Paul McCartney died in 1966 - replaced by Billy Shepherd

Originally posted by SednaSon

Well, in this scenario, I think they had Paul's replacement before his death. In fact, why would they plan a murder without at least having someone waiting in the wings?

Yeah, I agree. In this case, they would want a double b/c Paul was popular, & they could exploit that popularity. If he hadn't been popular, then he might have been "suicided" or met w/ an "accident" or maybe died from an "undiagnosed heart defect" like some other people we know of.

Whatever agency is in charge of this, the process I believe is they send agents out to locate potential doubles.

Yes, talent scouts. lol

I know someone personally who was approached by one of these agencies, not to be a double, but to do "work" for them.

Ditto. If people only knew the amount of deception that goes on, they'd be super paranoid. People are not necessarily who they say they are. You might even call the number on their biz card, & a nice receptionist might answer, but you know what? It might not be a real company at all. This is depicted in "Conspiracy Theory" w/ Mel Gibson.

Anyway, Paul's double most likely looked like him before the surgery but advanced plastic surgery was done to make every little feature look like Paul's, including freckles, moles, scars, etc.

Yes, Faul started to look more like Paul w/ time. He didn't look like him at all (imo) in '66 or '67.

reply to post by faulconandsnowjob


Yeah, thanks. If you click on the spectrograph it takes you to another board.
It doesn't even mention the software being used.

As far as standards go, nothing that I have been able to locate so far supports a one word analysis.

expertpages.com...

www.forensictapeanalysisinc.com...

Lennon was kept in line by threat of mdc

the link isn't working...

Originally posted by 510carl

Lennon was kept in line by threat of mdc

reply to post by faulconandsnowjob


Hi, I am new to this forum, I am very interested about Paul/Faul issue, I have to say that the difference in the Beatle's height before and after 1966 is very impressive! But look at the photo of his eyelids (expecially his left one): they look exactly the same in the "before" and "after" pics... could plastic surgery make them so identical?

Originally posted by magnolia_xx

But look at the photo of his eyelids (expecially his left one): they look exactly the same in the "before" and "after" pics... could plastic surgery make them so identical?

Hi, Magnolia. Welcome to this thread. It certainly is lively - lol

Anyway, yes, we believe Faul had some surgery to improve the resemblance. This is pretty common. Consider the case of a political decoy:

...The political decoy is an individual who has been selected because of their strong physical resemblance to the person they are impersonating. This resemblance can be strengthened by plastic surgery. Often, such decoys are trained to speak and behave like their 'target'...

en.wikipedia.org...

We maintain that this is what we are seeing in the case of Faul, but in the field of entertainment rather than politics or military.

There has also been a lot of photo-tampering to make the 2 look more alike.

Check out Paul's lips:


The lips & eyebros are markedly different. :eek:


Who is that on the right?

Originally posted by elfie

As far as standards go, nothing that I have been able to locate so far supports a one word analysis.

As far as the aural evidence goes, someone else is going to have to comment on it. I'm a lawyer, not an audiologist. I have a background in graphic art, so I'm very comfortable assessing visual evidence, but the audio stuff is beyond my expertise, I'm afraid. However, I think it's possible that Paul laid down vocal tracks that were incorporated into later recordings. There is some pretty amazing technology that can create the illusion that someone is saying (or singing?) something that they're not. This article is from 10 yrs ago, & I'm sure barely scratched the surface of what was possible, so one can only imagine.

When Seeing and Hearing Isn't Believing
By William M. Arkin
www.washingtonpost.com...

Originally posted by faulconandsnowjob

Originally posted by magnolia_xx

But look at the photo of his eyelids (expecially his left one): they look exactly the same in the "before" and "after" pics... could plastic surgery make them so identical?

Hi, Magnolia. Welcome to this thread. It certainly is lively - lol

Anyway, yes, we believe Faul had some surgery to improve the resemblance. This is pretty common. Consider the case of a political decoy:

...The political decoy is an individual who has been selected because of their strong physical resemblance to the person they are impersonating. This resemblance can be strengthened by plastic surgery. Often, such decoys are trained to speak and behave like their 'target'...

en.wikipedia.org...

