|
Post by Goldfinger on Oct 19, 2004 12:01:04 GMT -5
Seriously, I mean Paul Bearer thinks it's a spoof, too and he's friggin' involved in what's practically a spoof of itself now. That is so cool how you got the words to link to the other forum. I like that. **edited to remove hotlink. Please do not hotlink to 60IF from this forum. Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by Goldfinger on Oct 7, 2004 12:26:00 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Goldfinger on Sept 30, 2004 11:40:33 GMT -5
Matchbox, are you paying attention? Thanks Morph! The unretouched photo of Faul contained in the Sgt Pepper CD booklet is one of the few unairbrushed, unmanipulated, unstretched genuine photos we have of Paul's impostor. I think it ought to be used as the foundation for any comparison between Paul and his replacement. There's nothing to be ashamed about being fooled. Most people were (and still are) under the false impression that these guys are one and the same. Even if some of you don't see it at the moment, if you keep studying the evidence, it will come to you. You just have to be brave enough to believe what you are seeing. Bye for now. AYE! That last paragraph says this board is open to discussion which is a nice change from the 60IF standard. It also states that people's work is to be respected. I don't see how accusing people of doctoring or manipulating photos shows respect. Matchbox's fades are just as valid as any other. Anyone here is able to manipulate the photos they put out here. Without someone at a person's house to verify that the photos are vintage and undoctored, there is no way to tell. I can readily accuse any PIDDER of using doctored photos, but I can't prove it, just as you can't prove anything about Matchbox. Let's respect each other's views and work as was intended without making rash accusations. By the way, the Sgt Pepper CD work is the worst work I have ever seen. It looks like my 8 year old did it with safety sissors and Elmer's paste. Parts of the hair are chopped off - it's terrible.
|
|
|
Post by Goldfinger on Sept 28, 2004 13:42:52 GMT -5
You no like? ? ? [glow=red,2,300] KEEP IT![/glow] The truth hurts sometimes.
|
|
|
Post by Goldfinger on Sept 30, 2004 14:49:53 GMT -5
Actually, Paul's son was replaced with Faul's son.
|
|
|
Post by Goldfinger on Sept 27, 2004 15:22:48 GMT -5
Funny, but I spent the whole weekend hearing various people tell me that my 20 month old son looks just like me. And the truth is, he does. We even have the same walk. This is not true with my first son. It is undeniable that kids can show many characteristics of the parents and are definitely comparable.
|
|
|
Post by Goldfinger on Oct 25, 2004 15:48:19 GMT -5
Lennon denied the clues publicly. The people who believe the clues were made up, not there and/or a publicity stunt, well, some of them have come forward as in the case with Tom Zarski. Let me tell you if Tom Zarski didn't discover the clues someone else surely would have. The people who believe the clues are real and left by Lennon, namely us on this board and others, you would never hear their opinion voiced anywhere on any news publication, etc., etc. How can you not see the MANY clues that are there? This goes WAY beyond coincidence my friend. 1. Lennon publicly denied the PID clues, not that he put hidden things into his songs. Just look at "fish and finger pie" in Penny Lane. They also put drug references in the songs. Also, he liked to screw around with people who would over analyze lyrics in Beatle tunes. 2. These just weren't people who believed them to be made up or a publicity stunt, they are the ones who made them up and knew they were false. Also, the sheer number of clues does not make them true. If someone makes up 100 clues then they are 100 false clues. Just because they are MANY, doesn't make them right. Who would have believed it was really Lennon without him stating it publicly? If he stated it publicly he could lose his life. And you wanna know something? Your whole idea of Lennon sending a letter to news agencies, etc. to tell the whole story would be just another "clue" in this day because noone would have believed it back then or today and YOU would be denying it yourself to this day. ***edited to remove lengthy discussion of Watergate and JFK conspiracies.***
Bug, this is not the first time we've had this discussion.
It's not even the first time today we've had it.
If you want to have those conversations, you need to have them at a different forum.
