10-26-2023, 07:41 PM
(Note by Hissil: also see these links)
https://hyperspacecafe.com/Thread-Paul-McCartney
https://hyperspacecafe.com/Thread-Paul-I...er-Is-Paul
https://hyperspacecafe.com/Thread-Paul-M...ly-Is-Dead
https://hyperspacecafe.com/Thread-Ringo-...ed-in-1966
https://hyperspacecafe.com/Thread-Paul-M...ut-at-Last
https://hyperspacecafe.com/Thread-Paul-M...-Operation
https://hyperspacecafe.com/Thread-Paul-M...e-Harrison
https://hyperspacecafe.com/Thread-THE-AS...-MCCARTNEY
Paul McCartney Is Dead – A Case Theory Overview
Clare Kuehn
October 9th, 2023
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...Newman.jpg
CHAPTERS
Part 1 How Can We Think about Paul's Supposed Death? – And Some Photographs
Part 2 First Principles: Nothing In the Way of the Claim
Part 3 The Material Evidence: A Broad Historical Fit; A Surprise; Faces, Music
Part 4 Formal Forensic Scientists
Part 5 Name of Double; Place, Cause and Date of Death of Paul
Part 6 Murder of Paul?
Part 7 Murder = Redrum: The Art Clues of Beatles and Others
Part 8 Nuns, Saints and Icons
Part 9 Fall-Out and Conclusion
Footnotes
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...20comp.jpg
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...mp%201.jpg
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...20real.jpg
PART ONE
How Can We Think about Paul's Supposed Death? – And Some Photographs
In mid-September, 1966, something happened with the Beatles that would rewrite the history of music forever. James Paul McCartney was missing from media coverage for months.
When he supposedly appeared again in mid December, he appeared in all ways to be very different than he had been, just seven or eight weeks before.
When the film of the Beatles “Hello Goodbye” aired in November, 1967, on the Ed Sullivan TV show, the figure of Paul was extremely awkward and lanky. Why did they send a film instead of doing an in-person appearance, as before? He moved awkwardly, not with the effortless, fluid movements of Paul.
Numerous fake and distorted films began to appear; music was altered in pitch during remastering; cryptic comments were made. What had happened to the "beautiful boy"?
The rumor that Paul died started almost immediately, we now know. Most sources say it was created in late 1969, but it was in print in early 1967.
If Paul was replaced in the public eye, some powerful people had to manage passports and legalities: the powerful economic export the Beatles represented had to be continued. Some people now are considering that he was murdered, instead of dying in a natural accident. If he was murdered, some common suggestions follow.
This Overview
The case called “Paul Is Dead” (“P.I.D.”) is something we can think about, no matter what we assume. We can only cover the broadest outlines of the case, allowing readers to fill in details and find some already-identified complex references themselves (do more "personal research" into the matter).
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...l%2014.jpg
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...y%2011.png
The Claim
24-year-old Paul McCartney of the Beatles died in late 1966 and was publicly replaced by another man.
Simplicity and Unusualness
PID is, at root, a simple claim, but a permanent double is more complex than a person who continued in a public life. If PID is simplest to explain all the evidence, PID does not break the principle of simplicity. “Occam's Razor” is that principle.
Also, while PID is extraordinarily unusual, it can require no extraordinary evidence: evidence can only come in ordinary forms. The rest is mere feelings of extraordinariness or ease of decision-making, using "best evidence", preferred, simple forms, which are always missing in cold cases.
All Evidence is Bad Evidence?
Evidence may be evidence points on a table, so to speak, but not "actual" evidence, of the final kind. Perhaps some pieces indicate that unsure directions become surer, when in combination.[1] Beyond evidence and logic, court and history arguments are won by the quality of jury: the equanimity of listeners' minds. What kind of listener are you?[2]
Because this is an overview, not every objection can be raised and answered, or answered in full here, but all have at least reasonable answers.
Official Forensic Scientists
As we will shortly see, in part four of this article, two forensic scientists did come out in support of PID, against their initial assumptions.
