Paul McCartney died in 1966 - replaced by Billy Shepherd

Originally posted by blupblup
So they found a Canadian guy with an authentic scouse accent?
Amazing that.

Anyone can learn to speak in an English accent. And one thing about Paul is that his Liverpool accent was stronger in songs before 1967 than it was after 1966.

No..... for every piece of "evidence" you have provided, someone has provided counter evidence stating and proving the exact opposite of what you claim.

Not really, if Faul doesn't look like Paul in 8 out of 10 pics, then posting the 2 pics where he does look like him and saying "see, it's the same guy" doesn't prove anything. The question should be "Why does he look different in the majority of the pics if he is the same guy?"

I have followed the thread thanks... this is not my first post in it.
Must be hard for you to remember though as you're always posting misleading and ridiculous pictures comparing "faul" and Paul.

That's a personal attack, isn't it? And I don't remember you either.

No he's very much alive.
I have a couple of his solo albums and have seen him perform and seen interviews with him.... trust me, he's alive.

Then if you are so sure he's alive why bother coming here to argue with people about it?

So you know he's dead but can't prove it?

Can you prove Jimmy Hoffa is dead?


[edit on 14-9-2009 by SednaSon]

Originally posted by novacs4me
Forgive me for not reading all 135 pages before posting this. Being a pack rat, I still have my newspaper clippings (1970's) from when this conspiracy first was discussed. I am amazed it is still a topic of conversation!

Actually that it is still a topic of conversation is what fascinates me. I envy your collection as I have lost everything I owned more than once.

Originally posted by SednaSon

Originally posted by blupblup
So they found a Canadian guy with an authentic scouse accent?
Amazing that.

Anyone can learn to speak in an English accent.

It's not just English - his accent is Liverpudlian. It has a distinct sound. People from that area would know if he was just imitating an accent. It's very hard to fake for any length of time.

So, this 'Faul' guy - apart from looking exactly like Paul, being a fantastic left handed bass player, singer, writer etc. etc. also just happens to be a highly talented mimic; able to keep up a convincing Scouse accent for over 40 years?

Boy - were the illuminati lucky in having such a 'superman' handy right at the time Paul was replaced.

How convenient for them.

And one thing about Paul is that his Liverpool accent was stronger in songs before 1967 than it was after 1966.

In your opinion.

No..... for every piece of "evidence" you have provided, someone has provided counter evidence stating and proving the exact opposite of what you claim.

Not really, if Faul doesn't look like Paul in 8 out of 10 pics,

Again, in your opinion. He looks like Paul in 10 out of 10 pics as far as the majority of people are concerned.

And where does this 8/10 pics statistic come from?

So you think he looks like Paul in 2/10 pics? Well, your making some progress towards 'the light'.


[edit on 14-9-2009 by Dakudo]

Originally posted by faulconandsnowjob
... And yet, she was married to Faul for about 4 yrs, so she must have figured out he was Illuminati/Luciferian before 4 yrs. I'm not part of that cult, so I don't know, but I would imagine... But yes, I definitely think Faul is Illuminati. He controls so much wealth and he's been knighted? Yeah, I would say he is.

We cannot prove (yet) that Faul is Illuminati/Luciferian but the circumstances of his replacement of Paul leave little doubt. For example his impunity from the authorities as a blatant double: Scotland Yard would have been down his throat without orders from Buckingham to desist. The unabated cover up by Illuminati controlled media groups also points in this direction. They would never go that far for an outsider.


It is also possible that Heather didn't know what she was getting into, and either was shocked when she got thrust into the nitty gritty of it (a Zabriskie Point road with no return). However, this is unlikely as most of the time they are united by arranged marriages.


It could have been seeing her child raised with an elite Illuminati "education" for lack of a better word that got her goat. At a very young age you are subjected to isolation, parental attack, sexual torture, mental programming as a daily lot to make you as tough as a Spartan, with shock conditioning and just a twist of the Marquis de Sade for good measure.


Maybe she was even OK with the intensive training to become a dominant "reptilian minded" elitist ruler, but didn't think her own child could become a ceremonial target? After all, what better way to test her loyalty than by sacrificing what's most precious, and having her or Faul do the deed?


