Anyhow if you take your theory at face value NOTHING makes ANY SENSE! If nothing makes any sense then it is a useless theory!
Well, that's a bit hyperbolic, eh? I, actually, think multiple men playing the roles of the four Beatles answers a lot of otherwise unanswerable questions, such as: how do their heights keeps changing? how do their immutable cranio-facial features keep changing? how could they perform multiple shows a day for years on end with only one of them ever getting ill, once? how could they have possibly written so much material while touring globally and making numerous additional public appearances and partaking in endless press conferences and photo shoots and televised interviews? how did "Paul's voice" change from a deep, bluesy baritone to a reedy tenor? why does "Paul" have blue eyes, brown eyes and green eyes in different photos and footage? And on and on and on. In fact, the only reasonable, earthly explanation for the avalanche of incongruities between "The Beatles" from day to day is that there were multiple men playing the roles of John, Paul, George and Ringo.
However, that's not a theory. That's simply the logical conclusion to what any man can see with his own eyes...if he's actually looking. And I don't, necessarily, have a theory as to why this was done or how it was pulled off or how many people were involved. One can bandy about a variety of scenarios in which having a rotating cast playing public figures might seem like a solution to a myriad of problems or potential problems. But I've seen nothing that *explains* the why of any of it enough that I'd place a bet. & it sure doesn't seem like anyone involved is going to be confessing, accidentally or otherwise, any time soon.
Regardless, you can't look at these two boys, on their right and our left in both photos, both of whom are officially identified as "Paul McCartney" and tell me you think they're the same kid. They are simply not the same kid.
I don't know who they are. And I don't know who these three (of many more...) guys, all officially identified as pre-66 "Paul McCartney" are, either:
It's worth noting that none of those guys are are the men 66ers insist are 'The Real JPM'. And yet, all of them, and many more, were presented to the public as being 'The Real JPM' before Beatlemania went
viral.
I am very curious about what really happened to Dr. Asher and why. I hope that, eventually, even if posthumously, Jane will reveal what she knows. I think she knows
everything.
Given the sheer quantity of suspicious deaths that befell The Hurricanes and those in their circle, it seems reasonable to posit that they were silenced. The question is not 'did these other people exist?' The question is 'which Beatles did they know and how much did they know about them?' I'd say too many and too much. Just like Mel. And Stu. And Brian. And Joe Orton. And...
The issue isn't a dearth of reality. The issue is too much reality at once. You've got a dozen + guys sharing the name and persona "Paul McCartney".
I will take a look at this video. But anything that hinges on '66 is disinfo, intentional or otherwise. No one who takes the time to actually look at photos and footage of "Paul McCartney" from boyhood through 1963 can
honestly report that they see One Real Paul nor that the most frequently photographed "Paul McCartney" prior to Beatlemania bears much, if any, resemblance to the '64/'65/'66 Paul
s they claim are the one man who is "The Real JPM". Anyone doing so is willfully ignoring facts that poke holes in their precious narrative. You don't investigate anything by coming up with a theory and then cherrypicking supportive documents while burying any evidence that contradicts what you want to be true. That's just writing historical fiction. The truth of this story began long before 1963 and so data from those years prior must be included in any
serious inquiry. I do not see the objective here as being the creation of a slick, seamless, easily digestible story, but rather to ask the questions that will help to detangle this clusterfuck of a mystery. And that mystery is not 'Did Paul McCartney die in 1966 or was he otherwise replaced that year?' The mystery is 'Why the fuck were there a dozen different guys pretending to be each Beatle, why did they wear fake ears that didn't even match and why are there still at least three different guys taking turns playing
one man named "Paul McCartney"?'
Which do you prefer, Tall Pauls or Small Pauls?
1960 - Tuesday, May 10th:
1960 - August 17th:
1961 - Summer:
1962 - Late September:
1963 - October 23rd-31st:
1963:
1963:
1964 - Week of April 4th:
1964 - June:
I mostly prefer the Small Pauls, with a few exceptions.
Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International