Short and simple: one more time, and your ticket will be punched.
|
|
|
Post by Goldfinger on Oct 25, 2004 11:08:13 GMT -5
So there are NO clues in Rev9? They were put there by somebody else I suppose? NONE of his lyrics are clue worthy? Forget it I give up. Do you not read anything I put up? Yes, John did write some crazy stuff and put them in songs, but it was not about PID. It was to the "f*ckers" to let them "work on it." People can interpret lyrics many different ways. If one goes in predetermined to find clues about Paul being dead. then that is how they will be interpreted.
|
|
|
Post by Goldfinger on Oct 25, 2004 10:55:31 GMT -5
So, an unsubstantiated story written after the PID stuff already broke by a guy trying to sell books. If you believe that, then I will sell you a story that I actually knew that the Red Sox were going to come back against the Yankees from a 0-3 deficit a week before the playoffs even started. (Try to make that political.) Of course I didn't tell anybody until after it happened.
|
|
|
Post by Goldfinger on Oct 22, 2004 15:35:30 GMT -5
So what people tell me outweighs what I see and hear. Anyway, I thought the premise of the thread was "how" this could have been accomplished...consider it an opportunity for speculation. They have ears but can not hear. I did a lot of research on PID before I found 60IF. The thing that intrigued me most about 60IF is that it was based on a document giving detailed information as to what happened and it had the photo comparisons. It was not based on the silly clues. You are right, the topic was about how this could be accomplished, it was not about photo or voice comparisons. I addressed the issue of how they could keep all these people quiet for 40 years. In other words, I dealt with the likelyhood that the details would be leaked and how they would have been leaked. I was not dealing in any way with photo and voice comparisons. And yes, when the people originally involved with the PID story that came out in the fall of 1969 admit to making up the clues and that they knew the story was false, I will certainly give that more credence than I would feelings of people who had nothing to do with it. No matter what the photo or voice evidence shows, it does not validate these "clues" and does not prove that Lennon put them there. I mean if these guys made up the clue about the walrus being a symbol of death in 1969, why would John use it as a clue in 1967? Why would the replacement, who is part of the cover-up, who is benefiting financiallly, and the other beatles resent agree to participate in putting clues on album covers showing him to be a fraud? It makes no sense.
|
|
|
Post by Goldfinger on Oct 22, 2004 14:04:51 GMT -5
Clues alone would have never been enough to convince me Paul was dead. It's the PHYSICAL evidence, i.e. the head shape, the eye distance, the nose, the height, the singing voice, etc. that opened my eyes. Like many on this board, I was a Beatles' fan for years and never believed Paul was dead. Now that I have seen enough physical evidence, the clues actually make sense now and I know why Lennon and everyone left so many. Did you not see? The "clues" were made up. Lennon didn't leave any. It was concocted by these people in the mid-west. They are real people. They admitted it was a joke, a fraud. This thread questioned the cover-up and how nothing leaked out, not about photo comparisons. My whole point was that if Lennon wanted to get this information out, he could have done it quickly, directly with more detail and documentation that could have been verified. Back in the late '60s and early '70s, there was a program called the Wild, Wild West. James West would usually get caught by the bad guys who would naturally want to kill him. But to do so, they would always come up with some elaborate plan to slowly do away with him. It would involve something like a record playing a song, and when the record finished the arm would pull a string that would light a match which would then swing over and light a fuse to a rocket that West was tied to. The rocket was supposed to light and send him shooting out a window over some cliff. It would take so long, he naturally had time to escape. I always thought it was crazy. Why all these crazy elaborate plans; why not just shoot the guy between the eyes and be done with it. This cover-up and "clues" foolishness are like the plans in the Wild, Wild West. Overly elaborate, complicated and melodramatic. Why go through all the trouble of doing these clues when the direct approach would be so much more efficient getting more bang for the buck at the same time being less risky. Especially when the replacement, who was benefiting so much from imitating paul, would have had to be involved in ratting on himself.
|
|
|
Post by Goldfinger on Oct 22, 2004 9:57:21 GMT -5
Here is a piece written by "Tom", the very first caller to Russell Gibb at the radio station WKNR. www.keener13.com/zarski.htmNo leak here.
