|
Post by truthseeker on Jun 20, 2011 18:57:02 GMT -5
Try being open to other theories besides your own because yours is kinda messed up. That statement is hypocritical. You want me to be open to other theories then claim mine are messed up. Why don't you take your own advice and be open to my theories? And if they are messed up, then please explain why. Paul is dead.
|
|
|
Post by truthseeker on Jun 20, 2011 17:45:57 GMT -5
You haven't scaled those two pics properly. You have deliberately made the head on the right smaller. You are trying to fool people in your desperation. You have failed. I have done it properly - Lol!! ;D And we can see that the pic on the right of Paul has the thinner looking head and face. But what did thewalruswaspaul claim? Hmmmm. Thewalruswaspaul creates comps that are not only dishonest - making one photo smaller in order to try and fit his claim - but it actually contradicts his own statements that Paul's head was rounder. We can all see that thewalrusispaul cannot answer my questions, explain himself or refute my points. He just ignores what I post and tries to change the subject. I am debating alone. He cannot beat me, and he knows it. I am too clever and I have truth on my side. This thread is a total failure. "Disproving Doubleback Fake Paul"? He couldn't even prove Faul had a longer head. Paul is dead. R.I.P
|
|
|
Post by truthseeker on Jun 20, 2011 14:44:39 GMT -5
Your statement was quite clear. You claim that Faul has a longer head than Paul - Faul therefore having the greater length of the two heads. Now, I refer you back to my comp, showing that the eyeballs, nostril, upper lip and bottom of the chin align - I therefore ask you again - If Faul has a longer head than Paul, how can the eyeballs and chin align in those two photos? If his head was longer, as you claim, then they wouldn't align as well as they do in my comp. Now, please explain this and support your claim with some actual evidence. Then please explain this - ok well the picture on the right has his mouth open, wheras the one on the right dosent, so to me it looked rather longer.So, Faul's head is only longer than Paul's when his mouth is open? Hmmmm. I hope you can appreciate what your statement suggests as to your reasoning and it's consequent absurdity? Anyway, let us continue. You have claimed - i beleive that faul had the long head You made a clear statement, as we can all see. Your statement says that Faul had a longer head than Paul - not that 'Faul has a long head when his mouth is open'. So - you need to clarify what you are claiming here, because at the moment your position is rather muddled and confused. So, thewalruswaspaul, which is it? A. Faul has a longer head than Paul did, period. Or - B. Faul only has a longer head than Paul did when he has his mouth open and Paul doesn't. Please state which it is. You claimed: I have previously presented the following comp, showing that the eyeballs and chin align, suggesting that the faces are, infact, the same length - Now, thewalruswaspaul, despite repeated requests you have failed to explain the reason as to how the heads appear to be the same length if Faul has the longer head. Do you now concede that the evidence I have presented presents a more credible case that they are the same length than your case that one head is longer than the other? If you do not, then kindly present your evidence - which so far you have not done. If you cannot do so, then your claim that Faul had a longer head than Paul can be dismissed. Let us return to your statement - The head on the right, in the photo above, looks longer and thinner than the rounder face in the photo on the left. Do you therefore claim that the pic on the right is Faul? If not, then you are contradicting your whole argument that Faul has the longer looking head and thinner looking face. So please explain yourself to the forum members, because at the moment your case is rather falling apart.
|
|
|
Post by truthseeker on Jun 20, 2011 14:01:17 GMT -5
seeker - I'm guessing there are AT LEAST a few here that are way ahead of you when it comes to certain things. Well, I am not so sure about that lol! Thank you, I may try that.
|
|
|
Post by truthseeker on Jun 20, 2011 13:59:56 GMT -5
see you dont want to answer that one do u I'll explain in my own good time, thank you very much. I am in the know about a lot of things. And you can't spell 'believe'. Paul is dead.
|
|
|
Post by truthseeker on Jun 20, 2011 8:15:18 GMT -5
first of all my qoute meant he has a long head, just to clear that up. Paul had a rounder head. Your statement was quite clear. You claim that Faul has a longer head than Paul - Faul therefore having the greater length of the two heads. Now, I refer you back to my comp, showing that the eyeballs, nostril, upper lip and bottom of the chin align - I therefore ask you again - If Faul has a longer head than Paul, how can the eyeballs and chin align in those two photos? If his head was longer, as you claim, then they wouldn't align as well as they do in my comp. Now, please explain this and support your claim with some actual evidence. Then please explain this -
|
|
|
Post by truthseeker on Jun 19, 2011 16:38:56 GMT -5
@ truthseeker ok i beleive the one on the left is Paul, and the one on the right could be paul OR Faul. Now, i beleive that faul had the long head, so im gonna say its faul. now, who are these two?? You believe Faul "had" the long head? Past tense? So he now has a round head? How does that work, exactly? Or are you saying Faul is dead? Anyway, let's forget this rather confusing statement. Ok. That is the starting point for your position that Doubleback Fake Paul doesn't exist, and where I will now begin to examine and probe the credibility of your argument. I have now noted this "faul had the long head" claim.Now - I refer you to my comp again. You are claiming - by reason of your statement I previously quoted - that the person in the pic on the right has the longer head. We would all be thrilled, I'm sure, if you could back up that statement with some actual substance. Paul is dead.
