jilli
Hard Day's Night
Posts: 6
|
Post by jilli on Aug 15, 2009 2:21:11 GMT -5
Khan there is a difference between a droopy nose and a hooked one...Faul has a hooked one. You dont get a hooked nose with age.
|
|
|
Post by FP on Aug 15, 2009 2:55:39 GMT -5
Khan there is a difference between a droopy nose and a hooked one...Faul has a hooked one. You dont get a hooked nose with age. Funny how out of all the comparisons he posts, you use the old-age one to say he has a hooked nose. He doesn't have one in the '69/70's comparisons, so why would Faul's nose get hooked over night when it was just fine decades before? Please don't give me the fake nose argument.
|
|
|
Post by eyesbleed on Aug 15, 2009 8:22:21 GMT -5
|
|
Jude
Hard Day's Night
Acting Naturally
Posts: 34
|
Post by Jude on Aug 15, 2009 9:05:43 GMT -5
So Jude, are you now 100% PIA? I'm not saying that there's anything wrong with that. A couple of weeks ago, I seem to recall your saying that you "leaned" PIA. I agreed that I "leaned" the same way. But I'm not certain. You seem to be certain now. Again, I'm not saying that there's anything wrong with that. But then what should we do with all of those old "rockxlight" videos? Correct, I am 100% PIA. There is no conclusive evidence that Paul is dead, so it's not something to really sit on fence about: Paul McCartney lived well past 1966. On the other hand, that doesn't mean he wasn't replaced and all the references to "Bill" found throughout the vast expanse of PID lore give me sufficient reason to believe that there are some dark secrets hiding in the Apple closet. The Rather Unfresh Apple series are entertainment, nothing more, nothing less. I was just exploring the possibility of Paul being dead, and sharing PID clues that I had found on my own. Because the idea of PID still really fascinates me, and I'm really not against PID in any way. It's this pervasive thickheadedness amongst aging PIDers that really bothers me. I would love for someone to step up to the plate and discover something new (like the photo of two Pauls on a boat), but that rarely happens. We're too busy discussing whether "Faul" (and we know beyond a shadow of a doubt that there was a Faul, it is so OMG STUPID to think otherwise) was a gypsy or not to actually do anything meaningful. To put it bluntly, Iamaphoney has done more for the PID cause in the last two years that Nothing is Real has---I hope you agree. Now, eyesbleed: I will not dignify your preemptive threats with any sort of response other than "ban me if it makes you feel better". You'll only prove that you are someone who strikes out in unwarranted anger, not that you are in any way right for it. Those who listen and take others viewpoints into consideration are respected, those who overreact and lord their power abusively over others are generally perceived as mean. Decide who you want to be in this situation.
|
|
Jude
Hard Day's Night
Acting Naturally
Posts: 34
|
Post by Jude on Aug 15, 2009 9:14:18 GMT -5
Hey, don't spoil revolver's party with logic! Don't you know ignorance is bliss? What is this "ignorance is bliss" bullshit Jude?? So are you saying that everybody here & other forums who can clearly see 2 distictly different men are ignorant? ...And your post was somehow smart?? If you want to go join up with the JPM-never-ever-even-had-a-temporary-replacement-crew... go for it, but you better keep your goddamn insults to yourself. I think you should read what I wrote above and put things into perspective. I never he said he never had a replacement---I just don't think that if he did that he isn't the Paul McCartney who says he is Paul McCartney today. And yes, it is ignorant to only pick and choose photos that work to your advantage. You can find photos of "Bill" that look exactly like JPM and vice-versa. For as many times as you've shown pictures where they look like two totally different men, someone at MFH has posted photos that prove the opposite. I think the entire idea of using photo comps to prove a point is incredibly stupid, and I'm far from the only one to think that (there are even those at MFH who think that photo comps are pointless). If thats grounds for being banned, you might as well ban 65if2007, MikeNL, Jarvitronics and a host of other people as well.
