|
Post by B on Feb 18, 2009 14:04:10 GMT -5
Yes it is. There are some who feel that neither the real Paul nor the real Ringo are shown in that picture, and I tend to agree.
|
|
|
Post by mrshears on Feb 18, 2009 14:20:00 GMT -5
Yes it is. There are some who feel that neither the real Paul nor the real Ringo are shown in that picture, and I tend to agree. you are not alone
|
|
Jude
Hard Day's Night
Acting Naturally
Posts: 34
|
Post by Jude on Feb 18, 2009 14:59:58 GMT -5
(im not gay but) lets get one thing straight, faul will never be as good looking as paul. Of course! He has hideous teeth, practices poor hygiene, and worst of all looks nothing, NOTHING like Paul! How could anyone be fooled by such an ugly, skinny, obviously gay man?!
|
|
|
Post by mrshears on Feb 18, 2009 15:12:58 GMT -5
(im not gay but) lets get one thing straight, faul will never be as good looking as paul. Of course! He has hideous teeth, practices poor hygiene, and worst of all looks nothing, NOTHING like Paul! How could anyone be fooled by such an ugly, skinny, obviously gay man?! i would love to have faul's autograph though.
|
|
|
Post by B on Feb 18, 2009 17:50:53 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by thisone on Feb 18, 2009 18:18:59 GMT -5
That's Tara with a fake plastic - skirt??. p/s I just did a search for tara browne and it threw up a post by P(D)enny that's not showing in the thread - there are broken URL's in the post. Denny says possibly Tara Browne at the back on the boat!
|
|
|
Post by JoJo on Feb 18, 2009 18:56:25 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by B on Feb 18, 2009 19:09:56 GMT -5
this one:
|
|
|
Post by iameye on Feb 18, 2009 20:42:37 GMT -5
Of course! He has hideous teeth, practices poor hygiene, and worst of all looks nothing, NOTHING like Paul! How could anyone be fooled by such an ugly, skinny, obviously gay man?! i would love to have faul's autograph though. me too!
|
|
|
Post by P(D)enny La(i)ne on Feb 19, 2009 11:49:43 GMT -5
Do I spy a seem where Pepper Paul's face has been attached using crude, 1968 technology?
|
|
dark66horse
Hard Day's Night
Nobody can deny that there's something there...
Posts: 23
|
Post by dark66horse on Feb 19, 2009 13:34:43 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by B on Feb 19, 2009 13:47:05 GMT -5
P(D)enny La(i)ne wrote: "Do I spy a seam where Pepper Paul's face has been attached using crude, 1968 technology?"----------------- I don't see it P(D)enny. I don't think it's been altered. And really, that dude could be anybody.
|
|
|
Post by P(D)enny La(i)ne on Feb 19, 2009 14:00:13 GMT -5
P(D)enny La(i)ne wrote: "Do I spy a seam where Pepper Paul's face has been attached using crude, 1968 technology?"----------------- I don't see it P(D)enny. I don't think it's been altered. And really, that dude could be anybody. I'll try to show you what I mean, B. Here's the untouched crop: In this one, I've colored in the "seam" I'm referring to: And yes, it *could* be anybody, but if this guy was the only "Paul-like fellow" in this photo, I think it's safe to say that we all would have just assumed it was Paul. And as I mentioned earlier in the thread, dark66horse, it's the East River, not the Hudson...
|
|
|
Post by Red Lion on Feb 19, 2009 14:36:37 GMT -5
Not a decent comment on the original photo, just some silly hysterical nonsense in the last 2 pages... I think some people here are getting nervous by this photo... especially after having failed to debunk it as fake
Chill....some people are probably uncomfortable with this pic. Keep in mind though that we have never seen a post 66 pic with more than one Paul in it. That makes this particular photo a bit of an anomaly. Not to say it is not genuine, I hope it is, as the investigation into this mystery would have to take a well needed and hard shift in a new direction. Maybe we can actually make some progress and ditch the PID nonsense which has been a dead end from the very start.
|
|
|
Post by P(D)enny La(i)ne on Feb 19, 2009 14:54:59 GMT -5
Not a decent comment on the original photo, just some silly hysterical nonsense in the last 2 pages... I think some people here are getting nervous by this photo... especially after having failed to debunk it as fakeChill....some people are probably uncomfortable with this pic. Keep in mind though that we have never seen a post 66 pic with more than one Paul in it. That makes this particular photo a bit of an anomaly. Not to say it is not genuine, I hope it is, as the investigation into this mystery would have to take a well needed and hard shift in a new direction. Maybe we can actually make some progress and ditch the PID nonsense which has been a dead end from the very start. I'm not saying it's not genuine either. I just want to be as certain as possible that it IS genuine, and that includes pointing out what I find to be a somewhat questionable "seam" attaching Pepper Paul's face to his head. That "seam" may just be a shadow, but it's a pretty linear shadow, and it just happens to fall in the exact spot one would expect to see a "seam" if his face had been attached via some sort of primitive trickery. But even if it turns out that Pepper Paul is faked (which again, I'm NOT certain of), that doesn't mean that we don't still have a photo with TWO Pauls. And I just want to go on record here saying that I would LOVE for this photo to be real, having always been a proponent of multiple Pauls, and having suggested several times that JPM stuck around this world AT LEAST until Ram, and most likely a lot later than that. But dark66horse, you can't just throw a photo like this in our faces and expect us to do nothing in the way of attempting to verify it. If this really is the grail we've been waiting for, then we should be as certain as possible of its integrity. With that in mind, what does everyone think of the seam that I pointed out?