But there have been some others who did not use the extreme examples of Sir Paul's seemingly different bone structure, nor account for any fakery. They came out with a different result. Would they have, if they had done so?[3]
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...istics.jpg
Faces, Sounds, Statements Both Ways
Some people see two or more “Pauls” in historical evidence, some only one. Perceptions can be shaped by emotions in either direction, yes. If one is a proponent of either PIA (“Paul Is Alive”) theory or PID theory, the opposite side comes into view only by resifting and analyzing photos and all other evidence. Part three discusses the photos, but we will present some here.
Sorting Photographic Materials
One only has to take most of the early photos of Paul early and compare them to most of the post September 1966 photos to notice a problem. There are also some sure indications of photo doctoring (photo fakery), as we have seen.
Faces
The following photos are originals. Can you tell?
Paul 1965, 1966 (including the time, December 26th, 1965 when he was likely beaten up, 9 months before being possibly murdered, per PID; it was claimed to be a moped accident):
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...ul%201.jpg
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...ul%202.jpg
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...ul%203.jpg
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...ul%204.jpg
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...ul%205.jpg
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...ul%208.jpg
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...l%2010.jpg
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...ul%209.jpg
Sir Paul, noting bone structure, not age:
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...ll%201.jpg
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...et%207.jpg
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...et%201.jpg
Safety and Critical Thinking Skills
People are wired to want truth with safety. When truth is scary, we tend to avoid it. Some cognitive scientists have even warned people, who may or may not have low skills, from applying classical critical thinking skills to conspiracy theories, presuming a definition that the very term means something scary, crazy or stupid, using biased methods.
Some people are of low skill, it is true, but should not high-end skills always be applied, in full-spectrum skepticism, so as to determine dangerous tomfoolery?
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...0Trick.jpg
Paul and Sir Paul
To determine truth or falsity, we begin by categorizing the historical figure “Paul” as “Paul” and as “Sir Paul” henceforward, even if the designants are actually one real person. (The putative replacement claimant went on to be knighted, as well as seeming to be older than Paul, born about 1937).
PID requires a conspiracy as a cover-up, whether Paul died naturally or by murder. Let us build up the case and compare it to the opposing side, calmly, reasonably.
Conspiracies and Theories
Properly defined, most of history and law is conspiracy theory.
It may be necessary to reread that sentence.
Any group activity can be called conspiracy by an opposite group, with or without a plot. Explaining and defending claims, even after accepting them, is the activity of theorizing. Theories, i.e., may be good, bad or indeterminate – and unofficial or official.
The phrase “conspiracy theory” goes back to the 1890s, not to the CIA in the 1960s. Its opposites are only lone-person theories or no-event-at-all theories – not finality, reality or value. From 1890 to now, "conspiracy theory" can be used neutrally, to mean a case or explanation of a conspiracy, or a posited conspiracy.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...20real.jpg
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...y%2013.jpg
For example, both subjects above are plausibly the same person, though one might "see" two; we can consider them as Paul or as Paul and a double; if we have lighting and "lens distortion" (perspective focal length distortions) at play, we can say they are plausibly the same. PID theory says they are Paul and that the double is much different, but sometimes resembles elements in the first photo. (We will get to focal length problems in part three.)
Could there be a conspiracy, a big and wide one?
PART TWO
First Principles: Nothing In the Way of the Claim
The Public as Dupes
Some PIDers say they first felt a jarring sense of loss of “attraction” to what they now “know” is a double. Older PIDers point out that they could not copy or share broadcasts, back then.
The issue is really whether the public was considered, by the cover-up arrangement, as needing to know. PID evidence suggests that the cover-up was actually awkward and difficult; still, most people, understandably, do not spend time on learning new information, in case PID is the correct theory of events.
Background and Conspiracies of Silence: Official Mechanisms
Doubles require legal help and passports, if we do not mean a mere distracting decoy at a public concert, etc.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...%20art.jpg
Such means are acknowledged by intelligence agencies. If Paul died and was replaced, to pull it off would require some “official” involvement. Even if intelligence services helped after an accidental death, a cover-up would normally continue to cover up the original “help”.
