|
|
Post by Quarryman on Dec 8, 2003 2:41:44 GMT
I think we have another problem here. This picture was taken in August of 1966, BEFORE the supposed switch. I found it on a photo thread in the James Paul McCartney section. Look at the photo below it. IT'S THE SAME GUY!!!!!   Look at the "scar" when Paul makes that expression. Look at the shape of the eyes! This is the same man!!!!! |
|
|
|
Post by Darkhorse on Dec 8, 2003 3:07:09 GMT
Nein!!!  |
|
|
|
Post by PaulBearer on Dec 8, 2003 3:15:25 GMT
Doesn't look like the same man to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by Fwings on Dec 8, 2003 7:22:04 GMT
That second photgraph of Faul is doctored to resemble JP. Here's how Billy really looked during that time period.  |
|
|
|
Post by SunKing on Dec 8, 2003 8:30:42 GMT
The comparisons would have to be done from photos with the same camera angle.  Remember Faul has foolished everyone for 36 years..... -Wings- that photo was doctored too!!!  Please look at his chin/jawbone left part: they were "added on" and his left eye clearly doctored (as Andrew ALREADY told)!!! The most reliable photo of Faul is that taken from "Hey Jude" promo video start  |
|
|
|
Post by Fwings on Dec 8, 2003 8:47:48 GMT
It's hard to keep up with what photos are doctored or not. After all, Bill had so many plastic surgeries over the years that his look was constantly changing. Eventually they'll make him look so much like the original JP that they'll have to re-doctor the doctored photographs as not to raise suspicions. |
|
|
|
Post by djmartins on Dec 8, 2003 12:45:17 GMT
Bahahaha!
So if someone proves a photo is pre 1967
that was identified as "Faul",
y'all scream "doctored photo!!!!"
C'mon now, don't you think that is pretty silly?
How can anyone believe such a thing?
I also love how SunKing deleted my reply to
one of his posts! There is a lot of editing and
censoring of posts here, but I already had a feeling
that honesty and integrity are not valued here.
I came here and checked out all the info,
asked some serious questions about the evidence,
and determined for myself if all this proves 60IF.
My conclusion?
There is no document called 50IF, I mean 60IF
that was dictated by GH.
What is found here is the whole thing.
It all appears to be a common conspiracy theory
that has no evidence to support it.
Sorry folks!
DJ
PS - Who are YOU SunKing? I have found out for
myself what kind of person you are.......
|
|
|
|
Post by Curious on Dec 8, 2003 12:59:34 GMT
And you, djmartins? What kind of a person are you? Aside from an irritating, mindless little troll, that is...  |
|
|
|
Post by djmartins on Dec 9, 2003 1:07:39 GMT
Bahaha!
Who are you?
I already sorted that one out with your high priest!
I am person who still has an open mind, but little
tolerance for obvious falsehoods...
Who are you?
I already know what kind of person you are...
DJ
|
|
Danthology
Contributor
"For awhile we can sit, smoke a pipe and discuss all the vast intricacies of life..."
Posts: 47
|
Post by Danthology on Dec 9, 2003 2:34:21 GMT
Bahaha! Who are you? I already sorted that one out with your high priest! I am person who still has an open mind, but little tolerance for obvious falsehoods... Who are you? I already know what kind of person you are... DJ OK... OK.... There are three sides here. People that believe PID, people who do not, and people on the fence. That is GOOD! Much more interesting things come out of posts with several points of view. All I ask is that all sides are civil and respectful of each other. Debate is a good thing!!! Let's keep it clean. If for nothing else, there are some damn interesting things here! |
|
|
|
Post by TotalInformation on Dec 9, 2003 3:46:54 GMT
So if someone proves a photo is pre 1967
that was identified as "Faul",
y'all scream "doctored photo!!!!"
No one claimed that on this thread.
Please try to follow the conversation, now matter how much that makes your brian hurt.
This will make you look like less of a retarded ass.
Hope this helps.
|
|
|
|
Post by djmartins on Dec 9, 2003 10:58:53 GMT
--
No one claimed that on this thread.
Please try to follow the conversation, now matter how much that makes your brian hurt.
