Paul McCartney died in 1966 - replaced by Billy Shepherd

Oh I had fun with this theory years ago! It's suitably morbid and the clues are scintillating and vague at the same time.

I found this great vid someone did for a folklore class.
7 parts, great info and a nice tongue in check style



[edit on 25-8-2009 by MadameGuillotine]

Originally posted by Uncle Benny

This pmexplorer sure loves "his" Faul!

What an invaluable input you've made there.














There you go faulcon, a brief selection of pics spanning different periods in beatles history, you want to tell me where this incredibly apparent height difference is supposed to be?

Originally posted by MadameGuillotine
the clues are scintillating and vague at the same time.

That's why I prefer to concentrate on the physical/forensic evidence.

Originally posted by SednaSon

Originally posted by pmexplorer

Originally posted by faulconandsnowjob

Okay then faulcon let's have it?

What are the supposed discrepancies with this one eh?

Faul's head is larger compared to George's than Paul's is...which is what we've been saying all along.

The only thing we can determine from this photo is they are ugly bastards.

I think they replaced Lennon in the second photo as well, it looks nothing like him.

Paul looks equally ugly in both photos.

Originally posted by faulconandsnowjob

In that particular photo, the cheekbones and skull structure are off.

[edit on 8/25/2009 by Ethera]

[edit on 8/25/2009 by Ethera]

Originally posted by Ethera

Originally posted by faulconandsnowjob

In that particular photo, the cheekbones and skull structure are off.

Does that go for John Lennon too?
Or are we just picking and choosing again.

That's like posting this and this alongside each other
and saying the same thing, different facial expressions, from a grin
to a subdued smile or segue from a smile to a non expressive look.

Next...

Originally posted by Ethera
In that particular photo, the cheekbones and skull structure are off.

That's exactly what the forensics experts thought. /mw83db

[edit on 25-8-2009 by faulconandsnowjob]

Originally posted by faulconandsnowjob
That's why I prefer to concentrate on the physical/forensic evidence...

of which you really have none apart from borrowing facts from your precious Italian report and simultaneously ignoring any claims / analysis which refutes your own.

[edit on 25-8-2009 by pmexplorer]

Originally posted by pmexplorer
of which you really have none apart from borrowing facts from your precious Italian report

Don't forget I have photo comps that show the differences, too.







[edit on 25-8-2009 by faulconandsnowjob]

Originally posted by pmexplorer

Originally posted by Ethera

Originally posted by faulconandsnowjob

In that particular photo, the cheekbones and skull structure are off.

Does that go for John Lennon too?
Or are we just picking and choosing again.

That's like posting this

and this

alongside each other
and saying the same thing, different facial expressions, from a grin
to a subdued smile or segue from a smile to a non expressive look.

Next...

There is no picking and choosing, as you claim. I offered no reason as to why the dimensions appear differently, therefore what basis do you have to dismiss a theory that has not even been presented?

There is a just as much possibility the photos have been altered. I can take a picture of myself and using mass marketed photo manipulation software, change the dimensions of my face with a few clicks, giving the appearance of someone who looks like me, but is not quite the same.

Physiologically speaking, the lip corners on the left are lower, which should mean his cheeks are lower than in the pic on the left.

Next...

Let's pause for a moment of reflection.

You can join in this too aorki and uncle benny, give you time to cool your
jets eh.

And while we reflect on the last 78 pages of bogus claims, photoshopped images and fancy youtube montages, none of which would ever stand up in a court of law, let's sing along to the wondrous 'Shes Leaving Home' co-written by Paul in 1967. That would be the year after he was murdered / killed in an accident etc etc according to our beloved band of 'pid' believers.

But I was led to believe this replacement / lookalike did not have the musical or songwriting talent that Paul did?

Here's Paul performing this Beatles classic back in '02.

Enjoy.....

www.youtube.com...

Edit: This embed hasn't worked but the link does!


[edit on 25-8-2009 by pmexplorer]

Originally posted by pmexplorer

And while we reflect on the last 78 pages of bogus claims, photoshopped images and fancy youtube montages, none of which would ever stand up in a court of law, let's sing along to the wondrous 'Shes Leaving Home' co-written by Paul in 1967.

