gordo
Welcome new member
Posts: 9
|
Post by gordo on Aug 12, 2003 20:21:07 GMT
Hello I have been reading this story with interest.
However, there are a few tests which can clear this up once and for all.
1. A DNA test of the current Paul against his brother Mike.
2. Tracing the birth certificates and family of the supposed Canadian imposter, which can be done through public records. CHecking of the RCMP (or military) had such a member.
3. Asking Denny Laine for a reaction, as he knew Paul in the early 60's (the Moody Blues toured as the support act on the 64 beatles US tour). It seems inconceivalble that Denny would cooperate with an imposter for so long.
I am being healthily skeptical here.
Yes, the photographic comparisons are quite striking but photographs can be manipulated. The truth is out there, and its not that far out of reach. It would just take someone to do some old fashioned paper research.
Oh, on the song backlog theory, I fully accept that this is possible. One of my friends has been in the same rock group since 1967 and released an album 2 years ago which was mad eup entirely of songs he wrote before 1976 but which he had not got round to recording, more than 10 albums later.
Gordon
|
|
|
Post by TotalInformation on Aug 12, 2003 20:56:03 GMT
1. Any DNA test would have to be both surreptitious and double blind, as well as secure. They can be faked.
2. Most official records of Sheppard would be long since gone.
3. I don't know much anything about Denny Laine, but he probably decided early on he didn't want to be the next Tara Browne. . .
|
|
|
Post by TotalInformation on Aug 12, 2003 20:56:46 GMT
PS - Uberkinder has invited anyone and everyone to prove he manipulated the photos he used.
|
|
|
Post by SunKing on Aug 12, 2003 21:05:43 GMT
PS - Uberkinder has invited anyone and everyone to prove he manipulated the photos he used. ...so Sun King that HAS the original documents....
|
|
|
Post by TotalInformation on Aug 12, 2003 21:15:23 GMT
I hope you will be posting some of the original documents!
|
|
Matt
Contributor
Posts: 99
|
Post by Matt on Aug 12, 2003 21:22:22 GMT
If it were possible to pinpoint exactly where in Ontario Paul's imposter served with the O.P.P. or R.C.M.P. or whatever (which is it anyway??) then one could conceivably check police files. Sure, his records might be erased, but there would still be people living who would've served with him who might remember him "mysteriously disappearing" in 1966; and possibly be able to attest wether he had any singing ability or not.
(p.s. i still don't think paul's '69 songs sound like they were written in '66)
|
|
|
Post by TotalInformation on Aug 12, 2003 21:27:21 GMT
(PS I still don't think your opinions on songwriting are particularly compelling.)
|
|
Matt
Contributor
Posts: 99
|
Post by Matt on Aug 13, 2003 0:37:46 GMT
TotalInformation
I am a songwriter. I know other songwriters, and they agree with me.
What is it about my opinion that you don't agree with?
|
|
|
Post by TotalInformation on Aug 13, 2003 4:43:23 GMT
There are several songwriters posting on this board.
|
|
|
Post by Uberkinder on Aug 13, 2003 5:47:19 GMT
All it would really require is a simple melody hummed onto a tape that John or anyone else could add lyrics to. Even concievably Faul.
My father is a professional songwriter (several #1's country singles for Joe Diffie) and I'm also trying to go professional, and we both have literally HUNDREDS UPON HUNDREDS of unused songs, melodies and bits of music lying around in tapes and notebooks too numerous to count. And Paul had certainly developed considerably by the time Revolver came around. Notice that almost all of Paul's songs on Sgt. Pepper, MMT and even the White Album are normal pop songs or traditional dance hall style songs, not acid freak-outs like John's.
Paul is known to have not taken acid at least up until the time that Day Tripper was released, while John took it before this and started writing songs such as "Tomorrow Never Knows" and "She Said She Said" which show a definate drug influence. So isn't it interesting that all that supposed acid used doesn't seem to have effected the nature of Paul's songs, while John dropped love songs for "Mr. Kite" and "Glass Onion"? You're telling me that songs like "Mother Nature's Son" or "Blackbird" couldn't have appeared on Revolver?
|
|
gordo
Welcome new member
Posts: 9
|
Post by gordo on Aug 13, 2003 9:52:49 GMT
Hi Just to clarify.