Historical Precedents, A Proof of Concept
PID case theory hinges on known historical methods of spy-craft and deception in war, and political usage of doubles for protection.
Still, permanent public replacement of a known figure seems to start with Paul.
Early 20th-century spy and dancer Mata Hari had a public double, while elsewhere on assignment. However, she was, in turn, set up to fall, as well.
Josef Stalin (USSR), had four doubles – long suspected. One major one has spoken out, who was “classified”, until recently.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...Stalin.jpg
By the Second World War, British Intelligence used a long-term, temporary, semi-public double for General Bernard “Monty” Montgomery – not for safety, but to trick the other side for battle plans.
In 1944 the Allies used a "Ghost Army" of inflatable tanks and personnel carriers to fool German recon missions.
WWII British “Operation Mincemeat” disrespectfully used a poor man's corpse, with fake documents and uniform, to trick German intelligence, effectively speaking, “for grave reasons of state.”
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...%20JPG.jpg
Co-conspirators As Circles of Silence
Family and friends would have to be aides, co-conspirators (by name or not), via threats, bribes, or half-truths. We have some evidence pointing to each of these, but do not need to know specifics here, to determine if Paul was replaced.
There have been a few legal affidavits done by family and fans, about various parts of the case. However, most back off, even if only tangentially related to the case, and others say more publicly that it is not up to themselves.
Are they all lying?
Motivations for a Cover-Up
British Prime Minister Harold Wilson's government has been described as "floating" the British Pound Sterling for four years "on the back of" the Beatles, although this is a simplification. News of Paul’s death could have affected the British economy. Cover-up of a natural or an unnatural death could well have been cobbled together for this reason.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...201964.jpg
In 1965, the Beatles were given an economic-military honor thanks to Wilson, himself, who nominated them. Other recipients of the Members of the British Empire (MBE) award complained. Wilson and the Beatles are pictured above, in 1964.
Murder by "the state" or "its" affiliates, for any reason, would be further motivation for a state cover-up.
PART THREE
The Material Evidence: A Broad Historical Fit; A Surprise; Faces and Music
Was Necessity the Mother of Invention? A Sea-Change, 1967 Onward
Those familiar with Beatles history and the personalities of the band members, have remarked on the seriously striking changes which occurred around early spring, 1967.
The manic and depressive demeanor of all members of the band except the replacement stood in stark contrast to earlier days. Wild styles, colors, and facial hair became the vogue, tied in to the Beatles. Meditation, occultism, drugs, loose living and a repudiation of middle-class values became widespread, as the replacement’s influence made the surviving Beatles more or less follow his lead.
This was even as the youth culture of the world mimicked the mores and concerns of the Beatles themselves.
Gap at Early Posthumous Period, 1966
Gaps in knowledge, if embedded in contextual evidence, are perfectly acceptable for consideration; sometimes, gaps are highly significant to court case-making (theory) and history.
Absence of evidence can be evidence of important absence. Defacement of Cappadocian rock churches (Anatolia, Turkey) is determined by specific areas missing: faces.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...adocia.jpg
For several months in fall, 1966, only two or three news references Paul's supposed behavior and whereabouts exist – an extraordinarily surprising gap.
Reports in media recollect how “Paul” did not “look like Paul” to some fans at the end of that period, about early November 1966.
First Printed Rumor, 1967, Not 1969
PID's detractors state that the idea of PID was rumored first in 1969, among “those crazy American college kids of the 1960s,” but the rumor was in print by early February, 1967. Moreover, people credibly state that they had heard or figured out that Paul had died, the previous fall.
“Beatles Book,” a Beatles-affiliated magazine, UK-only back in February, 1967:
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...ok%201.jpg
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...ok%202.jpg
This first-known, in-print rumor was a surprise find. It was a discovery based on the hypothesis that Paul may have died.
It disinforms about timing, survival of Paul and exact place of the events – but the basics confirm later case theory: Paul was the only Beatle affected, a car seemed to have been involved and the events occurred in England.
