacking up against a quote 'normal, reasonable' view on the matter is limited to spurious ideas assumed-as-established-fact in order to justify more extreme ideas.
As I've said before, it;s fun to engage in a 'let's pretend' game with all of this but the fun runs out when fanatical impulses overcome the game.
I can't help thinking back to a few years ago when I was worried, here, that the extreme ideas being forced into PID by those holding the ideas external to PID was part of some kind of movement of infiltration by extremists.
We've now seen this play out LARGE on the public stage

[beatlas231]

Feb 12, 2017 2:08:48 GMT -5 delysid said:

Sept 18, 2016 8:28:00 GMT -5 B said:

You don't seem to understand that virtually everybody's hands have "big lines in the right place", and that most hands are similar.
Look at your friends' hands, and you will see that this is so. It's the details that matter.

I did not say that "Paul has six toes"; I said Faul appears to, in some photographs. "Faul" is the replacement.

You wrote: "I honestly took an open minded approach to PID. I really did. But the evidence just doesn't stack up."

My impression is that you've taken anything but an open minded approach, and that you aren't the least bit interested in
being objective about anything related to the matter. Of course, that's just my opinion, based on what you've posted so far.

Here is a question I would ask you: Why would the Beatles spend 3 years putting "Paul is dead" clues in their records,
and then, in addition, "Faul" continue to include such clues in his solo recordings, if there was no point to it?

I am not saying Paul IS dead, but whether he was dead or replaced, what would be the point of saying he was dead if he clearly wasn't?

Wouldn't it seem they would almost have to have replaced him for the clues to have any meaning?

With respect, what you're doing here, as many are (and not just in PID these days), is taking as established the still-spurious idea that '...the Beatles spend three years putting "Paul Is Dead" clues in their records'.
The chief reason this is a highly spurious idea is that the clues are actually being put in by those looking for them.
Who could deny this? This entire board is about that activity and clues have now been put in to justify the most outlandish claims.


Having said that, I actually do think that there was some of this going on from the fabs.
But, as per McCartney's one or two lines of criticism of John Lennon on the "Ram" album, it's not reasonable to assume that McCartney was lying when he claimed that Lennon saw the whole album as being about him when it wasn't.
There was a movie, 'Blow Up' by Antonioni that came out at the time which explores this very idea artfully. And there's no doubt that it was one of the big influential movies of the period so it's safe to assume a certain presence of the idea.
Similarly, among the things going on around the band that they used creatively, I do think there was a certain recurrent subject of death, being as both writing principals had been devastated by the deaths of their mothers and, to quite some degree, as they have themselves said, were fired into their ambition by it, if just to avoid thinking about it. That it comes through is understandable.

I've also no doubt that there was a general humourous thing around at the time in ALL of the bands about regular reports that one of them had died. People assume this to have been a Beatle exclusive but there are threads of reported-death throughout the history of many of the contemporary acts, backgrounded by more records by Buddy Holly, for example, emerging after his death than before.
That they may have played with this theme is not an untenable idea.
What is untenable is that clues 'found' later were not placed by the finders.
That is especially true of everything found during the 'web period' of PID.
Now we have 'evidence' of, well, you name something we haven't had 'evidence' for.

McCartney and Montauk? Seen it.
McCartney as Satan? Regular as clockwork
McCartney and The NWO? Bored by it.
McCartney as secret author of The Bible? Any day now



What is REALLY boring though is to see someone who expressed their opinion after consideration of PID/PWR dismissed as being 'with eyes closed'.
I've no time for that kind of dismissal, considering that the evidence stacking up against a quote 'normal, reasonable' view on the matter is limited to spurious ideas assumed-as-established-fact in order to justify more extreme ideas.
As I've said before, it;s fun to engage in a 'let's pretend' game with all of this but the fun runs out when fanatical impulses overcome the game.
I can't help thinking back to a few years ago when I was worried, here, that the extreme ideas being forced into PID by those holding the ideas external to PID was part of some kind of movement of infiltration by extremists.
We've now seen this play out LARGE on the public stage

It just sort of y'know, Comes Together all at once

Makes you wonder the meaning to War is Over (if YOU want it)





My God! Look at that, at the beginning of Strawberry Fields it goes from 4 Beatles to just Paul and Ringo, but John appears TWICE.

[beatlas231]

You know something, you're Right. He isn't Dead.

[beatlas231]

Do you guys even listen to "Bill's" relevant music? I think it's time to, or atleast Google the lyrics to get a grip on the Real Reality..

[beatlas231]

Feb 12, 2017 5:17:55 GMT -5 beatlas231 said:

You know something, you're Right. He isn't Dead.

That's also the same interview where Ringo says "I knew you before; I thought you were dead"

[Jude]

Feb 12, 2017 6:23:49 GMT -5 beatlas231 said:

Feb 12, 2017 5:17:55 GMT -5 beatlas231 said:

You know something, you're Right. He isn't Dead.

That's also the same interview where Ringo says "I knew you before; I thought you were dead"

Do you have anything to offer in this thread other than video links? Any way of countering the photo and video evidence presented by cyndaquillfire35? I'm with delysid--it's frustrating, as someone who wants PID to be true because it's such a great story, to be treated to flippant or dismissive responses from the forum moderators and board regulars when presenting evidence to the contrary. It's one of the reasons I rarely visit anymore, let alone post.

B will remember how sold I was on PID. That's not the case anymore, although I still keep an open mind about it. No matter what, I'll always think Paul is as shady an oak tree --most normal aging rockstars don't release songs with titles like 444 and 222 and call themselves the 'King of Cosmania'. I'm just not convinced that Paul was ever replaced, even if his voice is unrecognizable from what it was even 20 years ago. There are just too many bodily characteristics that match up perfectly with pre-1967 Paul.

[Deleted]

lol



www.runyonsway.net/Homer%20Price/02.%20THE%20COSMIC%20COMIC.doc