|
|
Post by TotalInformation on Sept 8, 2003 16:22:36 GMT
Vand, if I made any comment about your vocabulary usage it was certainly before I knew you were not a native English speaker. I do not recall doing so, however. But if it helps your persecution complex, go for it.
A number of photos have been compared and morphed here and on the other two sites that are not from the 60IF site and the posters here of those pics have stated their sources, including those who have verified the pics on Sun King's site. By impying that the photos Sun King scanned in were not 40 years old and were in fact recent fabrications (which would be readily noticeable, as prints age), you are in fact accusing him of lying, and your denials as to same are in fact bullsh*t. That's fact, not flame.
I can understand your desire to ignore me, as the truth hurts, but I will not ignore your mistruths and I will point them out whensoever I wish.
Cheers.
|
|
|
|
Post by Forum Manager on Sept 8, 2003 19:21:11 GMT
children children!!!
cant we all just get along?
dont make me shake my stick!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by PaulBearer on Sept 9, 2003 1:57:01 GMT
Mr. Vanderbuilt has been observed as being on these forums 24/7. I wonder why. Could he be a "professional"?
|
|
RZ4
Contributor
Posts: 17
|
Post by RZ4 on Sept 9, 2003 6:42:42 GMT
Mr. Vanderbuilt has been observed as being on these forums 24/7. I wonder why. Could he be a "professional"? Hmm...interesting. Who knows though? What I do probably know, is that among all of the people that frequent this forum, there has to be at least one or two "professionals" or "authorities" among us. That's what I think, anyway. |
|
Mykel
Contributor
Posts: 12
|
Post by Mykel on Sept 15, 2003 6:24:11 GMT
Having worked with Faul in the 90s, I can say that this man is definitely well over 6 ft tall, which Paul was not (McCartney was 5'11"). I say was, because there are other areas which prove to me that Paul was indeed replaced and it does appear from the evidence to have happened around the recording of the Sgt Pepper's album!
Like it? Hell no! But that does not change the facts, I am afraid. I most definitely feel cheated, thinking I was working with Paul McCartney, only to find years later that the pecularities I never even noticed at the time (but which were definitely there) were because of the fact that this guy was not Paul.
I think very strongly that something should be done to expose this fraud, but I also have reservations because of what the repercussions to Ringo may be!
|
|
|
|
Post by MrMustard on Sept 15, 2003 6:35:10 GMT
Wow, you worked with Faul? Hey it's better than nothing, Faul is still cool! How and when and where? Ur so lucky! ;D ;D ;D
|
|
Mykel
Contributor
Posts: 12
|
Post by Mykel on Sept 15, 2003 6:56:16 GMT
Well, Ms Mustard, I worked in Cleveland with Faul and also visited his and Linda's ranch in Tucson AZ numerous times!
|
|
|
|
Post by MrMustard on Sept 15, 2003 7:01:07 GMT
Oh you're so incredibly lucky, my dream is to meet one of the Beatles, even if it is Faul! but I don't think I ever will.....  What were you doing with Faul, playing music? Or are you two just friends? (sorry but I'm curious) |
|
|
|
Post by IanSingleton777 on Sept 17, 2003 12:50:37 GMT
(switch on yer best Scouse accent) "This Vanderbillt; he's a bloody Troll. Wanker! Sod off!"  |
|
|
|
Post by Forum Manager on Sept 18, 2003 1:30:28 GMT
nah, mykel isnt vanderbuilt.