[edit on 25-8-2009 by pmexplorer]

Backlog? Tupac Shakur's backlog of material has been released on several CDs since his death. Those were just the actual recorded tracks, but his unrecorded work is said to have been extensive as well.

reply to post by Ethera


You know the nose does look quite different. The angle of the head seems the same and the later Paul has a nose that goes down farther.....

Originally posted by pmexplorer
And while we reflect on the last 78 pages of bogus claims, photoshopped images

You mean the ones that try to make Paul & Faul look more similar?

none of which would ever stand up in a court of law

Counselor, I think you need to review the laws of evidence.

let's sing along to the wondrous 'Shes Leaving Home' co-written by Paul in 1967.

You don't know it was written in 1967.

But I was led to believe this replacement / lookalike did not have the musical or songwriting talent that Paul did?

No, he doesn't. Just listen to "Ever Present Past" for confirmation of that.

Originally posted by MadameGuillotine
I found this great vid someone did for a folklore class.
7 parts, great info and a nice tongue in check style

[edit on 25-8-2009 by MadameGuillotine]

If you go to 2 minutes 58 secs in, the author mentions how original photos of Paul may have been stretched - This is something I`ve spoken to different people about many times before. It appears that many of the original photos of Paul have been doctored to make him appear more like Bill (Faul) - Bill has a bigger head (with a longer face).

Originally posted by pmexplorer
...of which you really have none apart from borrowing facts from your precious Italian report and simultaneously ignoring any claims / analysis which refutes your own.
[edit on 25-8-2009 by pmexplorer]

Why don`t you go back to MCF (Maccas Fun House) with your mate Diabolo - At least you had the intelligence to change your name, I can`t say the same for your German speaking friend however -

maccafunhouse.proboards.com...


For anyone who`s not aware of it, MCF is a forum set up with the intention to debunk "the PID hoax..." if you don`t mind (it`s written in their forum manifesto). Now why would anyone spend so much time trying to debunk "a hoax"???

Maybe Diabolo (disko1) can explain to our readers why he has set up a youtube channel specifically to cover up Paul McCartneys replacement - www.youtube.com...

Why does he spend most of his day signed in as Fireman on the David Icke forum to AGAIN... debunk a "supposed" hoax??


I`ll let people make up their own minds about it - but spending day-after-day for months on end, debunking what one believes to be a hoax is extremely fishy to me... if not downright nuts, UNLESS there`s a little truth there somewhere!









[edit on 25-8-2009 by Uncle Benny]

Originally posted by MadameGuillotine

You know the nose does look quite different.

Originally posted by Uncle Benny

Why does he spend most of his day signed in as Fireman on the David Icke forum to AGAIN... debunk a "supposed" hoax??

It's a tough job, but someone's gotta do it.

Originally posted by pmexplorer


That's like posting this

and this

alongside each other
and saying the same thing, different facial expressions, from a grin
to a subdued smile or segue from a smile to a non expressive look.

Next...

Not so fast!

You can see (though apparently not ) that those are definitely the same emoticon. The skull shape is identical, it's just the expression that is different.

This, however, is NOT the case regarding those photos above.

Cue Standard Mod Speech

Hi People,

Can we please focus on the POST and not the POSTER please.

Please lets keep it On-Topic and leave out the personal attacks and sidejabs.


Cheers,
ALIEN

I apologise, sincerely, to all those (it's obvious really) I've taken a dislike to through their posts. This is not a good modus operandi for me and so I am taking this chance to apologise for behaving badly and I will make more effort in the future to ignore any sniping and/or name calling and try to focus on the issue at hand.

Now, from where I sit it looks like there were/are 'subtle' changes in Paul's appearance and mannerisms over quite a short period of time, in fact over less time than has been ascribed to these changes occurring normally (so to speak).

Certainly, I notice the ears and nose changes the most.
Something piqued my interest and now I'm curious.

Alice in Wonderland has a lot to answer for!