|
Post by The Deceptionist on Sept 15, 2010 5:50:56 GMT -5
Thanks, D. Great hearing from you! Party on Garth! ;D always a pleasure!
|
|
|
Post by The Deceptionist on Sept 14, 2010 11:15:30 GMT -5
oops - bit late on this one... i an i be wishin iameye one happy birthday mon!!
|
|
|
Post by The Deceptionist on Sept 14, 2010 11:12:43 GMT -5
Aretha Franklin - Chain of Fools
|
|
|
Post by The Deceptionist on Sept 9, 2010 3:04:08 GMT -5
Creeque Alley - The Mamas and The Papas
|
|
|
Post by The Deceptionist on Aug 27, 2010 8:30:09 GMT -5
Jimmy Cliff - You Can Get It If You Really Want
...you'll succeed at last
|
|
|
Post by The Deceptionist on Aug 16, 2010 12:43:28 GMT -5
my first thought was that it could be derek taylor, but he also kinda looks like peter fonda - was he present for the day in the life video shoot?
on second thoughts, the second picture of the mystery man looks nothing like peter fonda, but a lot more like derek taylor
|
|
|
Post by The Deceptionist on Aug 5, 2010 4:16:43 GMT -5
wow - some very interesting ideas! i really enjoyed reading the blog - but it does rely quite heavily upon the idea that john sings 'more' and not 'all'.
interestingly, i've always thought he sang 'more' but it hadn't even crossed my mind that it could be a clue.
anyway, i just had to know - so i had a listen to all available versions of glass onion: the acoustic demo (which doesn't reference the line. also, the gibberish seems to relate to a different section of the lyric), the alternate version (which clearly says 'all', as you stated) and both the mono and stereo versions of the final release (which both sound like more).
however, a little bit of noise reduction later and it becomes clear that john is still saying 'all'. with all the other instruments on top it somehow sounds like 'more' - a very strange aural illusion.
so i suppose it comes down to a question of intent - did they intend for it to sound like 'more' (it still clearly sounds like more to me, every damn time) and is there any way to prove that?
tD
|
|
|
Post by The Deceptionist on Jul 27, 2010 6:24:25 GMT -5
and the connectiion to paul mcartney is? the connections are that paul wrote the song 'uncle albert/admiral halsey', and that the name bill has popped up again for the umpteenth time. sorry, its not exactly a mind boggling revelation. i just thought i'd come here and post it for posterity as it hadn't been mentioned before.
|
|
|
Post by The Deceptionist on Jul 25, 2010 17:02:45 GMT -5
ah-ha, finally found the right thread - was just watching family guy when they referenced Admiral Halsey, who I didn't realise was a real person. So I typed him in to wikipedia to check him out and lo and behold I find that Halsey was known as 'Bull' or 'Bill' Halsey. Small detail, but yet another Bill pops up in the long and winding PID trail. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Halsey,_Jr.
|
|
|
Post by The Deceptionist on Jun 15, 2010 6:27:41 GMT -5
will be interesting to see how "george's" voice print compares to the real article on a voice comparison spectrograph (sp?)
|
|
|
Post by The Deceptionist on Jun 15, 2010 6:23:51 GMT -5
damn... i got really excited when i started reading this. right up until watching the video with "george's" voice over. to be fair, i don't know if i have heard much of what George sounded like ca. 1999, but going by the anthology clips (1995) it was fairly similar to how he had always sounded - only slightly huskier. therefore, i doubt his pronunciation of specific words would change too much. the word that tipped the scales for me was his 'but', which in the video was pronounced 'boot'. no way. in my mind george's pronunciation of 'but' would be 'buh' with either a dropped or hesitant 'T' (buh-T) ... certainly not 'boot' ... in fact i don't think 'boot' is how any northerner would pronounce it (b-oo-k, l-oo-k and c-oo-k perhaps, but never b-oo-t) leading me to agree with PP in assuming it is a non-scouse, perhaps non northern, maybe even non british impersonation - possibly american. but i guess we will have to wait and see...
|
|
|
Post by The Deceptionist on Jun 8, 2010 6:21:09 GMT -5
Happy Happy Birthday DH!!! Maybe you can make some supermodel(s)' dreams come true next year
|
|
|
Post by The Deceptionist on May 25, 2010 6:33:59 GMT -5
oh thank god! i need some closure with the LC articles seriously lol.
|
|
|
Post by The Deceptionist on May 25, 2010 6:25:53 GMT -5
wow - do you know roughly when these photos were taken?
|
|
|
Post by The Deceptionist on May 15, 2010 8:25:58 GMT -5
from the same source ^ Modern research confirms, the most ancient form Hebrew to be a natural language, the alphabetic forms emerging from the phosphene flare patterns of the brain. The same shapes, in fact, born of a spinning vortex. It is a true language of light, coursing through our very nervous system.