|
|
|
Post by truthseeker on Jun 19, 2011 11:38:53 GMT -5
Total, absolute refusal to accept any criticism or corrections to your theory..... Oh ya, that will get you far I'm pointing out facts I believe to be true. You are the one refusing to consider them or accept corrections to your preconceptions of Faul. That won't get you far, thank you very much. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone. Paul is dead.
|
|
|
Post by truthseeker on Jun 19, 2011 11:27:16 GMT -5
So now according to truthseeker, all these men are paul. Yes all of them because they have [glow=red,2,300][/glow]longer face thinner face and bigger forehead.
|
|
|
Post by truthseeker on Jun 19, 2011 9:26:51 GMT -5
They're all Doubleback Fake Paul. I should know, I'm an expert on him. And that's him. Paul is dead. Uhhhh, no you are not an expert.... far from it. You've got pics of Bill labeled Paul, pics of JPM labeled fake Paul. It's a total mess. It's obvious you cannot tell real Paul from Doubleback Fake Paul. That's why I'm more of an expert on the impostor than most on here. You all seem to believe that just because a photo is from 1965 or 1964 than it has to be Paul because you have been brainwashed by the illuminati controlled media to believe it is him. This goes deeper than any of you here can imagine. You don't know the half of it. So keep believing the lies you are told and believe the media lies while I and others try to uncover the real truth.
|
|
|
Faul
Jun 18, 2011 17:13:46 GMT -5
Post by truthseeker on Jun 18, 2011 17:13:46 GMT -5
puffin's right. your only in it for the hoax. your afraid of being proven wrong which has been done over and over and STILL you wont give up. If i get Proven wrong, ill take it glady and do better and learn from ok? Obviusly ur a dimwit. oh, come on. I prove you wrong every single day, and you don't listen either. Lol!!! ;D That's told that bozo. Thank you. At least one other person has an open mind about there being an impostor.
|
|
|
Post by truthseeker on Jun 18, 2011 17:10:31 GMT -5
ok this is @ dewubbs or watever and everyone else who cant see the multiple faul thing. look. the first 3 are the same. same chin eyebrows and nose. at the end this guy has a bigger like nose and just a diffrent face alltogether. undeniable evidence They're all Doubleback Fake Paul. I should know, I'm an expert on him. And that's him. And the nose isn't any bigger than the others. And he is clearly squinting in the last pic because it's sunny so that's why his eyebrows are shaped differently. And you call me stupid?! Paul is dead.
|
|
|
Faul
Jun 18, 2011 12:08:11 GMT -5
Post by truthseeker on Jun 18, 2011 12:08:11 GMT -5
Most of the regulars here are comfortable with the concept of a replaced Paul due to not only a seemingly changed individual around the beginning of 1967 preceded by a strangely absent Paul for a few months. Well you could have fooled me. I keep posting proof of the impostor and all I get back are people arguing with me, ganging up on me and trying to ridicule my proof. Seems more like a PIA forum than a PWR forum. What is going on here? And Paul was replaced before 1967 as I keep showing, so that's probably why you are confused because you lot don't read what I post properly and think just because a photo is from 1964 or 1965 then it's definately Paul, but it's not. This is deeper than you realise and you have been conditioned to believe Paul was only replaced after 66 and that's not my fault, is it?
|
|
|
Faul
Jun 18, 2011 9:17:56 GMT -5
Post by truthseeker on Jun 18, 2011 9:17:56 GMT -5
Lol!!! How does GN know what lenses were used and the distances Faul is from the camera? He can't. Yet he claims one has a bigger nose than the other?! YIKES! We can all see his hypocrisy. Using one argument to ridicule my proof, yet the same argument he uses somehow doesn't apply to his comps! GN's claims are bogus. He's nothing but a charlatan.
|
|
|
Faul
Jun 18, 2011 8:18:23 GMT -5
Post by truthseeker on Jun 18, 2011 8:18:23 GMT -5
No, dear - Lol at GN contradicting his own claims. If you are going to post photo comps as evidence of an impostor, you can't then try and ridicule other people's comps and claim perspective and lenses disort the features of their comps, but not yours! GOTCHA! lol!!! You have serious problem in your glasses. Those comparisons tell that eyes distance and nose length DONT' CHANGE even with different camera lenses. That's because the photos were taken at different distances from the camera with different lenses. If they were taken at the same distance from the camera, then the nose would get bigger and the eyes distance would change. Do I really have to explain this to you dear? The right answer was easier. Old TKIN members have not missed the exhaustive scientific discussion of early times. So how can you claim a big nose Faul and a small nose Faul? Seems that GN posts comps where perspective and lenses don't alter anything yet when I posts comps, they do! Lol!! ;D ;D We can see who the hoaxer is. lol!