We maintain that this is what we are seeing in the case of Faul, but in the field of entertainment rather than politics or military.

There has also been a lot of photo-tampering to make the 2 look more alike.

Check out Paul's lips:

The lips & eyebros are markedly different. :eek:

Who is that on the right?

Oh for crying out loud, you post one normal pic of him
and one of him blowing out his cheeks and you have the nerve to say ''his lips are different'' which are quite obviously going to be inverted and closed together when you make that action with your cheeks.

No mention of course that the eyes are exactly similiar with the left being slightly higher than the right or the jawline, facial structure and Paul's chin is identical of course.

As you said yourself faulcon, you only see what you want to see.

This thread just goes from one absurd extreme to the next.

A page ago we had someone claim he sounded different when he got older.

**warning-sarcasm ahead**

Noooo! You don't say mate! And let me guess he changed physically as he got older and matured aswell. Well gee, that's your conspiracy right there, someone call the cops, human nature occurred! This guy goes through his early twenties and he grows up, fills out and gets older and suddenly it means he's been replaced by a copycat.
I bet I could find similiar photos of all four beatles which would show
similiar differences.
Faulcon you can pull all the edited photos you like from the web and
ridiculous youtube videos, you can have your mates from the PiD forums
come on here and star your posts and back you up and try and make you look credible but the simple fact is there is no conspiracy, there is no ''Faul''
and the Illuminati is your saftey blanket as I've said before everytime
you start to look foolish on here, for everytime something is explained, debunked or questioned you simply choose to ignore it and post yet more of the same again and again, it's pointless.
Did this illuminati pay off / threaten / convince / EVERY single member of Paul's family and extended family, and close friends, the people who knew the man inside out? This number would easily go into three and possibly four figures. Are you prepared to say here and now that that is what you believe, if not can you please give your answer as to how they were fooled as this thing of 'mind control' etc might be plausible when you are dealing with a small group but that many people, sorry, no way.
If it is, tell me how it occurred, I don't expect you to know everything, you are merely speculating after all, but seeing as this is what you passionately believe in i expect you have the answers to my and others questions.
This is where such wacky theories usually go downhill, the key is in the minute detail and you canot expect to be taken anyways seriously if you cannot offer up a plausible explanation for how this 'replacement' was carried out with such apparent ease.
Did they also do the same for the replacement Paul's family and friends?

[edit on 21-7-2009 by pmexplorer]

Just b/c something seems real, doesn't mean it is real. It may just be an illusion. Remember Milli Vanilli & Ashlee Simpon?

Originally posted by pmexplorer

you post one normal pic of him
and one of him blowing out his cheeks and you have the nerve to say ''his lips are different'' which are quite obviously going to be inverted and closed together when you make that action with your cheeks.

No, I posted one pic of Paul & one pic of the imposter. The lips are difft b/c they are difft people. Why don't you look for the differences that have been proven to be there? Wouldn't that be interesting to see if you can spot the subtle differences? It'd kind of be like a little challenge for you.

If you want to prove that they're the same person, then I suggest you get out your ruler & calculator, b/c you have to overcome some pretty overwhelming scientific evidence to the contrary.
only1rad.proboards.com...

No mention of course that the eyes are exactly similiar with the left being slightly higher than the right or the jawline, facial structure and Paul's chin is identical of course.

"Exactly similar" but NOT "exactly the same." Of course, they're similar. They're doubles, after all. But again, I can prove that they're not "identical." Here's half of that pic of Paul above from AHDN (1964) & half of Faul from 1967 ("Penny Lane" video).

As you said yourself faulcon, you only see what you want to see.

I never said that.

This thread just goes from one absurd extreme to the next.

It's amazing how some people cling to the old paradigm in the face of overwhelming evidence. Why can't you just admit that you have fallen for a double? Lots of people have. There's no shame in that. What is weird, tho, is refusing to accept a proven fact.

de⋅lu⋅sion  [di-loo-zhuhn] Show IPA
–noun
...
4. Psychiatry. a fixed false belief that is resistant to ... confrontation with actual fact...

dictionary.reference.com...

