Did Paul McCartney actually die in 1966?

Originally posted by jolois
Yeah on this video

You can hear "I buried Paul"...

Only thing I could find!

But according to wikipedia article..

Some vocalizing by Lennon is faintly audible at the end of the song, picked up as leakage onto one of the drum microphones (close listening shows Lennon making other comments to Ringo). In the "Paul is Dead" hoax these were taken to be Lennon saying "I buried Paul."[37] In 1974, McCartney said, "That wasn't 'I buried Paul' at all—that was John saying 'cranberry sauce'. It was the end of Strawberry Fields. That's John's humour. John would say something totally out of sync, like cranberry sauce. If you don't realize that John's apt to say cranberry sauce when he feels like it, then you start to hear a funny little word there, and you think, 'Aha!'".[38]

Not to dismiss the theory, but Lennon is quite clearly saying "Cranberry Sauce". Listen to it; he draws the "sssss" in "sauce" out at the end. I honestly believe that this is his humour and that he would have dropped something like this into a song. I mean, listen to the Let It Be version 'Two of Us' and 'Get Back'. Same silliness. Watch the DVD of the Beatles First U.S. Visit; they all have this kind of humour.

I don't know what to make of this conspiracy theory. The thought of it shatters my entire Beatles universe and, quite frankly, creeps me out. Although, I compare the pictures, read the suss song lyrics, observe the curcumstantial evidence, and while I admit that it all paints a rather interesting picture, I just don't think it's so.
You could analyse a millions pictures and some will look the same, some will look glaringly different, and much of it will depend on who is looking at those pictures. However, as another poster mentioned in a similar thread, if you can find William Shears Campbell and see what he is up to nowadays, then that puts much of the fire out. But if you can't ...

Until then, I don't believe that it is unreasonable to think that this was apart of a farce that someone or a group orchestrated for whatever means. But I do think it is in the Beatles humourous style to go along with it.


[edit on 8/6/10 by pretty_vacant]

Well here is a preview.

www.musicradar.com...

or

www.youtube.com...


I don't think I'm buying this one...



Check out these videos.

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

Originally posted by jolois

Did Paul McCartney actually die in 1966?

Paul McCartney has his 68th birthday coming up on June 18th. Or does he? MVD Visual announces the release of a film from Highway 61 Entertainment: PAUL McCartney Really Is Dead, The Last Testament of George Harrison for North American distribution on September 1, 2010. The following description of the film is provided by director Joel Gilbert of Highway 61 Entertainment:

[edit on 7-6-2010 by jolois]

Yeah, Macca is alive and well. This is a hoax that when the Beatles found out about it, started mischievously playing a long.

Anyway. This film looks absolutely terrible! Have a look at the video on the movie website! That isn't George!! It's an extremely bad impersonation of him. An impersonation by an American, too.

I was feeling pretty angry about someone using a dead hero of mine to sell their useless film but when the Harrison impersonator said "but" and pronounced it "boot" I could stop myself from laughing!

Haha! "Boot"!! How very Liverpudlian!

Originally posted by MAC269
reply to post by jolois

 

Dear jolois

The question is does it matter.

Apparently there was a clue at the end of strawberry fields which it you played it backwards side Paul is Dead.

I don’t know how difficult this would be to achieve maybe some into recording can tell us that.

I never like strawberry fields back then it was to way out for me but no0w I have a copy

The only thing I would say is that if they will do this they will do anything and that is most likely the way to look at it.

That's John saying "Cranberry Sauce" whive sounds a little like I buried Paul.

There is also what sounds like "miss him miss him" in reverse vocalisation.

Originally posted by jeh2324
Well here is a preview.

www.musicradar.com...

or

www.youtube.com...


I don't think I'm buying this one...



Check out these videos.

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

I'm not too... I think.


And yes when it's pretty clear he says "cranberry sauce".. You're right.
But the theory is still very interesting, the facts are "there"... But I guess the Beatles played along!!

Cheers!

Jolois

Have a look at the vids below

Have you seen this voice comparison between Paul and Faul's songs? It clearly shows a different imprint from the scientific analysis.

plasticmacca.blogspot.com...

Also I heard that two Italian forensic experts announced in Wired magazine that there is a high probability that the Paul before 1966 and after are different people. Here is an article about it in English.

plasticmacca.blogspot.com...