I was not claiming that the photos HAD been manipulated, just that they COULD have been.
Oneof the most compelling arguments re the songwriting is: why did Paul require so many songwriting collaborators over they years as a solo artist, when in the 60's he wrote songs like Yesterday and Blackbied without any external input (although jointly crediting them for royalty purposes).
Another thing which makes me come down against the imposter theory is the ease with which paul slipped into the accesnt (if he was replaced). I know there are claims he was often putting on other accents, but htis was the influence of the Goon Show ( a radio program) on many young people in the 60's
All in all, I have not seen a convincing overall argument advanced which explains WHY a replacement was required. The story about Epstein and McCartney being kidnapped is clearly untrue as Epstein didnt die till much later.
If you claim Epstein was also replaced then why bother with that? All they had to do was claim he committed suicide, which is what happened eventually.
No, this does not stack up at all.
The photos demand an explanation and the only one I can come up with is that they are of a different person, but the reasons advanced make no sense.
|
|
|
Post by Forum Manager on Aug 13, 2003 21:19:08 GMT
Oneof the most compelling arguments re the songwriting is: why did Paul require so many songwriting collaborators over they years as a solo artist, when in the 60's he wrote songs like Yesterday and Blackbied without any external input (although jointly crediting them for royalty purposes). you just proved our point! the real paul didnt need all the songwriting colabborators. but the fake paul did! thanx for helping our argument!
|
|
|
Post by SunKing on Aug 13, 2003 21:41:53 GMT
If it were possible to pinpoint exactly where in Ontario Paul's imposter served with the O.P.P. or R.C.M.P. or whatever (which is it anyway??) then one could conceivably check police files. Sure, his records might be erased, but there would still be people living who would've served with him who might remember him "mysteriously disappearing" in 1966; and possibly be able to attest wether he had any singing ability or not. (p.s. i still don't think paul's '69 songs sound like they were written in '66) Dear Matt, it's simple, very simple. Do you know "Her Majesty" that is THE VERY LAST song published by the Beatles? Well, that is a TYPICAL example of what James Paul really left.
|
|
Matt
Contributor
Posts: 99
|
Post by Matt on Aug 13, 2003 22:37:35 GMT
Granted. And it is true that Paul's song never really became psychedelic, although he was supposedly taking lots of acid.
|
|
gordo
Welcome new member
Posts: 9
|
Post by gordo on Aug 14, 2003 8:14:46 GMT
Ok I am playing "devils advocate" here. I DO believe the current Paul is not the original one (simply based on the physical evidence), but the story as told does not stack up for me on a number of levels.
However, here is another issue: The current Paul (Faul if you like) can't sing beatles early numbers in the original keys according to George martin. I dont have the live album he just recorded, but I heard GM say in an interview that paul had damaged his voice during the Wings period and lost a lot of his range as a result.
I wish I had a record of that, but i don't.
There has also been a bit of a personality change. Paul was a very generous guy. I know that when the Moody Blues were on the point of breaking up he wrote a song for them called "Those were the days" (eventually a hit for mary Hopkin). He was sure it would be a hit but Denny Laine didn't like it, resulting in Bass player Clint Warwick leaving the band and Denny shortly afterwards.
There are lots of stories of his generousity, but in later life he has been much more guarded. Could just be the experience of life, but perhaps not.
Gordon
|
|
|
Post by datkanniet on Aug 14, 2003 10:39:22 GMT
Is there taken in account that if you take a picture with different lenses you can get deformations of the face. For example if you take picture fromn somebody with 35 mm lens or even lower you get big nose in comparrison with the rest of the face. And if you take a picture of somebody with a 120 mm lens you a more normal proportioned face. Isn't it so that you have to be sure that the picture has been taken with the same lens.
|
|
|
Post by OceanChild on Aug 14, 2003 10:43:09 GMT
I'm not a songwriter, but wouldn't one say that it wouldn't be too difficult to update a song from 66 to 69? Isn't it mainly in the arrangement and producing?
