|
Post by joseph on Aug 24, 2022 8:49:31 GMT -5
I was wondering what was going on, whether Peter wasn't using the quote function correctly. I looked in the tools and you can block users on here. I believe Peter's blocked me from reading his posts. As the Beatles said "No Reply" from Peter to your post. I wondered why. If you got blocked, I suppose I'm next. 😂 I don't know if you're next because I've seen this sort of thing before where two people are arguing false positions. What's Peter's stance? Does he believe no replacement has taken place or is he Paul is Dead?
|
|
peter
Hard Day's Night
https://youtu.be/v1hes0WFcUU
Posts: 16
|
Post by peter on Aug 24, 2022 9:21:29 GMT -5
Gonna have to disagree that all early Cavern/Hamburg Pauls look like Billy. They don't. Not at all. If all early Pauls looked like Billy, then I might consider the premise of photo doctoring. Again, have a look at the threads here on this site that I mentioned in an earlier post. And John always being the same guy, even after 1966? Now we completely disagree. Those Yoko Ono Johns look nothing like the Johns who came before. Nothing at all. Photo lighting? What about vastly changing heights? Check out some photos on the Fireman thread. I do believe there's one there, from the cover of an early Beatle book, depicting the Beatles about to roll some sort of agricultural press over George. Check out the extraordinary height of the "tall Paul" in that photo. And I have watched interviews. Plenty of them. Perhaps all of them. And gimme a break with those inferences that people here have doctored photos themselves - "But perhaps you already know this". People simply posted photos here and on other sites from old Beatle books, Mersey Beat photos from the Beatles early days, and sites like the Savage Young Beatles and Meet the Beatles for Real. And what we see is a psy op, from the very start. Those grainy television receptions you mentioned, making it much easier to switch short Pauls for tall Pauls, long necked Pauls with Pauls that had wider thick necks, Pauls with thinner faces with Pauls that had much rounder faces, and so on.....You know that early Pauls did put their hands inside their coats, Masonry style, right? But I suppose we all here doctored those photos as well. I never once suggested that people here have doctored photos, the mechanics behind Billy certainly have. I did say that I wouldn't go by photographs but by interviews. If you want to believe that there are multiples go ahead. A hand inside a jacket proving that they were masons?, now you are entering Williams territory!, a hamster wheel with no resolution. Pop stars have very little say during photo shoots as to how they are to appear. The recent case of an R&B singer (sorry, name escapes me) taking her record label to court because she had to dance in front of pyramids with the all seeing eye etc is a case in point. Celebs covering eyes and putting fingers to lips is in no way proof of adrenochrome drinking..it's another psy-op and distraction. Best leave it at that, and I don't block people, it's just that more often than not it saves precious time not going around in pointless circles.
|
|
peter
Hard Day's Night
https://youtu.be/v1hes0WFcUU
Posts: 16
|
Post by peter on Aug 24, 2022 9:26:03 GMT -5
I was wondering what was going on, whether Peter wasn't using the quote function correctly. I looked in the tools and you can block users on here. I believe Peter's blocked me from reading his posts. I certainly haven't blocked you! Sorry but all discussion pertaining to Featles is a complete waste of time to me! Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by kvo on Aug 24, 2022 9:27:43 GMT -5
Gonna have to disagree that all early Cavern/Hamburg Pauls look like Billy. They don't. Not at all. If all early Pauls looked like Billy, then I might consider the premise of photo doctoring. Again, have a look at the threads here on this site that I mentioned in an earlier post. And John always being the same guy, even after 1966? Now we completely disagree. Those Yoko Ono Johns look nothing like the Johns who came before. Nothing at all. Photo lighting? What about vastly changing heights? Check out some photos on the Fireman thread. I do believe there's one there, from the cover of an early Beatle book, depicting the Beatles about to roll some sort of agricultural press over George. Check out the extraordinary height of the "tall Paul" in that photo. And I have watched interviews. Plenty of them. Perhaps all of them. And gimme a break with those inferences that people here have doctored photos themselves - "But perhaps you already know this". People simply posted photos here and on other sites from old Beatle books, Mersey Beat photos from the Beatles early days, and sites like the Savage Young Beatles and Meet the Beatles for Real. And what we see is a psy op, from the very start. Those grainy television receptions you mentioned, making it much easier to switch short Pauls for tall Pauls, long necked Pauls with Pauls that had wider thick necks, Pauls with thinner faces with Pauls that had much rounder faces, and so on.....You know that early Pauls did put their hands inside their coats, Masonry style, right? But I suppose we all here doctored those photos as well. My explanation comes from videos of live performances. Not just the performances but the audience reactions to them. The audience shots at the DC concert in February 64 are a sight to behold - never mind the British invasion, those kids look like they are witnessing aliens landing and they love it. The audience reaction to the imposters on the other hand is noticeably different. You can hear the deflation of excitement in the audience at the 1965 NME Poll Winners show compared to the May 1964 NME show and there's some audience reaction from an American concert where audience members are puzzled and look like they're thinking, "Why do I like this?" This is something much more convincing than, "I saw some photos where he looked different." I've got photos of me where I look different. You need more, but I have to ask what are your needs? Your opinion is easily dismissed because you don't back it up with motive or reason. You keep blaming the Beatles for using multiples. How are they going to get away with that if someone in authority doesn't want that to happen against them? The GOAT band is highly complex, as we've seen here over the years. I've considered that the human resources needed to accomplish all that they did, appear everywhere that they did, in such a relatively short period of time during Beatlemania, would require multiples. Looking at this from a purely business plan standpoint. Here are the goals, the objectives, and the timeframe. Now, what will be needed to achieve the business plan goals and objectives, both in terms of human and financial resources? Quite a lot, I would imagine. Lots of professional looking shots of this band in their very early days. Just a club band then. Working for peanuts. Huh.....Frankly, what I see is a business plan, one that was extraordinarily well crafted and executed.