very interesting, does that then bear some relation to the following? (from 'pyramids of montauk - explorations in consciousness' by preston nichols and peter moon) "...But this was just the first step in Stan Tennen's brilliant discovery. Further work would show that the alphabet correlated with other geometrical shapes. Perhaps the most remarkable discovery he made was that when he paired all the letters and then mathematically reduced that shape to the most compact and elegant form he could, he ended up with a very unusual form. It is best described as a special sort of three dimensional vortex. What was so astonishing about this endeavor was that if you looked at the vortex from twenty-seven different angles, you would see all twenty-seven letters of the Hebrew alphabet. Similarly, if you were to hold a light behind a solid rendition of the vortex and move around it from twenty-seven different angles, you would see all the Hebrew letters in shadow form (See Figure 4). Stan arrived at this vortex shape by pairing the letters together, but that is not the only way the shape could be arrived at. For this next step, we will consider a torus or doughnut. For those of you who remember reading Appendix F of The Montauk Project, the entire universe can be likened to the shape of a doughnut. This idea is commonly accepted in the world of physics and is not any great revelation in itself. Stan realised that you can create a torus by taking a flat piece of paper and rolling it into a tube, then connecting the two ends (actually, paper does not obligingly shrink and stretch to make a perfect doughnut but the idea will serve). The reason we use paper in this example is that we are going to insert the seven colours of the spectrum into our equation. Before we make the torus mentioned above, we are going to lay out seven colours on a flat map or piece of paper in equal proportions (see Fig. 2 on next page) so that when the torus is in final form, each colour touches each one of the other six colours but never more than once. Once you have an actual coloured torus as described above (see Fig. 3), a line marking the seven colour boundaries will unfold from the centre in a vortex like manner as you rotate the torus though itself. If this concept is difficult, imagine the torus having a skin of seven colours. As you push the blue part of the skin towards the centre, all of the other colours of the skin will move accordingly. The lines of the boundaries will fold into the centre of the torus, tracing out a vortex shape (Fig. 4). Again, you can observe all twenty-seven letters of the Hebrew alphabet by observing this vortex from different angles."
|
|
|
Post by The Deceptionist on May 12, 2010 10:04:31 GMT -5
wow, talk about eye in the sky lol ...there are 7 Levels too soon? ;D ;D ha, i didn't even notice the 7 there - i guess i'm getting used to it cropping up everywhere (pardon the pun)
|
|
|
Post by The Deceptionist on May 12, 2010 9:53:44 GMT -5
wow, talk about eye in the sky
|
|
|
Post by The Deceptionist on May 7, 2010 7:01:40 GMT -5
Much of what John Coleman has written is sloppy and erroneous. He actually does a disservice to the point he is trying to make by being so careless and overtly innaccurate. Agreed. Which is a pity, because a lot of it seems to have at least some basis in truth. Its just in cognito and smothered in lies. As far as I know the DEA was created during Nixon's reign, post '66 (when LSD became criminalised), so that may answer Coleman's question on 'where were the DEA?' ... they simply didn't exist. This type of writing annoys me, because just as it starts to get interesting you end up coming across a blatant lie or severe stretch of the truth. I remember being chided a while back by Letter B after contemplating a similar article to this. Whats Coleman's agenda I wonder??
|
|
|
Post by The Deceptionist on May 4, 2010 11:18:25 GMT -5
Dinah - Fats Waller ;D
|
|
|
Post by The Deceptionist on May 4, 2010 5:36:07 GMT -5
Jimi Hendrix is like a fine wine... I'm Down - The Beatles
|
|
|
Post by The Deceptionist on Apr 29, 2010 5:01:19 GMT -5
Gypsy Eyes - Mr Jimi Hendrix
|
|
|
Post by The Deceptionist on Apr 28, 2010 10:45:30 GMT -5
A Message to You, Rudy - The Specials
|
|
|
Post by The Deceptionist on Apr 23, 2010 4:56:00 GMT -5
wow, brilliant thread! how strange though - i've just started reading blavatsky's 'secret doctrine' in earnest and I have a feeling a lot of what mr weidner is talking about will be outlined therein.
hope i didn't spoil the ending for myself lol
|
|
|
Post by The Deceptionist on Apr 22, 2010 10:21:25 GMT -5
worlds oldest beatles groupie lol
do we have a source for the black and white pic?
|
|
|
Post by The Deceptionist on Apr 22, 2010 9:18:13 GMT -5
thats the picture i was thinking of - well done I ;D so who is this guy?
|
|