Regarding what was behind the scenes during The Beatles' rise to global success and Paul's disappearance, although Tavistock was involved that doesn't mean that it was just an Intelligence Service or Think Tank operation. Unfortunately, however sinister that may already seem - MI5 / CIA brainwashing of populations - this is likely a far more serious matter. We must take a moment to consider who pulls the strings and what their motives are. In the words of an Ex-Illuminati, it is a SPIRITUAL WAR. From the standpoint of someone with experience as one of their internal Mind Control trainers, she speaks up here using those exact terms:





Unfortunately, this witness speaking in 2006 has since joined Paul McCartney as she was also "disappeared" a few months after this recording.

[edit on 14-9-2009 by Getsmart]

Originally posted by helloiloveyou
If 'Faul' is no relation to Paul's father how come he looks more like him the older he gets?

Who says they're not related? Maybe there is a familial relationship.

Are these not the same teeth?...Actually when I asked this question on another forum someone replied saying they were 'obviously' not the same. Didn't say why though - from those who agree I'd love to know.

Not same teeth, not same mouth, not same ears, not same nose, not same jaw. Some of us who can actually see the differences. Now it's been proven by forensic scientists who are experts in their field.

ASK WHO WAS THE "BEATLE"
/mw83db

Originally posted by blupblup


Sir Paul McCartney is a legend.

Hmmm...so what happened to the guy who wasn't a myth? The legend of Paul McCartney is strong. The reality, on the other hand, is difficult to discern.

Originally posted by blupblup

So they found a Canadian guy with an authentic scouse accent?
Amazing that.

LOL - I guess you haven't heard the interview when he said he was "alive and living in Scotland." It sounds very fake. If I can find that interview, I will post it.

No..... for every piece of "evidence" you have provided, someone has provided counter evidence stating and proving the exact opposite of what you claim.

I didn't realize we had forensics experts conducting biometrical analyses of Paul & Faul & posting their findings. Give me a break. Just saying they "look the same" doesn't really cut it.

Must be hard for you to remember though as you're always posting misleading and ridiculous pictures comparing "faul" and Paul.

lol - I don't see how posting pictures of Paul & Faul are "misleading and ridiculous." I think they're just showing something you don't want to see. But no, I guess I didn't remember. Must not have made much of an impression.

No he's very much alive.

I know for a fact he is not.

I have a couple of his solo albums and have seen him perform and seen interviews with him.... trust me, he's alive.

You've seen the imposter.

So you know he's dead but can't prove it?

That's right.

No no..... I've followed the thread and watched all your repetitive attempts at "proving" that Paul was replaced.
And I'm not convinced.

Well, if you're not going to be convinced by forensic science, then I guess nothing will convince you.

I admire your persistence, really i do.... but it doesn't change the fact that Paul McCartney is alive and well.

Sadly, that is not the case.

[edit on 14-9-2009 by faulconandsnowjob]

I think the forensic science findings deserves more scrutiny and shouldn't just be brushed aside.
Sure, they're preliminary, but something drove them to test Paul/Faul. Initially, as I understand, to quell the thought of his being replaced but they found that there were unexplainable discrepancies.
These weren't kids playing forensics, these were people with solid credentials in forensic science.

I find it somewhat amusing that people with no scientific training think they can just discredit experts in the field. Sorry, but no.

How is this comp, for ex, "misleading?" These are just screen caps of interviews w/ Paul & Faul. You can even watch the interviews yourself on YT.



They don't look the same b/c they're not the same. I'm sorry to spoil some people's illusions, but that's just the way it is.

Originally posted by Getsmart
Unfortunately, however sinister that may already seem - MI5 / CIA brainwashing of populations - this is likely a far more serious matter. We must take a moment to consider who pulls the strings and what their motives are. In the words of an Ex-Illuminati, it is a SPIRITUAL WAR.

More from John Todd...