|
|
|
Post by kvo on Aug 24, 2022 9:44:29 GMT -5
Gonna have to disagree that all early Cavern/Hamburg Pauls look like Billy. They don't. Not at all. If all early Pauls looked like Billy, then I might consider the premise of photo doctoring. Again, have a look at the threads here on this site that I mentioned in an earlier post. And John always being the same guy, even after 1966? Now we completely disagree. Those Yoko Ono Johns look nothing like the Johns who came before. Nothing at all. Photo lighting? What about vastly changing heights? Check out some photos on the Fireman thread. I do believe there's one there, from the cover of an early Beatle book, depicting the Beatles about to roll some sort of agricultural press over George. Check out the extraordinary height of the "tall Paul" in that photo. And I have watched interviews. Plenty of them. Perhaps all of them. And gimme a break with those inferences that people here have doctored photos themselves - "But perhaps you already know this". People simply posted photos here and on other sites from old Beatle books, Mersey Beat photos from the Beatles early days, and sites like the Savage Young Beatles and Meet the Beatles for Real. And what we see is a psy op, from the very start. Those grainy television receptions you mentioned, making it much easier to switch short Pauls for tall Pauls, long necked Pauls with Pauls that had wider thick necks, Pauls with thinner faces with Pauls that had much rounder faces, and so on.....You know that early Pauls did put their hands inside their coats, Masonry style, right? But I suppose we all here doctored those photos as well. I never once suggested that people here have doctored photos, the mechanics behind Billy certainly have. I did say that I wouldn't go by photographs but by interviews. If you want to believe that there are multiples go ahead. A hand inside a jacket proving that they were masons?, now you are entering Williams territory!, a hamster wheel with no resolution. Pop stars have very little say during photo shoots as to how they are to appear. The recent case of an R&B singer (sorry, name escapes me) taking her record label to court because she had to dance in front of pyramids with the all seeing eye etc is a case in point. Celebs covering eyes and putting fingers to lips is in no way proof of adrenochrome drinking..it's another psy-op and distraction. Best leave it at that, and I don't block people, it's just that more often than not it saves precious time not going around in pointless circles. Well, you came in here insinuating quite a lot about me and my reliance on old club band photos that are not Beatlemania Pauls, nor are they "Billy". Your clever CIA post and your insertion of "But perhaps you already know this". Casting aspersions on those who simply do not agree with you. Not a good sign.
|
|
peter
Hard Day's Night
https://youtu.be/v1hes0WFcUU
Posts: 16
|
Post by peter on Aug 24, 2022 10:04:20 GMT -5
Well, you came in here insinuating quite a lot about me and my reliance on old club band photos that are not Beatlemania Pauls, nor are they "Billy". Your clever CIA post and your insertion of "But perhaps you already know this". Casting aspersions on those who simply do not agree with you. Not a good sign. Wow, you sound all riled up! Yeah!, it was quite clever of me...and also a joke! It's ok, I forgive you, words and meanings can be easily misconstrued in these boxes. 'Insinuating a lot' ? Nope no aspersions were cast and there are no 'those', only you. Stating 'not a good sign' within a rather vague comment which could be easily misconstrued by others is....not a good sign! Let's leave it be. Take care.
|
|
|
Post by joseph on Aug 24, 2022 11:30:16 GMT -5
I was wondering what was going on, whether Peter wasn't using the quote function correctly. I looked in the tools and you can block users on here. I believe Peter's blocked me from reading his posts. I certainly haven't blocked you! Sorry but all discussion pertaining to Featles is a complete waste of time to me! Cheers. Well The Beatles ceased to be in July 1964, so I have to call those that followed something else. Here are The Beatles performing Long Tall Sally in May 1964 This is the same song being performed in April 1965 at the same venue These are the full performances those clips were taken from - 1964 1965 Now is that the same four men in 1965 as it was in 1964? Don't try avoiding the question by saying by saying "don't be ridiculous" or "stop wasting my time" etc. I want to hear you say "that's the same four guys," or, "that's four different guys."