It also seems awkward. Perhaps it was in response to real rumors. This acknowledgement was never repeated.
Plastic Surgery, Prosthetics, Hair, Moles, Hands
Some suggestions exist of plastic surgery on Sir Paul, beyond any official surgeries. The best indicators are too complicated to go into here; they are that Sir Paul had his first surgeries in Kenya, in a British-intelligence-affiliated hospital, in about October-November, 1966.
The use of prosthetics occasionally by the supposed replacement, especially on ears. Moles “move around” on Sir Paul. Hands are sometimes similar (doctored?), sometimes not.
Hair whorl and texture are also seemingly different on the putatively two men, although some fake photos do exist and some contrary real ones.
When PIA theory acknowledges any of this, it is explained as done for fun and cosmetic surgery.
Body
Body height is harder to determine than complexities of faces, because very often a context for height references is needed. The Beatles claimed to be what seems to be 2 or three inches taller than they were and Sir Paul claims the same height: 5'11" for Paul and John.
Because of indications that Sir Paul is taller than was Paul, plus some distorted photos, some PIDers now claim that Sir Paul is 6'3", which is countered by good evidence. Without getting into the weeds of this debate here, it is likely that Paul and John were about 5'9" and Sir Paul is about 5'11'-12", with far bigger feet.
The Hofner Bass and Body Height
For upper body measurements, we could have used certain photos with the Hofner bass in them, when it was held and photographed in a certain angle. But Sir Paul officially "lost to theft" Paul's extremely valuable Hofner bass and had it rebuilt. He had rarely, if ever, used it after the supposed death of Paul. (PID case theory says that this is because of photo comparisons and the fact that he is a bigger man, preferring a bigger guitar.)
The original guitar would form a measuring stick. He now uses it in photos. PID theory suggests that he simply hid the valuable object and had it rebuilt to make all relevant photographic internal measurements more deceptive.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...hofner.jpg
Doctored (Faked) Photos
Mostly, it is pictures of Sir Paul which are doctored. Some of Paul also get doctored, but nowhere near as often. (Some fakes of Sir Paul are paired below with Paul.) Can you tell?
Sir Paul head with Paul face added in (below). Not a bad job, but left eyebrow shows a break and long chin unnatural to mouth:
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...ke%204.jpg
Older, 1968 Sir Paul with younger Paul face inserted, grey-reddened in color to match general tones of old photo around it:
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...20fake.jpg
The following example below should be obvious, but a few things which were done – highlight added to nose, dark edge exaggerated; contrast increased, showing more stubble information from original negative. Bottom lip moved down, teeth inserted, lower cheek lines near mouth and nose added:
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...ke%202.jpg
Paul on the left (below) is also seemingly doctored around the eyes. Sir Paul with Paul's face inserted (right):
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...ke%202.jpg
Sir Paul on left, composite (below), with elements from Paul photo on right, also probably using a Paul mouth from another photo. Highlight added to nose on "Sir Paul", eyes darkened and points of highlight added, shadow added to Paul eye ridge at nose. Areas of change highlighted except eye ridge and irises:
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...20fake.jpg
Paul (left). Mouth, nose bridge and Paul's right eyebrow, half of left eyebrow, cheeks and mouth doctored into Sir Paul photo (right):
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...ke%203.jpg
"A Hard Day's Night" Movie (1964) and "Hey Jude" BBC TV Production (1968, "remastered" or faked, circa 2015)
Careful viewers will notice that some copies and broadcasts of "A Hard Day's Night" movie have been slightly stretched. This is especially true for scenes with Paul in them. Is this done to look more like Sir Paul? Per PID theory, it is.
Others may notice that the close-ups in "Hey Jude" have been computer assisted (are a CGI, computer-generated image). It is as though Paul and Sir Paul were morphed and laid onto the images, with a computer. They are not limited to having a clearer face; it is far more Paul-like in this 2005 "BeatlesVEVO" on-line release, of circa 2015. Why?