|
|
|
|
Post by beldabeast on Sept 20, 2003 17:46:05 GMT
hello Stormie, First, I would agree with Sun King's suggestion to read more posts. (I know it takes time)  From a Scientific and forensic point of view I wouldn't call the things Sun King builds his "thruth" on "Evidence" at all. With the information I've seen and read so far I can't just simply "believe" that Paul is dead. I admit that the best part in the story is of course the section in which the pre 1966 pictures of Paul are compared to post 1966 ones. But this is not evidence since no real official authority on face and skull forensics so far has mingled in this debate and/or confirmed that the comparisons presented are made up in any scientific way (I mean, we obviously need more investigation about the methods of comparing photographic angles, resizing, sources of the pictures used, etc...). The only thing we can refer to as an existing source used by whoever made up these photographical comparisons in the 60IF document is this book Sun King refers to in one of his posts: www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0471560782/qid%3D1058543328/sr%3D1-2/ref%3Dsr%5F1%5F0%5F2/026-4565195-8418818 But this book might just as well be a good clue on how some people (whoever) made up this story: They might have used the book as nothing more but a "how to" manual to present us with these 'semi-scientific' photo's. As for the rest: most of the "clues" found on album covers or songs you read about here are pretty far fetched, and are free for any interpretation. Just an example: In the past, tests have been done where random listeners were exposed to backwards messages on various rock albums. No tested person could at first hear the sugested messages right, UNTIL they were told what they were supposed to hear. Just to say that these audiovisual "clues" are highly suggestive and you can use these sort of clues to prove anything you like. The "evidence" of a big change in Paul's voice after "66. (as presented on Uberkinder's site uberkinder.5u.com/paul/voc/vc1.html) is not convincing at all, when you listen thourougly on a good set of speakers. The changes in Paul's voice can easily be explained by other factors, (I wrote more about that in another posting). The story itself of the 60IF document contains more holes than the amount of holes John Lennon counted in Blackburn, Lancashire (in "A Day In A Life"). The 60IF story is an accumulation of so many inconsistencies, and historical mistakes, that it raises the question why the folks who wrote this stuff didn't consult better historical Beatles refferences before publishing their amusing story on the net. In the 60 IF FAQ it is also mentioned that: "60IF is a compilation of evidential documention (including over 10000 original EMI photos, narratives and more ../.." Many people on the board have asked Sun King (and others) to elaborate on this fact, and give us some proof or another that this huge version of the document really exists. No accurate reply on this question was given so far. One could argue that it's impossible to publish this amount of info on the net in a short amount of time, but after all the controversy going on, one might at least expect that some interesting exerpts of the full document would have been published by now, and leave us, sceptics baffled. If this full document contains more and inevitable proof of the death of Paul in '66, one could also wonder why the whole document wasn't fully published in the first place, instead of this highly condensed version. So to answer your question: As you might have guessed by now, no, I don't believe Paul is dead. Here's the link to other stuff I've been writing on this board during the last days: 60if.proboards21.com/index.cgi?action=usersrecentposts&user=MrVanderbuiltI hope you do enjoy your stay here as much as I do. Yeah , but you can look at the 67 pics abd tell those are 2 different people . Heck , the guy looks like 4 different people in a space of five years . And I am hoping to prove paul is alive , NOT dead . But alas , what I want and hope has no bearing on the facts . Is James Paul alive ? I hope so. Is the present Paul the same as the old Paul ? I do not think so. |
|
|
|
Post by Elidor on Sept 20, 2003 20:07:32 GMT
In what sense are the rumours "strong against him"? There are 2 sites that proclaim this version of events in 1966 on the whole of the WWW. Most people who read it, like me, find it entertaining, but wont beleive it. Many people knew Macca in the sixties and know him today. I can't believe that none of them would have come forward.
If Harrison wanted to make sure such information got out, there are numerous methods by which he could have achieved his aim, all better than relying on a dodgy cobbled together 1st and 3rd person account that would eventually sit on the internet alongside a myriad of conspiracy theories, many of which actually have hard evidence to support them.
Why not make a VT and put it out on his own website, send multiple copies to various people, organisations, sworn affidavit to a lawyer, several lawyers. And Ringo? Was there ever a more honest face? I ask you!!!?
|
|
|
|
Post by Elidor on Sept 20, 2003 20:10:59 GMT
According to the US radio show "Coast to Coast" website, a forensic scientist stated that the images used on uberkinder and 60IF were no use as they were not taken from the exact same angle and they do not therefore constitute evidence.