|
|
|
Faul
Jun 18, 2011 7:29:50 GMT -5
Post by truthseeker on Jun 18, 2011 7:29:50 GMT -5
If a double died ( as Cacca truthseeker tells ) they NEVER needed that photo tampering crap I've never said Doubleback Fake Paul died! You are a liar. Stick to claiming the impostor is an old woman and your other crazy theories. I, on the otherhand, am a serious investigator and you are derailing my thread with disinfo. Paul is dead.
|
|
|
Faul
Jun 18, 2011 7:27:37 GMT -5
Post by truthseeker on Jun 18, 2011 7:27:37 GMT -5
The right answer was easier. Old TKIN members have not missed the exhaustive scientific discussion of early times. So how can you claim a big nose Faul and a small nose Faul? Seems that GN posts comps where perspective and lenses don't alter anything yet when I posts comps, they do! Lol!! ;D
|
|
|
Faul
Jun 18, 2011 7:09:27 GMT -5
Post by truthseeker on Jun 18, 2011 7:09:27 GMT -5
For that Cacca truthseeker the real Paul is that on the right. No, dear - Lol at GN contradicting his own claims. If you are going to post photo comps as evidence of an impostor, you can't then try and ridicule other people's comps and claim perspective and lenses disort the features of their comps, but not yours! GOTCHA! lol!!!
|
|
|
Faul
Jun 18, 2011 6:58:42 GMT -5
Post by truthseeker on Jun 18, 2011 6:58:42 GMT -5
A shadow suddenly makes your ear change shape?! Yikes! No shadows here - Paul is dead. here it is. You have Paul (that you labeled) with the designation UNattached and Attached. I didn't label it - you did. I just wanted clarification - was confused. You don't have to be abrasive. It doesn't say that Paul has unattached ears. Why are you twisting things? Paul is labelled on the left (attached), Doubleback Fake Paul on the right (detached). Then underneath there is a comp of both ears showing they are not the same.
|
|
|
Faul
Jun 17, 2011 17:51:47 GMT -5
Post by truthseeker on Jun 17, 2011 17:51:47 GMT -5
No fifty's style hairstyle in sight, and yet the head shapes are still different, lol!!!
|
|
|
Faul
Jun 17, 2011 17:36:15 GMT -5
Post by truthseeker on Jun 17, 2011 17:36:15 GMT -5
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! NOW I know you are a maccafunhouse troll - you gave the "real Paul" all extra the inches of that puffed-up ridiculous 50's hairstyle. Lol!! The hair has nothing to do with the fact that the head is clearly thinner. Otherwise how can the outline of Paul's face fit into the outline of Doubleback Fake Paul's face? I deliberately outlined the sides of the faces, not the hair. Stop trying to twist things. GOTCHA! It is now becoming rather tiring explaining the obvious mistakes in your arguments. I do wish you would open your eyes instead of constantly coming up with ridiculous arguments that I have to spend time dismissing and explaining where you are going wrong. Paul is dead.
|
|
|
Faul
Jun 17, 2011 17:04:27 GMT -5
Post by truthseeker on Jun 17, 2011 17:04:27 GMT -5
I ask 'cause in reply #137 you have an inset from what's labeled 'Paul' -'detached' Then have 'Paul' labeled 'attached' in same post. Is there something wrong with your eyes? Only one real Paul named in those photos.
|
|
|
Faul
Jun 17, 2011 14:25:57 GMT -5
Post by truthseeker on Jun 17, 2011 14:25:57 GMT -5
|
|
|
Faul
Jun 17, 2011 13:55:21 GMT -5
Post by truthseeker on Jun 17, 2011 13:55:21 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by truthseeker on Jun 17, 2011 12:05:21 GMT -5
It seems the Paul who allegedly died was not the first original by that name. It also appears there needed to be multiples of each Beatle. A good look at the many available pictures will show a short Paul, a medium Paul, and at least two taller Pauls, all before 1966. Also, both a short and tall George, a John with a wide nose or narrow. I haven't quite tallied them all up yet. I don't believe you. Please post a short Paul, a medium Paul and a tall Paul so I can show you where you are going wrong. There was only one impostor. Doubleback Fake Paul. I am an expert on him because I have studied this for a long time. I know what I'm talking about, trust me. I saw you post these photos on Mommybird's site. One is Paul and the other is Doubleback Fake Paul. Surely you saw the differences?
|
|