|
|
|
Post by eyesbleed on Aug 15, 2009 10:27:55 GMT -5
I think you should read what I wrote above and put things into perspective. I never he said he never had a replacement---I just don't think that if he did that he isn't the Paul McCartney who says he is Paul McCartney today. And yes, it is ignorant to only pick and choose photos that work to your advantage. You can find photos of "Bill" that look exactly like JPM and vice-versa. For as many times as you've shown pictures where they look like two totally different men, someone at MFH has posted photos that prove the opposite. I think the entire idea of using photo comps to prove a point is incredibly stupid, and I'm far from the only one to think that (there are even those at MFH who think that photo comps are pointless). If thats grounds for being banned, you might as well ban 65if2007, MikeNL, Jarvitronics and a host of other people as well. Now there's a wise move.... drag innocent bystanders into your mess when you seem to be the only one posting personal insults.
|
|
Jude
Hard Day's Night
Acting Naturally
Posts: 34
|
Post by Jude on Aug 15, 2009 10:30:42 GMT -5
I think you should read what I wrote above and put things into perspective. I never he said he never had a replacement---I just don't think that if he did that he isn't the Paul McCartney who says he is Paul McCartney today. And yes, it is ignorant to only pick and choose photos that work to your advantage. You can find photos of "Bill" that look exactly like JPM and vice-versa. For as many times as you've shown pictures where they look like two totally different men, someone at MFH has posted photos that prove the opposite. I think the entire idea of using photo comps to prove a point is incredibly stupid, and I'm far from the only one to think that (there are even those at MFH who think that photo comps are pointless). If thats grounds for being banned, you might as well ban 65if2007, MikeNL, Jarvitronics and a host of other people as well. Now there's a wise move.... drag innocent bystanders into your mess when you seem to be the only one posting personal insults. I'm not dragging them into any mess. Aside from you, no one even has even said there is a mess! All I did was attest to the fact that they think photo comps prove nothing, something they've each told me themselves at one point or another with the exception of maybe Jarvitronics (I apologize, Jarv, if I am mistaken). At any rate, the only "personal insult" I issued was saying that revolver was ignorant at how much of a role perspective plays in judging things like height and the size of one's head. The two photos of Paul that he posted are obviously from different angles. I honestly don't see how that is much of an insult anyway. You can call me ignorant of the truth of PID, and I won't be hurt because calling me ignorant OF something isn't the same as calling someone ignorant altogether.
|
|
Jude
Hard Day's Night
Acting Naturally
Posts: 34
|
Post by Jude on Aug 15, 2009 10:42:46 GMT -5
To say that there is a "mess" also implies that I am "in trouble", which means I should be afraid of you, and I'm not. Knowing fully that you are the kind of person who would ban me for saying such a thing, I will say with no qualms whatsoever that I am not afraid of faceless internet people. Life is far too short to let anything that happens on the internet get under your skin. I only wish I could go back in time and give my own self that piece of advice.
|
|
|
Post by revolver on Aug 15, 2009 11:44:38 GMT -5
Well first, you should show that Paul and Paul, and Faul and Faul match up, to show how easy a body fade should be. I can probably grab two head to toe pics of anyone, and chances are, you'll get something that looks like that. It's just a simple example of perspective distortion. When looking up at something, it seems to get smaller the further from you it gets, like looking up at a building. /\ But when looking down on something, the opposite happens. \/ When pics are taken from a better angle, you get something like this: Perhaps Paul's hat gives the optical illusion of additional volume, but clearly Faul's head is significantly larger/wider here as well. Not to mention that they just look like two different people. The reality is that Paul was shorter than Bill, but even when scaled to the same height, their relative head sizes were not the same. If you guys can't see it, well, then follow your bliss.
|
|
Jude
Hard Day's Night
Acting Naturally
Posts: 34
|
Post by Jude on Aug 15, 2009 12:28:09 GMT -5
Well first, you should show that Paul and Paul, and Faul and Faul match up, to show how easy a body fade should be. I can probably grab two head to toe pics of anyone, and chances are, you'll get something that looks like that. It's just a simple example of perspective distortion. When looking up at something, it seems to get smaller the further from you it gets, like looking up at a building. /\ But when looking down on something, the opposite happens. \/ When pics are taken from a better angle, you get something like this: Perhaps Paul's hat gives the optical illusion of additional volume, but clearly Faul's head is significantly larger/wider here as well. Not to mention that they just look like two different people. The reality is that Paul was shorter than Bill, but even when scaled to the same height, their relative head sizes were not the same. If you guys can't see it, well, then follow your bliss. Touché.