|
|
|
|
Post by byrdsmaniac on Sept 20, 2003 22:08:15 GMT
already been 'disgust', Elidor...  |
|
|
|
Post by SunKing on Sept 21, 2003 12:30:03 GMT
According to the US radio show "Coast to Coast" website, a forensic scientist stated that the images used on uberkinder and 60IF were no use as they were not taken from the exact same angle and they do not therefore constitute evidence. So police identikits and LEGAL recognitions made by medical examiners are ALL faked.... ;D ;D ;D ;D The result of an animation made of photos taken from different angles of the SAME subject is just an animation (movie) of the SAME subject. His face features don't change during the animation. THEY ARE JUST LAWS OF PHYSICS AND HUMAN ANATOMY. THAT'S ALL FOLKS  |
|
|
|
Post by Chris on Sept 21, 2003 14:21:22 GMT
;D ;D ;D WTG S.K. You're so cool. Do you know that  As always, we appreciate everything that you're doing to reveal the truth !!!!! Luv yah, honey.... Chris ;D |
|
|
|
Post by SunKing on Sept 21, 2003 14:34:47 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Elidor on Sept 21, 2003 15:11:21 GMT
As none of us are forensic scientists I don't think any of us are in a position to disagree with one. The photo evidence remains unconvincing, to me, anyway. I have original vinyl copies of all the Beatles UK album releases, and McCartney, as far as I can see, is the same size as Harrison and Lennon on the cover of Abbey Rd. Other pictures of the same era I have also show there to be no discrepancies in height.
The picture of Jand And Paul in the graveyard does not reveal the fact that Paul is standing on higher ground than Jane, and a picture from a few seconds earlier show them to be at their normal heights. Can I also just say that there is nothing unusual in taking a walk through old graveyards, at least in the UK. Indeed, if the graveyard is historical you can observe people having picnics in them. Very often they are tourist oriented. There is definitely a tendency here to read too much into insignificant details. And can I just say, I thought the treatment of Vanderbuilt, who used logic and reason throughout was outrageous.
|
|
|
|
Post by SunKing on Sept 21, 2003 15:16:07 GMT
As none of us are forensic scientists ... Please Elidor I 'm sorry for you but... I AM A PROFESSIONAL (UE CERTIFIED) IN LEGAL COMPARISON. THAT'S ALL FOLKS |
|
|
|
Post by TheWatusi on Sept 21, 2003 16:03:48 GMT
i would Really love to see those pictures mentioned.
|
|
|
|
Post by PaulBearer on Sept 22, 2003 2:30:26 GMT
The picture of Jand And Paul in the graveyard does not reveal the fact that Paul is standing on higher ground than Jane, and a picture from a few seconds earlier show them to be at their normal heights. Absolutely untrue. I have seen a video of Faul and Jane walking together - the same incredible height difference! Why don't you show us the photo of a few seconds earlier - if it even exist! We've already discussed this guy before. I agree that he wan't alwayas treated with proper respect however - banning someone is a judgement call and sometimes we simply have to go by gut instinct. Something simply didn't sit right with the guy. Logical and reasonable huh? Saying Paul was 100% alive? No doubt whatsoever? That 60IF was full of 4000 holes or somesuch with little elaboration? He made a number of sweeping statements without giving any real foundation. And, in spite of the way he appeared to come across (polite and conciliaratory) he was actually being quite manipulative and was not really going to listen to any argument that we had. He was here to disrupt but did it in a very subtle way. I was quite hacked off when I noticed he hijacked one particular newcomer's thread who was still finding his way around with something like "Paul's 100% alive so don't worry about it" or somesuch. That kind of arrogance really gets to me. He kept quoting official sources to make his points but we have already shown that with such a coverup as this that official sources are unreliable. Yet he would keep quoting them anyway. We can't waste time arguing against every official quote. He was highlighting too much misinformation. But we shouldn't need to justify who we ban. I've talked about Vandi enough times already. Yes, he could've been treated better while he was here and that concerns me; nevertheless banning him was justified in the opinion of the moderators. |
|
|
|
Post by TheWatusi on Sept 22, 2003 3:20:41 GMT
yes, i would be VERY interested in seeing the pictures taken right before that shows their "real" heights....now you wouldnt happen to have those, would you, elidor? |
|
|
|
Post by burntangel on Sept 26, 2003 5:26:10 GMT
MI5 and the Tavistock slugs have a vested interest in keeping Faul as Paul, so certainly this site will have its quota of coverts to dick around with those that are aware of the TRUE facts - Paul died and was replaced by a MILITARY boy, loyal to the crown, no matter the cost.
Stay the course. Boot every spook that comes crawling out of the slime they were born in, right out of here.
f**k em.
|
|
What were you doing with Faul, playing music? Or are you two just friends? (sorry but I'm curious)