...The Beatles are classified in the occult world as the four major prophets, their White Double Album is considered the Book of Revelation to Witches. That & “Atlas Shrugs”.In it is a song called “Helter Skelter”. It meant a time when the pit would be open & the demons would be set free & the World would get insane in a less than 24-hour period & they’d be killing everybody – their next door neighbours, their kids, their wife, everything! The World would just go completely mass insane overnight.Charles Manson went to jail because in the seven years that he’s been in he has organised from his jail cell every prison across the U.S.. They’re waiting for a time when the World will go completely insane & they’ll flood out of the prisons & they firmly believe that they will take over this country. When Manson gets out & “Helter Skelter” starts, in the first year, one million U.S. citizens are marked for death...

The Illuminati & Witchcraft (From tape recorded Lectures by John Todd, Ex-Grand Druid Witch, at Bible Baptist Church, Elkton, Md., USA, Fall 1978)
www.scribd.com...

Originally posted by blupblup
So they found a Canadian guy with an authentic scouse accent?
Amazing that.

Examine the next two interviews (with Bill) -

www.youtube.com...





and compare them to the Memphis interview (with Paul) -

Great post Getsmart!




[edit on 14-9-2009 by Uncle Benny]


Mod Edit - Mod Note: One Line Post – Please Review This Link.


[edit on 14-9-2009 by elevatedone]

Originally posted by Uncle Benny

Examine the next two interviews (with Bill) -

I really hope no one claims the interviews are misleading - lol.

I'm really confused about how these screen caps from interviews could be considered "misleading" & "ridiculous." Maybe they don't like the fact that it shows Faul has a huge honker compared to Paul? Or that his mouth is wider - cleverly concealed by the fake mustache?



Like I said, people can watch the interviews for themselves on YT & see that those images haven't been doctored in any way.

The two interviews posted above by Uncle Benny seem to me to be someone trying to look and sound like Paul compared to the Memphis interview of the real Paul McCartney.

I can easily hear a difference in their voices. Sounds like the fake is trying to mimic a Liverpool accent. Mr. Fake also has trouble making a coherent point as if he is just rambling on about nothing. Faker has strange looking wig hair and looks like he is uncomfortable being on camera.

The real Paul is genuine.

I don't know how anyone could fail to see the differences in those two different guys in those particular interviews.

I'm shocked and saddened by this thread because I think PID is true. I've seen the photo comps in the thread as well as the forensics article, reviewed the album clues,
contemplated the bizarre deaths of Mal Evans and John Lennon, reviewed the matter of how Heather Mills seems to have been threatened or feared death if she revealed the truth, I've noticed different personality traits between the original and the impostor, reviewed the solo material which sounds weak compared to Paul's writing, and I've looked into the matter of MK-ULTRA and Tavistock (what is publicly known about them has to be only the tip of the iceberg), and there is the satanic cult angle and Illuminati side of things.

I've also wondered if the story is correct about the Tokyo police finding that the fingerprints of "Paul" do not match those on file for Paul. We do know that "Paul" was held and interrogated for two whole days at Tokyo police headquarters and would not comment on the nature of the questioning. It's logical to me that if it was a case of false identity, they would have done just what they did, intensive interrogations for two days or more. This is what they did with Oswald and the cops wouldn't comment on that one either.

If you combine elements of Kubrick's A CLOCKWORK ORANGE and EYES WIDE SHUT, you can begin to understand what could have happened. I know it's a stretch that they found a double, but finding and training a double is part of the skill set of the intelligence community. Could a replacement have been found and trained? Yes, I think they could have done it well in advance of the switch. Why the others went along is still a mystery. Are there clues planted in song tracks and in the album art? I would say without a doubt. When John put on record "here's another clue for you all..." that's good enough evidence for me that clues were planted.

Just a couple of weeks ago, "Paul" reached out to Mojo magazine and made a point to say that there's nothing to the PID rumors. Why is he nervous about it?

When I came to this thread and started reading it, I found that there are people posting who seem unnaturally determined to intimidate, ridicule, derail, confuse, sidetrack, and manipulate the thread towards the PIA conclusion. Real fans wouldn't bother. Seeing this has further convinced me that there are dark forces intent upon destroying the PID theories. There has to be something in it for them. They aren't monitoring this ("silly" as they put it) thread for their own amusement. It's as if they are getting paid to tear down this thread as a job.