|
|
|
Post by eyesbleed on Aug 15, 2009 14:22:30 GMT -5
To say that there is a "mess" also implies that I am "in trouble", which means I should be afraid of you, and I'm not. Knowing fully that you are the kind of person who would ban me for saying such a thing, I will say with no qualms whatsoever that I am not afraid of faceless internet people. Life is far too short to let anything that happens on the internet get under your skin. I only wish I could go back in time and give my own self that piece of advice. My post was what you call a fair warning. That warning was for your benefit so that you don't get banned. If you want to run with it & make it something else, that's up to you. Plus you've been around long enough to know that nobody gets banned around here over one ill-conceived posting.
|
|
Jude
Hard Day's Night
Acting Naturally
Posts: 34
|
Post by Jude on Aug 15, 2009 14:51:02 GMT -5
To say that there is a "mess" also implies that I am "in trouble", which means I should be afraid of you, and I'm not. Knowing fully that you are the kind of person who would ban me for saying such a thing, I will say with no qualms whatsoever that I am not afraid of faceless internet people. Life is far too short to let anything that happens on the internet get under your skin. I only wish I could go back in time and give my own self that piece of advice. My post was what you call a fair warning. That warning was for your benefit so that you don't get banned. If you want to run with it & make it something else, that's up to you. Plus you've been around long enough to know that nobody gets banned around here over one ill-conceived posting. And how does that "fair warning" sound coming from a moderator? It sounds like a threat. I don't like threats, but like I said before I wouldn't mind being banned in the least. I live for greater things than discussing PID.
|
|
jilli
Hard Day's Night
Posts: 6
|
Post by jilli on Aug 17, 2009 0:15:43 GMT -5
bbbchords, eyesbleed posted pictures of Faul and Paul. Paul 1966 no hooked nose. Faul 1967 hooked nose. No droopy old age there.
|
|
|
Post by DarkHorse on Aug 17, 2009 13:05:15 GMT -5
And how does that "fair warning" sound coming from a moderator? It sounds like a threat. I don't like threats, but like I said before I wouldn't mind being banned in the least. I live for greater things than discussing PID. It's a warning. If you want to make it a "threat" that is your business. But it's eyesbleed job(like all mods) to warn members when they get out of line. If anything this forum is too lenient.
|
|
Jude
Hard Day's Night
Acting Naturally
Posts: 34
|
Post by Jude on Aug 17, 2009 13:37:36 GMT -5
bbbchords, eyesbleed posted pictures of Faul and Paul. Paul 1966 no hooked nose. Faul 1967 hooked nose. No droopy old age there. Is that so? 1964 1967 1966 1967
|
|
jilli
Hard Day's Night
Posts: 6
|
Post by jilli on Aug 17, 2009 15:41:11 GMT -5
Jude u say apples, I say oranges. U can post pictures till u are blue in the face, it wont change my mind about Paul/Faul. Its just not the same guy.
|
|
|
Post by JoJo on Aug 17, 2009 16:31:25 GMT -5
So.. Just to get up to speed here, you are no longer vociferously defending IAAP like you were when people here were calling him out, and in fact declare it all to be "bullshit"?
What happened? Must be an interesting story...
Mike, comments?
|
|
|
Post by 8749 on Aug 17, 2009 17:17:07 GMT -5
Well, everyone, in addition to the Paul research, I've been looking into the "terrible twos": a developmental stage of children that usually begins sometime in the toddler years. Why? Because Jude seems to be stuck there. In an About.com Pediatrics article, they give parents pointers on how to cope with a child who "isn't trying to be defiant or rebellious on purpose. He is just trying to express his growing independence and doesn't have the language skills to easily express his needs": 1.) have a regular routine for meals, naps, bedtime, etc. and try to stick to them each day. 2.) offer limited choices only, like 'would you like apples or oranges for your snack' and not just 'what do you want for your snack.' This helps your toddler feel like he is making some decisions and has power over things, but he isn't able to choose unacceptable alternatives. 3.) learn to set limits about things and don't be surprised when your toddler tries to test those limits to see what he can get away with. 4.) don't give in to tantrums. 5.) begin to use time-out and taking away privileges as discipline techniques. 6.) provide your toddler with a safe environment that is well childproofed to explore and play in. It really isn't fair that your toddler should get in trouble for playing with something he isn't supposed to if you left it within reach.