This will make you look like less of a retarded ass.
Hope this helps.
--
check out:
Posted by: -Wings- Posted on: 12/08/2003 at 03:47:48
It's hard to keep up with what photos are doctored or not. After all, Bill had so many plastic surgeries over the years that his look was constantly changing. Eventually they'll make him look so much like the original JP that they'll have to re-doctor the doctored photographs as not to raise suspicions.
---
I like this posts by Wings, though what I get out of it
is likely very different than the "true believers"!
Those poor conspiritors are running around RE-doctoring
photos because thier plastic surgeons are cutting on
poor "Faul" so much!
I gotta laugh!
Finally, something that appears to have a tiny
basis in reality. I can totally believe that some large organization is so screwed up that it's left hand doesn't
know what it's right hand is doing!
Bahahahahaha
I find it incredible that people believe a photo is
doctored simply because it goes against 60IF.
Show me the signs of doctoring in the photo by means of PHOTOGRAPHIC evidence of doctoring.
For Total Information:
I love your use of profanity!
Please, swear some more!
I like to swear too!
So, "retared ass" is the best you can come up
with, you sperm belching gutter slut with the IQ
of an ice cube in the sun?
Now, as regards this statement:
"So if someone proves a photo is pre 1967
that was identified as "Faul",
y'all scream "doctored photo!!!!"
shall I also point to all the other threads that
use this tactic whenever some posts any photo
that goes against 50IF?
Again, I appeal to the board to search out new and
different kinds of "evidence" to prove this.
This photo thing is too damn easy to blow away....
-----
I can just hear the strident claims and insults now for
this statement, shall I post links to the two or three web
pages that use a lot of the same photos used here,
BUT properly scaled, that show Paul has only aged...
-----
What I don't hear, OR SEE, is any other proof presented
in an intelligent manner that is any more convincing
than these photos.
Song lyrics certainly aren't more convincing!
I don't see anything other than personal OPINION
that his voice is different...
In a few minutes I checked out, BY MYSELF,
the change of eye colour that I found so intrigueing.
Found out that 10-15% of Caucasians experience eye
colour changes......
Where is this 50IF, I mean 60IF, document that proves all this?
Unlike anyone else here, I strongly believe that that
this "60IF" document doesn't exist or is so obviously
false that no one but a TRUE believer will ever see it.
Need I go on?
Bahahahahahahaahahahaha!!!!!
DJ
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris on Dec 9, 2003 18:20:25 GMT
 ::)BWAAHAAHAA  DJ, are you serious. I mean REALLY serious about this. You sure don't sound serious to me. About eye color - my son Carl's eyes stopped changing before he was a year old. They stopped inbetween green & brown. Sometimes they look greenish/brownish. Sometimes they look golden. Sometimes they have a multitude of colors in them. However, they never changed all the way. They just stopped like that. Now, if anyone's eyes would've decided to continue to change to another color, it would've been his. I waited for 2 YEARS for his eyes to turn brown. They NEVER DID !!!! Paul had brown eyes. Very warm, beautiful brown eyes. In some photos they look almost like a golden brown. In others, a darker brown. NEVER green. NEVER... Bill has green eyes. It's most obvious in the Hey Jude video...In fact, some versions of the Hey Jude promo video, it looks like his eyes have been tinted brown. In others, his eyes look GREEN. It's pretty obvious that someone is messing with photos & film featuring Bill/ Faul. To try to make him look more like Paul. Other times, they're messing with photos & film of Paul, trying to make him look more like Bill/Faul. Mess all they like, Paul is the one TRUE James Paul McCartney. As they say in the movie Highlander, " There can be only one !!! " Bill/ Faul is an imposter. He might live his life as Paul McCartney. However, this does not make him the man... Love to all... Chris ;D 
|
|
|
|
Post by gm1276 on Dec 9, 2003 18:44:27 GMT