|
|
|
Post by B on Feb 19, 2009 15:23:52 GMT -5
I think that it is just a photographic quirk. I see no reason to believe that anyone would have motive to alter the image of someone who could be, as I have already said, just about anybody. I wonder which Paul is between Ron Kass and John in the top photo?
|
|
dark66horse
Hard Day's Night
Nobody can deny that there's something there...
Posts: 23
|
Post by dark66horse on Feb 19, 2009 15:27:28 GMT -5
And as I mentioned earlier in the thread, dark66horse, it's the East River, not the Hudson...[/quote] so the "holy grail" yacht picture was taken in the East River in New York City ...but the Apple yacht trip mentioned in the article took place in California... Can someone explain?
|
|
|
Post by P(D)enny La(i)ne on Feb 19, 2009 15:36:53 GMT -5
And as I mentioned earlier in the thread, dark66horse, it's the East River, not the Hudson... so the "holy grail" yacht picture was taken in the East River in New York City...but the Apple yacht trip mentioned in the article took place in California...
Can someone explain? Maybe that was somebody's subtle way of telling us to examine the photo more closely.
|
|
|
Post by Red Lion on Feb 19, 2009 15:37:29 GMT -5
With that in mind, what does everyone think of the seam that I pointed out?You have made a nice observation there, but would it make difference if a "Pepper Paul" was shopped into the photo or not? We already have a "Paul" in the center of the pic that appears in several other shots. I think the most important passenger on the boat is the guy on the left who looks like JPM. Was that guy shopped in? And if not was it in fact the original?
|
|
|
Post by eyeseeyou on Feb 19, 2009 16:44:31 GMT -5
"But dark66horse, you can't just throw a photo like this in our faces and expect us to do nothing in the way of attempting to verify it. If this really is the grail we've been waiting for, then we should be as certain as possible of its integrity".
Remember I posted the full shot of the same photo from another source. JoJo has found it in a Beatles magazine now... Stick your finger in it's mouth let it bite you it is real !
|
|
|
Post by mommybird on Feb 19, 2009 17:25:37 GMT -5
I have done my best to stay out of this, but I have a valid question. If it is Paul, why would he allow himself to be photographed ? He was out of the scene for a few years at that point. If he wanted out of the madness & faded behind the scenes, why would he allow his photo to be taken with his replacement ? I'm sure that they wanted a smooth transition, and they did NOT want any questions asked about the validity of Faul's identity. If it was a shot meant only for those involved, why would it be in a Beatle Magazine ? It's as if it was done on purpose as an inside joke. 3 Paul's in one shot, hahaha. But only those involved would get it. Releasing it in a Beatle Magazine would risk raising uncomfortable questions. It makes no sense to me.
|
|
|
Post by mommybird on Feb 19, 2009 17:28:02 GMT -5
Jo, can you please tell me the issue & date of that Beatle Monthly and when it was released. I've always had trouble accessing your "shoebox". Thank you.
|
|
|
Post by DarkHorse on Feb 19, 2009 17:46:01 GMT -5
Let me add to this by saying that if it were Paul there on the left, why would he be wearing a mop top haircut of all things?...where it would be easier for him to be recognized?
|
|
|
Post by P(D)enny La(i)ne on Feb 19, 2009 17:48:40 GMT -5
"But dark66horse, you can't just throw a photo like this in our faces and expect us to do nothing in the way of attempting to verify it. If this really is the grail we've been waiting for, then we should be as certain as possible of its integrity". Remember I posted the full shot of the same photo from another source. JoJo has found it in a Beatles magazine now... Stick your finger in it's mouth let it bite you it is real ! If you'd read everything else that I posted, you'd know that I'm suggesting that it might have been doctored in 1968 for the original publishing. I'm NOT suggesting that it's been manipulated AFTER it was published.
|
|
|
Post by mommybird on Feb 19, 2009 18:05:06 GMT -5
I know. I'm not questioning what you said. That's what I was trying to get at in my post. I can't figure out WHY they would do that, for what purpose ?
|
|