In the David Icke forum, there is a huge mega thread about this topic.

www.davidicke.com...

Originally posted by DOADOA
shouldn't this be in the MTV or BET forum and not on ATS?

this is a fine testament to the ultimate futility of a human mind. such much wasted oxygen in the world today.

THis conspiracy has been done to death on both ATS and BTS. Flogging a dead horse springs to mind

Let's drop a logic bomb on this one:

Paul dies. For a record company that means instant cash. It would shoot the Beatles even higher then they were. Selling commemorative t-shirts, mugs, memorial albums, the tv special, the movie biography, the unauthorized biography hardback, the paperback version, etc etc.

They are claiming that British intelligence somehow FORCED a business to go against the cash cow and cover it up because of the risk of suicides?

And why didn't they do this for John Lennon?

Or for George Harrison?

Check out these side by side comparison photos of an interview with Paul McCartney in 1966 vs. 1967.

Notice every aspect of the face. Look closely. Don't they look like obviously different people?

Check out this voice harmonics comparison between Paul saying "Hey" before and after 1966.



Also, listen to this short chilling interview with Heather Mills, Paul's ex wife. She claims that she knows a secret about Paul so devastating that it would endanger her life and that people would not be able to handle it. What could she be referring to?



[edit on 2-8-2010 by WWu777]

Oh no not Paul is Dead again. I believe there was a thread so heated it was shut down by the Mods. The most convincing evidence I have seen is the ear lobes are completely different. I don;t know where the pictures are but they are somewhere in the PID thread that was like 400 pages.

[edit on 2-8-2010 by dntwastetime]

I was 16 when this 'story' first broke. I didn't believe it then and I don't believe it now. There would have been no suicides in 66, had Paul died and the the news was released. It was a HOAX then and it is a HOAX now.

Originally posted by darkelf
I was 16 when this 'story' first broke. I didn't believe it then and I don't believe it now. There would have been no suicides in 66, had Paul died and the the news was released. It was a HOAX then and it is a HOAX now.

What about the photos and video by Heather Mills posted above? You didn't address them.

The photos clearly show two different people.

Here is a link to a Paul mccartney death site. It provided tons of the evidence that has been claimed as well as the backtracking of different songs and one of john lennons videos that shows paul's head in the window of a car at a car accident with X's over his eyes

homepages.tesco.net...

reply to post by jolois

If you look at Fauls angular head you can see that it's impossible for him to have penned 'Yesterday'. Paul's head was softer, more round, less angular than Faul's. An angular shape is more given to sounds such as in 'Helter Skelter'. Paul couldn't have written Helter Skelter', and Faul couldn't haven't written 'Yesterday', which was perfect, like an egg....

Now there's only 1 Beatle, sigh.

Originally posted by WolfofWar
Let's drop a logic bomb on this one:

Paul dies. For a record company that means instant cash. It would shoot the Beatles even higher then they were. Selling commemorative t-shirts, mugs, memorial albums, the tv special, the movie biography, the unauthorized biography hardback, the paperback version, etc etc.

They are claiming that British intelligence somehow FORCED a business to go against the cash cow and cover it up because of the risk of suicides?

And why didn't they do this for John Lennon?

Or for George Harrison?

Because the Beatles were long gone when John and George died?

reply to post by davidmann


The Beatles were hardly over, the band may have died but the fans were still just as strong. We named an entire section of Central Park after a Beatles song, for Darwins sake!

Those pictures are hardly proof of a grand coverup that goes against the basic principles of good marketing. People look drastically different in their 20s as they do in they late 20s and mid 30s. You still have a lot of baby fat to burn on your face, and as your skin looses elasticity your features begin to change. Your jowl begins to lengthen, your eyes become more sunken, etc.

Likewise as you age your voice modulates different. Smoking, changes in environments, eating habits, all of these can change the sound of your voice.

Blurry black and white photographs also kind of soften and distort your image. Makes you look a lot different. Case in point:

If he died, whomever they got to replace him is one helluva bass player, same as the original was. He's also is a good singer and songwriter, so it begs the question - does it matter if he's dead? If he is, the guy they got to replace him was just as good as the original!

[edit on 8/3/2010 by LifeInDeath]

Naaa! hes crap since Lennon stopped working with him in way back when..