|
|
Post by SunKing on Nov 7, 2004 23:27:18 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by beatled on Nov 7, 2004 23:58:32 GMT
I'll agree with you, but you can always tell which "Paul" it is, no matter when it was published. Any change would have to be subliminal, aimed at calming the feeling of cognitive dissonance. Hard to prove, but I'd venture to say that an effort was made, yes.
|
|
|
|
Post by BeatlePaul on Nov 8, 2004 7:13:31 GMT
I'll agree with you, but you can always tell which "Paul" it is, no matter when it was published. Any change would have to be subliminal, aimed at calming the feeling of cognitive dissonance. Hard to prove, but I'd venture to say that an effort was made, yes.   I don't need quotes. |
|
|
|
Post by abbey on Nov 8, 2004 14:58:33 GMT
It's good to see Sun King posting more photos of Paul. He is correct in his observation. I agree with Beatled. However, in the photo comparison that BeatlePaul just made, the resemblance is superficial at best.
Just compare their ears !
|
|
|
|
Post by beldabeast on Nov 9, 2004 17:55:44 GMT
It's good to see Sun King posting more photos of Paul. He is correct in his observation. I agree with Beatled. However, in the photo comparison that BeatlePaul just made, the resemblance is superficial at best. Just compare their ears ! I cant believe we ever thought that could be Paul . What is really interesting in to cover half his face at a time and compare the profiles . On some of them the difference is downright WEIRD ! |
|
|
|
Post by BeatlePaul on Nov 9, 2004 20:08:06 GMT
I cant believe we ever thought that could be Paul . What is really interesting in to cover half his face at a time and compare the profiles . On some of them the difference is downright WEIRD ! Exactly! ... and what about the chin shape... |
|
|
|
Post by abbey on Nov 9, 2004 20:12:54 GMT
I agree completely, Belda ! It's SO good to have you back amongst us ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by SunKing on Nov 10, 2004 21:19:36 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by abbey on Nov 11, 2004 13:38:58 GMT
I noticed in this photo just how BIG Paul's eyes were. Also, he had the most beautiful LONG eyelashes. Why is it that the boys always get the LONG eyelashes ?  Anyway, has anyone done a comparison of this ? A comparison of eye size, shape & length of eyelashes between the two men ? |
|
|
|
Post by SunKing on Nov 11, 2004 14:28:13 GMT
I noticed in this photo just how BIG Paul's eyes were. Also, he had the most beautiful LONG eyelashes. Why is it that the boys always get the LONG eyelashes ? Anyway, has anyone done a comparison of this ? A comparison of eye size, shape & length of eyelashes between the two men ? ...strange... At: 60if.proboards21.com/index.cgi?board=Essential&action=display&thread=1085815478there is the answer. The strange thing is that "Sister Mary Abbey" has "officially" already seen that thread... ...strange... |
|
|
|
Post by abbey on Nov 11, 2004 14:47:21 GMT
Well excuuuuuuseeeee meeeeeeee !!!! ;D Geez, S.K., that was back in May ! I'm lucky I can remember what I ate for breakfast ! After looking at that thread AGAIN, I saw that it was mostly concerning eye COLOR. Eye shape was discussed, but not eye size or eyelash length. So, do you want to take that on S.K. ? ;D  BTW - after looking at the FOTH sequence eye photo again, I have to agree that it is Paul's real eyes. However, I still don't agree that he had eyes that light colored. I think that photo was doctored somehow ! |
|
|
|
Post by BeatlePaul on Nov 15, 2004 22:08:57 GMT
  1963-1965 - a Boy became a Father -Father Mc....Cartney- |
|