::)BWAAHAAHAA DJ, are you serious. I mean REALLY serious about this. You sure don't sound serious to me. About eye color - my son Carl's eyes stopped changing before he was a year old. They stopped inbetween green & brown. Sometimes they look greenish/brownish. Sometimes they look golden. Sometimes they have a multitude of colors in them. However, they never changed all the way. They just stopped like that. Now, if anyone's eyes would've decided to continue to change to another color, it would've been his. I waited for 2 YEARS for his eyes to turn brown. They NEVER DID !!!! Paul had brown eyes. Very warm, beautiful brown eyes. In some photos they look almost like a golden brown. In others, a darker brown. NEVER green. NEVER... Bill has green eyes. It's most obvious in the Hey Jude video...In fact, some versions of the Hey Jude promo video, it looks like his eyes have been tinted brown. In others, his eyes look GREEN. It's pretty obvious that someone is messing with photos & film featuring Bill/ Faul. To try to make him look more like Paul. Other times, they're messing with photos & film of Paul, trying to make him look more like Bill/Faul. Mess all they like, Paul is the one TRUE James Paul McCartney. As they say in the movie Highlander, " There can be only one !!! " Bill/ Faul is an imposter. He might live his life as Paul McCartney. However, this does not make him the man... Love to all... Chris ;D Proof posted already. Please see 60if.proboards21.com/index.cgi?board=60ifclues&action=display&thread=1070717504Also, before we start with the accusations, I am NOT djmartins, but I do agree with the majority of his points, and his banning really shows how pathetic this once great board has become....need proof? check my registration.    |
|
|
|
Post by gm1276 on Dec 9, 2003 20:39:04 GMT
I'm sure his "points" (wherever they were, in all that rambling) were not the reason for his being banned; but rather his abusive conduct towards other forum members, and foul language. My guess is that he is now suffering the consequences of his choice to come here and behave badly. Only as badly as others treated him. |
|
|
|
Post by eyesbleed on Dec 10, 2003 0:01:43 GMT
Only as badly as others treated him. Well... if I'd come home from work & checked in this evening to see DJ had been busy again today with more argumentative, insulting posts.... I woulda been very surprised. If he could've argued in a more respectful manner ALL the time, I'm sure he'd still be welcome, but that wasn't the case some of the time. He(?) was alright when he(?) was "behaving" & concentrating on his side of the argument instead of seeing how irritatingly "trollish" he(?) could be sometimes. |
|
|
|
Post by PaulBearer on Dec 10, 2003 3:27:47 GMT
All this talk of what's been doctored and what hasn't. Some of you, instead of being an armchair critic, simply go down to your local library and look up old newspapers and magazines pre-fall '66. Imerse yourselves in Paul's photos. And if you can scan them and post them, that would be cool. you see, we're not afraid of the real historic evidence of what we are saying. But if you're not prepared to do something besides pointing the finger and constantly finding fault with what other people are doing then you're not really contributing much. This is a research forum. It's not for a bunch of naysayers to go roaming around and constantly disrupting threads with their scathing and negativity; this is not called (as some have claimed it to be) "healthy sceptisism". Such people will be banned as it distracts from the good hard-working people here. And while we're at it, it's not a democracy either. If these people want their "rights" to their "freedom of speech", they can take them elsewhere. Some of us have work to do. BTW, I think Jojo is setting a good example for all of us as regards some basic research. Thanks for your efforts Jojo.  |
|
|
|
Post by eyesbleed on Dec 10, 2003 5:03:10 GMT
BTW, I think Jojo is setting a good example for all of us as regards some basic research. Thanks for your efforts Jojo. I couldn't help but notice that myself, here lately. There's always something else amazing turning up on this forum. .........wonder how long it'll be before DJ's buddie "Paul" shows up?? |
|
|
|
Post by PaulBearer on Dec 10, 2003 6:34:39 GMT
.........wonder how long it'll be before DJ's buddie "Paul" shows up?? You mean if he hasn't already that is. |
|
|
|
Post by Chris on Dec 10, 2003 21:49:45 GMT
;D :DAll I can say is let him come. I'm NOT afraid of him. Paul & I know the truth. The truth is that Bill is NOT Paul. Bill is Bill & Paul is Paul. Two totally different people. Geez, they have different body types !!!! Take two people who resemble each other. If one person has enough plastic surgery, I'm positive that he can look identical to the other person !!! NO BIG WOOP !!!! Love to all... Chris ;D
|
|
DeeT
Contributor
Posts: 18
|
Post by DeeT on Dec 10, 2003 23:05:48 GMT
I have an idea: we have seen some amazing examples of photos which "morph" from a known "Paul" picture to a possible "Faul" picture, and sure enough, features suspiciously change places.