|
|
|
Post by joseph on Aug 24, 2022 11:40:25 GMT -5
Well, you came in here insinuating quite a lot about me and my reliance on old club band photos that are not Beatlemania Pauls, nor are they "Billy". Your clever CIA post and your insertion of "But perhaps you already know this". Casting aspersions on those who simply do not agree with you. Not a good sign. Wow, you sound all riled up! Yeah!, it was quite clever of me...and also a joke! It's ok, I forgive you, words and meanings can be easily misconstrued in these boxes. 'Insinuating a lot' ? Nope no aspersions were cast and there are no 'those', only you. Stating 'not a good sign' within a rather vague comment which could be easily misconstrued by others is....not a good sign! Let's leave it be. Take care. You have to make sure the cursor is under the quote box when quoting a post, so what you are posting doesn't appear in the same box as the post you quoted.
|
|
|
Post by B on Aug 24, 2022 12:05:28 GMT -5
Peter, what joseph says in the post above this one is correct.
If you quote kvo in the example above, this ---> [/quote] should be after where she wrote "Not a good sign."
Then your comments should follow. That way your comments won't appear to be part of kvo's quote.
Unfortunately, on this board, when you quote someone, it puts the [/quote] instruction at the bottom of the page, and that can be confusing.
I hope this helps you when making future posts.
The quote should be between the [ quote ] and the [ / quote ] signs, so that it looks like this:
|
|
|
Post by joseph on Aug 25, 2022 15:44:24 GMT -5
Come on Peter! We're all waiting here. Same guys or not?
|
|
|
Post by Paul Bearer on Aug 28, 2022 12:07:33 GMT -5
IMO same guys.
|
|
|
Post by B on Sept 29, 2022 8:52:55 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by B on Oct 6, 2022 21:32:24 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by B on Oct 29, 2022 12:15:47 GMT -5
Sage of Quay™ - Mike Williams on Billy Watson TV - Looking Through His Glass Onion (Oct 2022)www.youtube.com/watch?v=6rVA2Ehh808Mike Williams' Paul Is Dead Channel Oct 28, 2022 "Mike joins host Billy Watson to discuss Beatles researcher Sallie Witte's recent discovery of Paul McCartney (Billy Shears) having an artificial eye. "
|
|
|
Post by ekauqodielak on Oct 29, 2022 19:16:57 GMT -5
Sage of Quay™ - Mike Williams on Billy Watson TV - Looking Through His Glass Onion (Oct 2022)www.youtube.com/watch?v=6rVA2Ehh808Mike Williams' Paul Is Dead Channel Oct 28, 2022 "Mike joins host Billy Watson to discuss Beatles researcher Sallie Witte's recent discovery of Paul McCartney (Billy Shears) having an artificial eye. " "recent"
|
|
|
Post by B on Nov 17, 2022 14:33:32 GMT -5
Sage of Quay™ - Victoria Leigh - Sgt Pepper, Crowley and Superman (Nov 2022) --------------- Sage of Quay™ - McCartney 1966 BBC Interview - “We're not all that good musically…” (Nov 2022)www.youtube.com/watch?v=HdYUH5J_De8 ----- Mike Williams' Paul Is Dead Channel Nov 17, 2022
|
|
|
Post by ekauqodielak on Nov 17, 2022 18:06:48 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by B on Nov 18, 2022 23:56:13 GMT -5
Amusing video, but I don't buy that Mike Williams and Thomas Uharriet are the same person, if that is what's being suggested. youtu.be/WJkGlSssJmU?t=82
|
|
|
Post by ekauqodielak on Nov 19, 2022 0:42:10 GMT -5
Amusing video, but I don't buy that Mike Williams and Thomas Uharriet are the same person, if that is what's being suggested. youtu.be/WJkGlSssJmU?t=82Yeah, he loses me with the numerology shit, but I love that he's taking the piss out of Mike. I don't think they're the same guy, but I do wonder why he professes such faith in that book and have to assume he's affiliated with the creators of it, in some way. Like his whole channel is basically an infomercial for the book.
|
|
|
Post by B on Nov 21, 2022 20:23:20 GMT -5
Sage of Quay™ - Billy Shears and the Spirits of Ancient Egypt (Nov 2022)www.youtube.com/watch?v=bSf3FUpbRq4Mike Williams' Paul Is Dead Channel Nov 21, 2022 "Mike discusses a strange occult passage contained in the 2022 edition of Memoirs. "
|
|
|
Post by B on Nov 27, 2022 15:03:45 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by B on Dec 4, 2022 12:36:15 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by B on Dec 7, 2022 17:04:35 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by B on Dec 15, 2022 22:29:39 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by B on Dec 21, 2022 1:50:02 GMT -5
Sage of Quay™ - Happy Holidays Everyone! Year-End Review and Keeping An "Eye" On Billy Shears 👍www.youtube.com/watch?v=hrd6wL76pAoMike Williams' Paul Is Dead Channel Dec 20, 2022
|
|