|
|
Post by BeatlePaul on Oct 8, 2005 8:45:38 GMT
Does anyone check (with an animation) if those eyes belong to the same man? Expecially if the irises match perfectly. (RRD alerted....) |
|
Dr.No
Contributor
Posts: 177
|
Post by Dr.No on Oct 8, 2005 9:05:29 GMT
 Neil Aspinall is still Neil Aspinall, so I doubt he's Billy. |
|
|
|
Post by BeatlePaul on Oct 8, 2005 11:40:46 GMT
Neil Aspinall is still Neil Aspinall, so I doubt he's Billy. Are you sure? That was ALWAYS against our eyes....    ... that ear without prosthesis.... |
|
moped
Contributor
Posts: 115 
|
Post by moped on Oct 8, 2005 13:56:10 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by defhermit on Oct 8, 2005 18:05:52 GMT
you can't do iris comparisons with grainy old pictures... well, you can, but they aren't worth much... especially with black and white pictures, obviously...
it also should be "THE TIME HAS COME"... sorry, sometimes I can't stop myself correcting english grammar...
|
|
|
|
Post by BeatlePaul on Oct 8, 2005 23:44:45 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by BeatlePaul on Oct 8, 2005 23:47:10 GMT
 Fantastic that photo, mopedNWR. |
|
|
|
Post by BeatlePaul on Oct 8, 2005 23:54:11 GMT
Tip: Copy and Paste ALL the link |
|
|
|
Post by BeatlePaul on Oct 9, 2005 0:07:17 GMT
Well now we know that it was Frankenstein Aspinall who was with John in Paris at September 18th 1966. The true Neil started to impersonate Faul on September 14th (according with the White Album "chronology"). Strange.... John was "still" with his "old" haircut and perfect shaved while the official chronologies tell that John was already on the set of the film "How I won the war" .... strange....  |
|
|
|
Post by defhermit on Oct 9, 2005 1:59:21 GMT
okay... you got me on the black and white thing... although I would think that having the color there would only help... you still can't do iris comparisons on grainy old photos where the iris is drawn with approximately 12 pixels... the photos on the links you gave are huge blowups of JUST the eye... |
|
|
|
Post by BeatlePaul on Oct 9, 2005 12:42:56 GMT
okay... you got me on the black and white thing... although I would think that having the color there would only help... you still can't do iris comparisons on grainy old photos where the iris is drawn with approximately 12 pixels... the photos on the links you gave are huge blowups of JUST the eye... A simple lens can change the colour. That's the reason why of the black and white comparison. Not "only" the same irises but the same eyes dimension and all the rest. A comparision with more resolution would be "just" a more matching one Again: |
|
|
|
Post by andrewexelor on Oct 9, 2005 15:28:45 GMT
there always is and always will be..  |
|
|
|
Post by defhermit on Oct 9, 2005 17:55:35 GMT
A simple lens can change the colour. That's the reason why of the black and white comparison. Yeah, you can change the color with contact lenses, but it's pretty easy to tell when someone has a contact lens on (I can see them just looking at people's eyes walking down the street), especially colored ones... If you are comparing irises suppsedly to the extent that you can identify someone, of course you would be able to tell whether or not a contact lens is on the eye. So, if the analyzer determines that there isn't a contact lens on the eye, color would only help making any matches more conclusive. |
|
|
|
Post by BeatlePaul on Oct 9, 2005 21:13:21 GMT
 Hello Goodbye to our Billy Pepper-Neil Aspinall-Faux Paul McCartneyTHANKS TO JOJO!!! |
|
|
|
Post by andrewexelor on Oct 9, 2005 21:33:44 GMT
there always is and always will be.. please explain this picture. its billy and neil is it not? |
|
Maacc
Contributor
Hail Hail
Posts: 89
|
Post by Maacc on Oct 9, 2005 21:51:21 GMT
I'm confused. No change there then...What I mean is, why would Neil impersonate Billy/Faul. Faul is impersonating Paul, I'm clear on that, but what need would there be for a second double? Unless you're saying Billy was Neil, which wouldn't make sense since they've obviously been photographed together.
|
|
TheDZ
Provocative Operator 
Posts: 435
|
Post by TheDZ on Oct 9, 2005 21:52:40 GMT
Let me try..