The only thing you offer to support your "theory" that Paul & Faul are the same person is that the media & SIR Paul claim he's James Paul McCartney. That's it. I think you're going to have to do better than that.



[edit on 21-7-2009 by faulconandsnowjob]

[edit on 21-7-2009 by faulconandsnowjob]

Let us recap the evidence presented thus far.

Pro-PID Evidence

Biometrical analysis showing different bone structure & differences in other facial features

Paul had brown eyes
Faul has green eyes
Paul had thicker eyelashes

Faul's head & face are more elongated than JPM's
Faul has a higher forehead

Paul had upturned nose
Faul has beaky nose

Paul's hair grew from left to right and his bangs were thick
Faul's hair grows from right to left, and his bangs are thinner

Paul's earlobes were attached and his ears stuck out farther from his head
Faul's ears have unattached earlobes, and are set closer to his head
Faul has worn prosthetic ears

Paul had high-arching eyebrows
Faul has thick eyebrows with little natural arch

Paul was left-handed
Faul is right-handed

Paul was masculine
Faul's portrayal of Paul has been effeminate

Faul is around 2.5 inches taller than Paul, and has a larger frame

Faul’s feet are longer & are shaped differently from Paul’s/different shoe sizes

Photo doctoring has taken place to make Faul look more like Paul and vice versa

Different lips
Different hand-writing
Different voices
Different mannerisms
Different musical styles

Pro-PIA Evidence

SIR Paul & the media say it's the same guy
They look alike


[edit on 21-7-2009 by faulconandsnowjob]

There are plenty of celebrity impersonators around, many of whom have undertaken plastic surgery (recent, not '60's era) to bear a greater resemblance to the celebrity, but none can be mistaken for the celebrity themselves under scrutiny.

Paul looks and sounds exactly like himself. Nothing short of a clone could result in such a perfect match. (Now that would be a conspiracy--time travel, human cloning lol).

Originally posted by elfie

Paul looks and sounds exactly like himself.

No, "he" doesn't. It's already been proven that there was a double. Why are people so resistant to this fact?

This might be a fun & challenging little exercise. See if you can spot the differences.




[edit on 21-7-2009 by faulconandsnowjob]

Originally posted by elfie
There are plenty of celebrity impersonators around, many of whom have undertaken plastic surgery (recent, not '60's era) to bear a greater resemblance to the celebrity, but none can be mistaken for the celebrity themselves under scrutiny.

Neither does Faul. Not upon careful scrutiny, such as say, a biometrical analysis carried out by scientists.

Originally posted by faulconandsnowjob
Pro-PIA Evidence

SIR Paul & the media say it's the same guy
They look alike

LOL!!!

Originally posted by SednaSon

Originally posted by faulconandsnowjob
Pro-PIA Evidence

SIR Paul & the media say it's the same guy
They look alike

LOL!!!

It is funny, isn't it? Faul is a double after all, so looking alike is kind of the point. But obviously, they don't look "exactly the same," b/c some of us can see the differences. Actually, if they looked "exactly the same," no one would have noticed in the 1st place, & there'd be no such thing as PID.

[edit on 21-7-2009 by faulconandsnowjob]

Notice the lips:

Look in the mirror, puff out your cheeks, curl your lips in, then come back and tell us how you got replaced without you even knowing...

This thread gets more delusional everyday. You wouldn't recognize subtle differences if they slapped you in the head. I mean you can't seven see what's obviously exactly the same, which kinda out number your 'subtle differences'.

Subtle changes in appearance is perfectly natural due to aging, maybe you don't suffer from this problem? Nice for you.

All of your other so called evidence has been explained already, you just refuse to listen.

Eyebrows

From the DGPAC

To our esteemed friends, we would very much like it if you would take this presentation into consideration, if you could be so kind please.

N.b please pay special attention to the right hand side animation, that is the eye area taken directly from the left hand photograph superimposed over the top of the right hand photograph to allow comparison of the eyes. Also note Please, even plastic surgery can not really change the overall shape and size of the eye socket area, because that is determined by the skull. No re-sizing of any photograph was performed, and no Paul McCartney's were injured, to create this presentation...



Hope you like it better than our first presentation, thank you. And remember, even if you ignore this post it will still be here...