DIFFERENT FACIAL EXPRESSION AND CAMERA LENS. COMPARE APPLES TO APPLES! YOU NEVER COMPARE PHOTOS THAT ARE REASONABLY SIMILAR.

You speculate on completely outrageous stories, when the truth and facts are the only things that actually make sense.

CRAZY.



They don't look the same b/c they're not the same. I'm sorry to spoil some people's illusions, but that's just the way it is.

Originally posted by blupblup

None of your photos (which are extremely misleading and hand-picked to make sure they appear different) show anything other than changes in light, contrast or the position that Paul may be standing in.

Others have presented pictures showing that Paul looks exactly the same as he always has.

This is no conspiracy to silence the PID (

) crowd, as you put it... nor am i affiliated in anyway, nor a shill for, the PIA crowd (

)

Hi Blupblup, the problem is that PIDers seem to actually pick up uncomparable photos (usually stretched or blurred, or bad TV stills, or often pre-1966 pics where Paul McCartney looks great to post-1966 pics where he is making grimaces and so on) and try to use them as a proof of replacement.
They cannot justify why properly made comparisons match, so when they see them they just shout "doctored!!!!". without having any proof of this.

Originally posted by brocket99
DIFFERENT FACIAL EXPRESSION AND CAMERA LENS. COMPARE APPLES TO APPLES! YOU NEVER COMPARE PHOTOS THAT ARE REASONABLY SIMILAR.

You think they look different because of camera lens because you don't think they could look different otherwise. I know it's strange that people think it's the same guy after all these years. What you're seeing is two different faces, not differences because of camera lens or facial expressions.

The problem I have with photo comparisons is origin. To perform an accurate photo comparison, one would have to have the original negative. Most published photos of celebrities are retouched. It could be that they are air brushed or that they have been stretched/shrunk to fit a desired area on a magazine page. Many of the videos are poor quality due to web compression. When a photo is scanned and exported to the web, it can have all kinds of artifacts due to file type or compression. As an experiment, compare an album cover with the CD cover. Due to the difference in ratio (square to rectangle) the CD cover is going to be distorted.

I appreciate the effort that both sides have displayed to prove their point. But in the end, it just depends on how one interprets the evidence. When the evidence is subjective, the interpretations will always vary.

Scientists are not gods. They are not infallible.

True scientific work is not just accepted without question. Einstien's wasn't. Scientific work is peer reviewed and must go through severe scrutiny.

Yet, we are expected to bow down and accept without question some article in a mainstream media magazine. Not a science journal; Wired magazine.

We are told that we poor ignorant people are not scientists so we can not even question what they say.

Sorry. Not me. I have a brain. I have had training in the scientific method. And I have a healthy skepticism.

One does not have to be a pro quarterback to be able to tell a good from a bad quarterback, or when one is having a bad game.

One does not have to be a CPA to determine if a CPA has violated independence and ethical rules.

One does not have to be a doctor to judge if there has been malpractice or negligence.

One does not have to be a scientist to make a judgment on work published by "scientists."

First, the Wired article was not something in a serious science journal, but in a modern cultural magazine.

It was not peer reviewed by other scientists or had any independent verification.

No other tests were done to verify the conclusions.

The only photos presented were from a biased, pro PID website by Sun King; a guy who promotes the idea that "Faul" is the clone of a female WWII spy. (And yes they are from that website. The chances that, out of the tens of thousands of pictures available of Paul McCartney, they would have picked the exact same pictures as Sun King to compare for the teeth and ears is astronomical.) And Sun King has stretched and flipped photos to support his improbable ideas. Any manipulation of the photos by the source would make measurements worthless.

The "scientists" themselves do not claim that their work proves that Paul was replaced. So no one here should make that claim.

Should the article be rejected out of hand? No.

If these scientists really believe that it is probable that they are two different men, then they should put out their work and source documentation for peer review and independent verification. I encourage that. I will pop the popcorn and anxiously wait for the results.

I noticed this video in the set that Uncle Benny posted:

www.youtube.com...

Throughout, David Crosby is standing just behind George and Paul. I don't know if anyone would find that significant in light of what had been suggested about him.