The person in the middle is singing Hey Jude.(Faul)(Neil Aspinall)
The person on the right is in a separate photgraph.
He looks like he could be Neil Aspinall Part Deux.(big chin/Jaw)
It has been said that the guy on the right is Denny Laine
but IMO that's not correct.
Two Neils Side by Side.
Things are beginning to make more sense to me now...
btw those dark diagonal lines, on each face seem to be
shadows or pic defects.
|
|
|
|
Post by BeatlePaul on Oct 9, 2005 22:04:05 GMT
there always is and always will be.. please explain this picture. its billy and neil is it not? I confess it's my Faul(t). The very first release of 60IF told about that guy as William Shepherd before the plastic surgery. But I was confused because perhaps that picture was tampered with Frankenstein Aspinall (Neil's replacement) eyes And the second picture was about Bill after and before surgery and/or make up The proof? See the name of the picture you've posted above That was the truth I changed the comment under false suggestions. Forgive me George |
|
TheDZ
Provocative Operator
Posts: 435
|
Post by TheDZ on Oct 9, 2005 22:19:16 GMT
Aha!   So this is Neil as Faul (singing Hey Jude) post makeup/surgery.  And this is Neil before the surgery/makeup. Correct? |
|
|
|
Post by andrewexelor on Oct 9, 2005 22:32:47 GMT
i think hes saying thats billy
|
|
|
|
Post by beatled on Oct 9, 2005 23:04:59 GMT
But you're not saying Faul (presently) is Neil Aspinal, are you? or are you? I'm wondering that myself.. I don't know what to make of this one, but there must be a few continuity questions raised here I would think? |
|
TheDZ
Provocative Operator
Posts: 435
|
Post by TheDZ on Oct 9, 2005 23:19:46 GMT
I'm gonna speculate and say that Neil was made up as a quick replacement for Paul because he knew him and could be made up to resemble him. Neil had a double brought in from an agency (False Neil-Feil  ?) to take over his role as road manager. Denny Laine did the vocal replacement while Neil(as Faul) was trained and altered to replace Paul in a more permanent capacity. Maybe? Might take care of the continuity problems.... |
|
|
|
Post by plastic paul on Oct 9, 2005 23:44:03 GMT
I know you'll hate me for this BP, but i still struggle to believe that the man who is faul can also be someone else, like with the faul/stanshall thing, i think if someone has surgery, implants, injections and everything else they are that person forever, it is to hard to keep changing them back and forth ie. bill to paul to bill to paul etc........
|
|
TheDZ
Provocative Operator
Posts: 435
|
Post by TheDZ on Oct 10, 2005 0:06:56 GMT
Well good question Plastic, I'm wondering about that too,
but with good prosthetics , wigs, facial hair and makeup ( which BP has stated
were used from the start) a persons looks can change
radically.
Change the disguise, change the man.
Why would intelligence agencies require disguise specialists
like Robert Barron if not to change a persons appearance
completely?
|
|
|
|
Post by BeatlePaul on Oct 10, 2005 4:30:27 GMT
I know you'll hate me for this BP, but i still struggle to believe that the man who is faul can also be someone else, like with the faul/stanshall thing, i think if someone has surgery, implants, injections and everything else they are that person forever, it is to hard to keep changing them back and forth ie. bill to paul to bill to paul etc........ "Paul" character was under threat even after his departure. The possibility "Neil" had to change identity was a sort of protection program. 60if.proboards21.com/index.cgi?board=Essential&action=display&thread=1128534428There you can read: Robert R. Barron, former Senior CIA Disguise Specialist, committed to restoring identities through prosthetic devices.
So the eyes in "Crippled Inside" were Neil's |
|
?) to take over his