***We can all learn.***
|
|
|
Post by eyesbleed on Aug 17, 2009 21:44:53 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by MikeNL on Aug 17, 2009 21:56:31 GMT -5
So.. Just to get up to speed here, you are no longer vociferously defending IAAP like you were when people here were calling him out, and in fact declare it all to be "bullshit"? What happened? Must be an interesting story... Mike, comments? maybe tomorrow. i'm tired now.
|
|
Jude
Hard Day's Night
Acting Naturally
Posts: 34
|
Post by Jude on Aug 18, 2009 9:48:03 GMT -5
So.. Just to get up to speed here, you are no longer vociferously defending IAAP like you were when people here were calling him out, and in fact declare it all to be "bullshit"? What happened? Must be an interesting story... Mike, comments? There came a point when I realized that the person or people that is behind Iamaphoney---even if they really are on to something big---are going about it the wrong way. If he really wants to prepare the world for a "revelation" there are better ways to do it than with viral videos, memorabilia-filled briefcases placed in remote locations and video/audio clips that have been removed from their proper context. Iamaphoney has given us fascinating clues and has given Beatles conspiracy theorists much to ponder, but some time around the third "briefcase event" I began to wonder if they just plain ran out of ideas. Maybe it's going too far to say that Iamaphoney is full of "bullshit", but he has been intentionally leading people on and has definitely falsified evidence on more than one occasion. I thought that was enough to warrant a full-fledged parody of Iamaphoney, which led to the idea of a parody of PID videos in general: I simply took everything I copied--er, "learned" about making interesting PID videos from The Rotten Apple series, and combined it with all the proofs and formulas I had seen other directors using (namely YouKnowMyName231, allofthemwitches, GrandfatherAleister, but there are countless others who fish from the same bag of tricks). My own Rather Unfresh Apple series was made originally conceived as a tribute to Iamaphoney, so it was a lot of fun to go back to that idea of emulating him. only this time poking fun at myself at the same time.
|
|
Jude
Hard Day's Night
Acting Naturally
Posts: 34
|
Post by Jude on Aug 18, 2009 9:51:01 GMT -5
Jude u say apples, I say oranges. U can post pictures till u are blue in the face, it wont change my mind about Paul/Faul. Its just not the same guy. Just tell me this, why are you so convinced that he's not the same person? Unless you have conclusive evidence, it seems like you just don't want to believe that he's Paul for some reason. Anyway, the point of my post was not argue whether or not Paul was replaced, it was only to show that there is no hooked nose.
|
|
|
Post by KHAN on Aug 18, 2009 15:03:25 GMT -5
First thing: That pic of "Faul" is from the '70', not '67. Secondly: I never could quite get my head around why so many PID comparisons are from completely different angles, with totally different expressions. When the head is tilted up in on pic, and tilted down in another, a comparison is useless. When you use pics from similar angles and expressions, the seeming peculiarities are easily and consistently repeatable.
|
|
|
Post by JoJo on Aug 18, 2009 16:48:09 GMT -5
Well thanks for the explanation Jude. I mellowed in my POV on him to the point of disinterested observer rather than arguing about it.. Still just watching, carry on I guess.
|
|
|
Post by FP on Aug 23, 2009 1:59:19 GMT -5
bbbchords, eyesbleed posted pictures of Faul and Paul. Paul 1966 no hooked nose. Faul 1967 hooked nose. No droopy old age there. Well a few other members gave some good replies before I had a chance, so I'll just repeat some key points we're making: One pair of photos is NOT enough to make any sort of claim. Ever. Now I'm not claiming you only use a few pics to show that he was replaced, since you claim to see it even in our comparisons. But, any myths about specific differences have been debunked by us. Not in one, but hundreds of fades (that I'm forcing myself to refrain from posting) that show that there are no consistent differences between Paul before and after 1966. The thing is Revolver, we both know that if MMT Paul were wearing the same hat, you'd accuse me of choosing that picture because it conceals 'Faul's bigger head'. But you're also missing the larger picture. What I just posted matches up ten times better then the results in your comparison, and if you'd like, I'll find pics taken at an angle where it looks like Paul's head is bigger. Heck, for the sake of it being a little less biased on both our parts, I decided to make a less exaggerated version of what you think is going on, but with George. Pretty easy! It's just simply another case where the same physical evidence will mean two different things to two different people.
|
|