I'm thinking of "I Took A Trip On A Gemini Spaceship" from David Bowie's recent album 'Heathen'. It's a cover of a song from (I think) 1969. On Heathen it's completely modern and not even remotely similar to the original. And what about Aretha Franklin's version of 'Eleanor Rigby'? It's very different from Paul's version.
|
|
gordo
Welcome new member
Posts: 9
|
Post by gordo on Aug 14, 2003 11:54:04 GMT
Is there taken in account that if you take a picture with different lenses you can get deformations of the face. For example if you take picture fromn somebody with 35 mm lens or even lower you get big nose in comparrison with the rest of the face. And if you take a picture of somebody with a 120 mm lens you a more normal proportioned face. Isn't it so that you have to be sure that the picture has been taken with the same lens.
This varies depending on how far the mens is from the face. The sperical abberations on wide angle lenses only really apply if you are very very close, not at normal ranges.
You also have to bear in mind that press photographers use good lenses which have less abberation (Nikon, Leica etc) than cheaper types.
On the songwriting, i have said before that one of my friends did an album 2 years ago of songs he wrote before 1975, yet he had done 10+ albums in between. It was quite difficult to tell they were old songs. If you hear the original demos the arrangements are quite different.
The song issue is not insurmountable, the reasons for wishing to continue without Paul still dont stack up for me. Sorry, the story is rather like some of the UFO disinofrmation/fake documents which contain enough truth to discredit anyone trying to get to it.
|
|
gordo
Welcome new member
Posts: 9
|
Post by gordo on Aug 14, 2003 11:59:20 GMT
Let me clarify what I mean:
The imposter is unlikely to be Canadian, but its a useful false trail to send people on.
The document will send you on all sorts of false trails while the truth lies in other places.
|
|
|
Post by SunKing on Aug 14, 2003 13:00:45 GMT
Is there taken in account that if you take a picture with different lenses you can get deformations of the face. For example if you take picture fromn somebody with 35 mm lens or even lower you get big nose in comparrison with the rest of the face. And if you take a picture of somebody with a 120 mm lens you a more normal proportioned face. Isn't it so that you have to be sure that the picture has been taken with the same lens. Well ALL THAT already checked (and told) in the "old" forum. Repetita iuvant. Here below an example of Paul/Faul features comparison: Here below an example of DIFFERENT lens distortion effect on Faul face: ...for the benefit or Mr Kite....
|
|
|
Post by SunKing on Aug 14, 2003 13:08:20 GMT
Please send me another one....just for the number... then I'll check them ;D
|
|
|
Post by SunKing on Aug 14, 2003 13:18:36 GMT
thaat would mean copying and pasting schtuff all over again.... No, My Friend! Just because I've a "bad" number and fixing it....
|
|
|
Post by SunKing on Aug 14, 2003 13:50:25 GMT
Jae, please show the Friend what I've just sent you....
|
|
|
Post by SunKing on Aug 14, 2003 15:13:10 GMT
Let me clarify what I mean: The imposter is unlikely to be Canadian, but its a useful false trail to send people on. The document will send you on all sorts of false trails while the truth lies in other places. Gordo, you could be right. It doesn't matter if "60IF" is all true or not. It just brought us to the definitive truth that is: "James Paul McCartney and Brian Epstein were replaced in fall 1966." And this is the MOST important thing.
|
|
|
Post by devilsadv on Aug 14, 2003 15:13:50 GMT
As for the song writing, the production can make the old songs sound new. For example, "One After 909" was an old song that was done on "Let It Be." It sounds very different from what it did in the early 60s as it appears on the Anthology 1 CD.
Also, on the Anthology DVD, Paul/Faul says that "Golden Slumbers" was something Paul came up with as a kid based on a lullaby in a book of his father. A number of the later songs had been around for years.
|
|