I think it would be worthwhile for someone, even a PID believer, to endeavor to make the most convincing morph possible from any "old Paul" picture to any "new Paul" picture, trying to demonstrate that they are, in fact, the same person. Such an attempt would lend scientific integrity to the whole process; and wouldn't it be interesting if no one can do it?
Another possibly worthwhile idea would be to issue an open challenge to make such a morphing picture that proves there is no "Faul" and post it.
-DeeT
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris on Dec 11, 2003 3:37:36 GMT
;D I'm with DeeT. Let the challenge begin. The morph has to be as seamless as the one S.K. did of Johnny. He used a photo of Johnny from 1963 & the second from the late 1970's. All John's features match up perfectly !!! Let's see what we get NOW folks... Love to all... Chris - Paul's girl... ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by Quarryman on Dec 11, 2003 5:17:29 GMT
I don't even find the morphs on Uberkinder's sites to be compelling. They move too fast and the inbetween steps from the original photo to the end result are suspect.
Angles, lens distortions an distances are not consistent, and although those considerations were given a cursory brush-aside "explanation," they still bother me.
Interesting story: On November 23, 1989, I went to the Great Western Forum in Los Angeles to see Macca live. It was a strange day, being not only my birthday, but Thanksgiving as well. I looked around and thought "I'm going to be in the same room with Paul McCartney." That thought had not occurred to me when I saw the Beatles in 1964 at the Hollywood Bowl.
Shortly into the concert, which was preceeded by a wonderful short fil directed by Richard Lester, McCartney addressed the crowd: "It's great to be in the same room with you all tonight." I got chills.
But that was nothing. My girlfriend had finagled backstage passes as a birthday bonus. I did NOT get to go to the band's dressing room and hang out with Hamish and Robbie and Paul and Linda if that's what you're thinking. That was for VIPs. I did get to go backstage, under the stadium acutally, and meet up with some other semi-VIPs (no one famous) and talk about the show. As we were leaving, I got within ten feet of Paul as he was being escorted down the tunnel.
I am Six feet-two inches tall and the man I saw was definitely shorter than me by at least two inches.
One more thing:
Do you guys seriously believe that "Faul" goes around with rubber ear sleeves on, and that plastic surgery in the mid-60s was advanced enough to make someone look almost exactly (exactly, IMO) like someone else? Plastic surgery isn't even that good NOW!
This is a fine story, a good urban legend, but there are holes in it big enough to hurl a planet through.
|
|
|
|
Post by MtBaldy on Dec 15, 2003 5:46:33 GMT
Agreed. It is a VERY fascinating legend; a brilliant string of coincidences, but, fortunately, that's ALL it is. Paul is one of those people who makes very animated facial expressions when he speaks - almost a 'rubber' face - he lifts his brows, lowers them, tilts his head, shifts his jaw, smiles, pouts... tilt down gives a long face, tilt up and smile - you get a round face with low dumbo ears. Just watch a few seconds of film or video - 2 seconds of video is 60 individual frames - in those 60 frames you're likely to see 6 or 7 different "faces" - I've done it. A photograph of Paul is just a single instance - a snapshot of him during that very precise moment, with that particular face. Factor into this the fact that photos *lie* - the variables are almost endless - lens quality (distortion), light/shadow, angle, film emulsion, exposure, focal length, processing - then, on top of that, the fact that MOST celebrity photographs that are going to be presented in a commercial manner ARE retouched - always have been - cover those zits, straighten that lip, remove the shine, etc... I fully accept the challenge of making an animation/fade that matches Paul with so-called "Faul". Who knows, maybe I'll find it more difficult than I expected. But I doubt it. Again, though, this is the most fascinating thing I have come across in quite some time, and I am thoroughly enjoying reading all of your insights and theories. Peace -
|
|
::)BWAAHAAHAA 
