|
Hehe
Sept 2, 2005 19:04:20 GMT
Post by TPIMaster on Sept 2, 2005 19:04:20 GMT
|
|
|
Hehe
Sept 6, 2005 18:11:22 GMT
Post by abbey on Sept 6, 2005 18:11:22 GMT
That's because Bill rewrites history or makes up story that weren't true llike his story about how the song "Michelle" came about One of Bill's biggest gaffaws was stating the he never wore glasses until his later years when we all know that James Paul was blind as a bat and even have picture of Paul with those thick lensed, black framed glasses. Those pictures are on the forum here somewhere. Here is a picture of Paul putting in his contact lenses...
|
|
|
Hehe
Sept 6, 2005 18:25:58 GMT
Post by abbey on Sept 6, 2005 18:25:58 GMT
|
|
|
Hehe
Sept 6, 2005 23:30:07 GMT
Post by plastic paul on Sept 6, 2005 23:30:07 GMT
Ok SMA point accepted, but we can't really going around saying JPM was as blind as a bat!
|
|
|
Hehe
Sept 7, 2005 10:55:40 GMT
Post by TPIMaster on Sept 7, 2005 10:55:40 GMT
It's just a comparison, like the ones RRD makes, but those move ;D (No, I don't expect RRD to make a comparison of a pic of a bat with Paul ;D)
|
|
|
Hehe
Sept 7, 2005 17:31:43 GMT
Post by ReallyReallyDead on Sept 7, 2005 17:31:43 GMT
Full legal proofs!
|
|
|
Hehe
Sept 8, 2005 0:25:11 GMT
Post by BeatlePaul on Sept 8, 2005 0:25:11 GMT
RRD, excellent your avatar! Change it NO MORE. Thanks!
|
|
|
Hehe
Sept 8, 2005 21:03:44 GMT
Post by ReallyReallyDead on Sept 8, 2005 21:03:44 GMT
you mean this?
|
|
Dr.No
Contributor
Posts: 177
|
Hehe
Sept 9, 2005 3:39:52 GMT
Post by Dr.No on Sept 9, 2005 3:39:52 GMT
|
|
|
Hehe
Sept 9, 2005 5:45:47 GMT
Post by McGarrett-Five-0 on Sept 9, 2005 5:45:47 GMT
Paul is looking at this Rolling Stones Album. The Rolling Stones: Mick Jagger (vocals, percussion); Keith Richards (vocals, guitar); Brian Jones (guitar, dulcimer, sitar, marimba, bells); Bill Wyman (marimba, bass, bells); Charlie Watts (marimba, drums, percussion). Additional personnel: Jack Nitzsche, Ian Stewart (piano, organ, harpsichord). Recorded at RCA Studios, Hollywood, California. Includes liner notes by Dave Hassinger. The Rolling Stones' first set of all-original material--a full two years after the Beatles had passed that milestone with A HARD DAY'S NIGHT--1966's AFTERMATH is arguably the Stones' first truly great album, as opposed to a selection of killer singles padded out with some forgettable filler. Not that the singles aren't killers; "Paint It Black" and "Under My Thumb" are two of the Stones' most inventive chart successes, their sitar and marimba touches showing that at least through 1966, the Stones were just as likely as the Beatles, Kinks or Who to release a single that sounded like nothing else on the radio. Of the album tracks, "Lady Jane" and "Stupid Girl" are standouts, the former another of the boys' Elizabethan oddities and the latter a stomping, snotty garage rocker. Even better, though, are formal experiments like "I Am Waiting," a spooky acoustic tune that sounds like the boys had been listening to George Harrison's Indian excursions. Several of the more blues-based tracks press the five-minute barrier, culminating in the nearly 12-minute blues-rock rave-up "Goin' Home," one of the few extended jams that's actually worth the extra minutes. Source-CD Universe
|
|
|
Hehe
Sept 13, 2005 0:56:55 GMT
Post by brackwater on Sept 13, 2005 0:56:55 GMT
So... after being bigger then Jesus (lol), having a stoned acid trip through life, then having another succesful career with a new band, and then still be making concerts and music. Think youd remember a lot? Hes old man!
|
|
|
Hehe
Sept 13, 2005 4:39:37 GMT
Post by abbey on Sept 13, 2005 4:39:37 GMT
RRD, that was fantastic with the bat. I also agree with BP, keep the fantastic avatar.
"Blind as a bat" is only an expression, but in reality Paul was very near sighted. He really couldn't see more than a few feet in front of him without the glasses or contact lenses.
Brackwater, it was Johnny who made the remark about being more popular than Jesus. Both John and Paul formed new bands..........both dropped acid, although John has stated he's done a hundred or more and I don't think Paul tripped out that many times.
Yes, Faul/Bill whatever you want to call him IS OLD!!!! He is at least 70. JPM would have been 63 years old, but Bill is several years older than JPM was.
|
|
|
Hehe
Sept 26, 2005 21:32:48 GMT
Post by peoplescommittee on Sept 26, 2005 21:32:48 GMT
Do we have exact proof beyond the document this forum was founded around? I would think that for it to work better, the replacement would have to be either the same age, a little younger, or a tiny bit older.
|
|
|
Hehe
Sept 26, 2005 21:56:43 GMT
Post by helterskelter on Sept 26, 2005 21:56:43 GMT
I don't think the replacement was younger, mostly because to me, he definetly doesn't look younger than Paul. I would have to guess that Bill is a couple of years older than Paul, 4- 5 or even more. I'm not that great with ages.
|
|
|
Hehe
Sept 27, 2005 0:16:45 GMT
Post by plastic paul on Sept 27, 2005 0:16:45 GMT
I think he is at most 70, I disagree with... Yes, Faul/Bill whatever you want to call him IS OLD!!!! He is at least 70. However it is pointless to argue about this because the point is he is not JPM!!!
|
|
|
Hehe
Oct 9, 2005 0:56:54 GMT
Post by helterskelter on Oct 9, 2005 0:56:54 GMT
You know, he might be wearing John's glasses in those pictures. Just a thought.
|
|
|
Hehe
Oct 9, 2005 10:21:02 GMT
Post by TPIMaster on Oct 9, 2005 10:21:02 GMT
You know, he might be wearing John's glasses in those pictures. Just a thought. John wore contacts till 1966. Since the end of 1966, he started wearing his typical granny glasses.
|
|
|
Hehe
Oct 9, 2005 15:17:38 GMT
Post by helterskelter on Oct 9, 2005 15:17:38 GMT
Yeah I know, but John still had glasses, even if he wore contact lenses. It's not like he would wear contacts 24/7. John's glasses were thick with black frames. Especially in that Beatle Book photo, it looks like Paul is wearing John's glasses. On a side note, has anyone else noticed that in SMA's first pics of Paul with glasses, it looks like there are diamonds in the frames? Hehehe.
|
|
|
Hehe
Oct 9, 2005 17:57:37 GMT
Post by defhermit on Oct 9, 2005 17:57:37 GMT
Wow, I had no idea they even had contact lenses in 1966...
|
|
TheDZ
Provocative Operator
Posts: 435
|
Hehe
Oct 9, 2005 18:01:44 GMT
Post by TheDZ on Oct 9, 2005 18:01:44 GMT
|
|