|
|
|
Post by Goldfinger on Oct 22, 2004 8:22:50 GMT -5
I submit you have NO way of knowing whether or not this is true... Where is it then? What is the definitive story answering the questions above? Where are the books about it based on an actual document rather than vague clues? Where is the document? Here is the origin: "Illinois University's student newspaper, the Northern Star, ran an article in the September 23, 1969, edition entitled "Clues Hint at Possible Beatle Death". The earliest piece, however, was by Tim Harper, whose article appeared in the college newspaper of Drake University in Des Moines, Iowa, on September 17, 1969. Once the rumor became widespread Harper achieved some notoriety for being the first to put all of the clues together. The Des Moines Register reported that Harper had been paid for interviews in several states and that WLS-TV in Chicago had even chartered a private plane for him so that he could appear on their morning talk show. And he didn't even own any of the Beatles' albums![2] "It was just a joke," he said. "I was the first one to put it all together. I knew when I wrote the story that it wasn't true."Perhaps the article that did the most to propel the "Paul is dead" rumor was one written by a University of Michigan student named Frad LaBour. LaBour's article appeared in the October 14, 1969, edition of the Michigan Daily, the University of Michigan's newspaper, just two days after Tom's call to Russ Gibb. Set with the task of writing a review of Abbey Road, LaBour wrote a tongue-in-cheek obituary of the Beatles. Even though it was not the first article about Paul's rumored death, LaBour's article in the was important because it fleshed out several aspects of the story. Many of the elements of the rumor that have been repeated countless times were products of LaBour's imagination. He created the identity of Paul's replacement, William Campbell, and he asserted the walrus was an image of death, stating "'Walrus' is greek for corpse.”
|
|
|
Post by Goldfinger on Oct 22, 2004 8:11:29 GMT -5
An accidental car wreck. SIGH... yes it was leaked. I'm listening to one of the first leaks right now. The DJ was immediatly fired. Go to commercial & poof... there's a new DJ! PID is not mentioned again. There are also several accounts of this in printed articles & such. Etc Etc. I would like to hear this. Where did the leak come from? What articles? What was the name of the DJ? What radio station? What was the date of the broadcast? He died in an accidental car wreck. Kind of vague and skimpy on details. Unbelievable. Nothing? The obvious differences in appearance & voice & mannerisms, & talent etc etc are nothing. Well whatever......................................... We were talking of leaks. Differences in appearance and voice are observations, it is not from a leak. I have never heard of an source of the PID story other than "clues" from songs or album covers.
|
|
|
Post by Goldfinger on Oct 21, 2004 15:51:34 GMT -5
sigh, no it wasn't.
There were a bunch of made up "clues" that turned into a story over time. The "clues" are open to interpretation. Then there are photo comparisons that some think show a difference.
Where is the leak of the actual story.
How did he die? In a car crash, kidnapped, explosive diahrea?
When did he die? November 9th, September 11th, September 12th, 1966, January 1967? Was it "stupid bloody Teusday", or "Wednesday morning at 5:00?"
Who did it? Was it an accident while watching "lovely Rita", or the KKK, or MI5 or the illuminati?
It's hard to say the story was leaked when the story changes depending on what site you visit and how different people interpret different "clues." Can you say the actual story has leaked because someone thinks he hears "turn me on dead man" when playing a record backwards or someone sees a walrus when holding a mirror at an odd angle on a record album cover? You have a bunch of different stories and since only one can be right, then most are wrong. And if most are wrong then they can all be wrong. There has been no definitive story leaked; just a bunch of bits of information from obscure "clues" that can be interpreted many different ways, and most of which were made up by college kids and radio jocks.
Well, then, some say the clues are not important because they were put out there for misinformation to distract people from examining photos. So now we have photo comparisions and fades. That is not a leak; that's just looking at pictures that were already in the public domain.
The only thing we have that could be called a leak of a definite story is the 60IF document. There at least we have dates and details of the death and so forth. But do we believe that? Where is this document? Why have we not even seen a picture of it?
The point is that there has been no leak of the actual story with hard facts that can be investigated. That could have easily been done had somebody wanted to. All we have is interpretation of "clues" that some think indicate that Paul is dead. Beyond that, there is nothing.
|
|
|
Post by Goldfinger on Oct 21, 2004 14:27:08 GMT -5
And not just those, but also the replacement's friends and family.
It would have been too easy for someone to leak everything if they had desired. Put yourself in the shoes of one of the Beatles or a close friend or associate of Paul.
You get a typewriter, or in later years, a word processor. You simply type out what happened in detail such as:
1. Date Paul died 2. Where Paul is buried 3. The actual name of the replacement 4. The place the replacement came from 5. School replacement attended 6. Place where replacement worked 7. Details of Paul's death 8. When and where the plastic surgeries were performed 9. The name of the doctor who did the surgeries 10. Who sang which songs after Paul's death 11. Who wrote Paul's songs 12. The names of the people who organized the cover-up
This letter could be sent to radio stations, universities, underground newspapers, major media outlets and any anti-establishment groups along with any photos or other documentation. Naturally, you would not sign your name so that the "powers that be" would not know who sent it. The "powers that be" could not kill everybody involved, which would have been hundreds of people.
This would be much more efficient than putting a lot of vague clues in your songs and on album covers which are much more traceable to the one who wrote the song or designed the album cover. Such a letter with documentation would be verifiable and give people some hard information that could be investigated by reporters and/or private investigators.
In addition, you would figure there would be death bed confessions by people with nothing to lose and people selling stories to tabloids for great deals of money. The bottom line is it would have been leaked.
|
|
|
Post by Goldfinger on Nov 11, 2004 9:17:29 GMT -5
ah, yes! But, is it the original Alvin singing? My ears say, no. It must be Fal(vin). Actually, Mr. Bagdasarian depicted there on the cover looks a bit like Paul.... Hmmmmm....could it be............entered the cartoon dimension........ ROFL!!! You may be on to something. We need our thech friends to do some fades to see if things line up.
|
|
|
Post by Goldfinger on Nov 10, 2004 9:49:09 GMT -5
So, do you think Selmer, Yamaha, Schilke, or Getzen would manufacture those? Piccollo trumpets would seem large and low by comparison..... Actually, it was Benge.
|
|
|
Post by Goldfinger on Nov 9, 2004 8:28:11 GMT -5
Agreed. Dizzy Gillespie was well known for his exceptionally elastic cheeks. Chipmunks everywhere saught to emulate his storage capacity. True, but it was eventually declared a failure because the shape of the little mouths and the position of the teeth made it impossible for them to play the little trumpets.
|
|
|
Post by Goldfinger on Nov 8, 2004 11:33:04 GMT -5
Are these trumpet players the same? Yes, they are. They appear different because faces are elastic and can change depending on what the muscles are doing.
|
|
|
Post by Goldfinger on Nov 8, 2004 9:52:28 GMT -5
There are these things in the face called muscles. They expand and contract and you can move them voluntarily! They are not hard and fixed. There are other parts to the face including skin, fat and cartilage. The skin and fat are elastic and can be stretched many different ways. Cartilage, while hard, is more elastic than bone. Therefore, the face can change shapes depending how muscles move.
|
|
|
Post by Goldfinger on Nov 5, 2004 12:37:50 GMT -5
That's mostly an opinion put forth by you. I disagree. Actually, my opinion was just the opposite. I find the clues important which is why I spent so much time on another thread debunking them. It was PWRs responding to my debunking of the clues that suddenly were saying that the clues weren't important because they were misinfomation designed to confuse the masses. It was them who said the important information was the photographs and voice, not the clues. It hasn't been explored in any "scientific" way here, the only thing we have at our disposal is what we hear with our own ears. Voice print analysis is what you are refering to perhaps, I seem to have lost my machine in my last move... Exactly!! Not scientific. The only thing we have at our disposal is our own ears which are at the mercy of our own feelings and preconceptions along with the fact that what we hear on records is affected by the types of recording equipment used and the studio effects that were used by the recording engineers. If all you have is your ears, then the only way you could do a real comparison is if you were there in person listening to Paul sing pre '67 and post '66. If you're married, I hope your wife doesn't know you think feelings and beliefs are useless.. Yes, I am married and feelings and beliefs are useless in proving that a man like Paul has been replaced. Feelings and beliefs are important in relationships both personal and spiritual. But, of course, that is not what we were discussing.
|
|
|
Post by Goldfinger on Nov 4, 2004 12:55:04 GMT -5
Let's see.
Fades don't prove anything.
Clues are not really important.
Voice comparisons - meaningless due to the many effects used by studios and the differences in recording equipment.
What is left? Feelings and beliefs.
Subjective and worthless.
|
|
|
Post by Goldfinger on Nov 2, 2004 23:08:09 GMT -5
Thanks...? ;D You don't match it up by the pupils. Highness can change that. ;D You always match it up by the eyes. I didn't purposely "make Paul's head bigger in proportion". It just fell into place that way, like it always does when I make a fade with the pictures at the same angle. Pupils? They fricken change in size depending on the amount of light. FP is right on target.
|
|
|
Post by Goldfinger on Nov 2, 2004 17:37:34 GMT -5
WHAT? We're not comparing the beards, we're comparing the other features that are NOT drawn.
|
|