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...ke%202.jpg
Anyone who looks for still photos from the "Hey Jude" television release from 1968, will find very few available now. The following one has the exact chin area and some other parts of a photo of Paul in another photo; see below.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...20fake.jpg
But Sir Paul here, also known as "False Paul", "Fake Paul", shortened to "Faul", still has a seeming dissimilitude with Paul. This Sir Paul seems to be wearing prosthetics and the chin doctored.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...ke%203.jpg
If anyone has the original television film from 1968, it would be good to share the stills with PID proponents.
Why all these fakes?
A YouTube channel sounding like a spy channel, called "Jack McFile" shows many, many hundreds of new fakes with real photos, a few old fakes – and Paul with Paul photos (pre-1967). It uses fades between them, to confuse the two faces as well, not highlighting problems. Fades have usefulness in some contexts, but not in most situations with fakes. Why such efforts, if not by a spy? PID says it is because it is more deception.
Sir Paul in Art
Artists instinctively have to “morph” Paul into Sir Paul or draw them differently, in many cases, it seems.
Moreover, many ordinary fans, natural PIAers, who are not even considering PID, have been upset at a computer airbrush artwork (done by AI, some say, but it seems to be an artwork using computers). Why are they upset? The artwork is typical of some photos of Sir Paul. If he is Paul, there is no problem. Do they just find him ugly, and have been not noticing his “change” from youth?
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...%20art.jpg
Could Paul have grown from the following, into the previous?
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...l%2011.jpg
To be sure, many pictures of Sir Paul younger are doctored, but certainly not all. He looked better, younger, in some photos, but not in all angles.
In other words, he seems to become more unlike Paul in how we notice telltale features, but he was always predictable for his own bone structures.
Distortions by Lens Focal Length and Curvature
To be sure, distortion occurs in photography. Aside from photo stretching and other fakery as seen above, natural uses of light also distort what we perceive. The photos below are all plausibly the same people in photos with cameras using different focal lengths in the lenses.
Could parts of the deception have been deliberate usages to deceive the public using “lens distortion” (actually perspectival distortion), plus the common occurrences of this phenomenon.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...on%201.jpg
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...ession.jpg
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...on%206.png
They are plausibly one person. (Source for focal-length comparisons: here.)
Is that all that is happening for the historical figure called “Paul McCartney”?
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...icking.jpg
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...rd%202.jpg
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...20ears.jpg
Note that on the last Sir Paul image, there has been fakery using the Paul photo: the lips are together, with the same little bulge in exactly the same lower lip shape with the chin, as in the first photo. The chin and ridge of the nose, with the brow, are grabbed from the Paul picture. (Look closely.)
Other than that doctoring of the last Sir Paul photo, are all of these, above in this section, the same people with lens distortion?
Music
Sir Paul is known for being more of a piano player with talent. He does “rock” hard on the bass at times, but Paul had more lilting abilities on the instrument and tended not to look down. Body language between the two persons, according to PID, is also quite different, except when Sir Paul is putting in an effort to copy a move, here or there.
Is Sir Paul left handed?
No. He does drum cross-overs differently in some rare photos, does not do the more complex guitar work Paul did on his own and rarely looked down for.
Although both men have been pictured using each hand in some situations, Sir Paul can be determined to be primarily right handed, not playing guitar on screen for one and a half years, and never with as much facility as Paul. He had help in studio and got good at more simple moves.
There are some who say differently handed playing is too hard. But it is not, with the considerations above.
Talent is something that people often think is unable to be compared between people, but that is not true, if we are careful. Sir Paul has talents, but is not as free with his energy; he has more of a driving, or awkward presence than Paul. Or does he?
Pitch of Music and Spoken Voice
Various songs by the Beatles, defined as Beatles by including Paul himself, have been shortened by a few seconds during “remastering” and raised in pitch; others are just slightly raised in pitch, to change Paul's generally huskier voice into an “easier high note” like Sir Paul, PID theory says.
The following video demonstrates voice types. Sir Paul is keeping his mouth and eye movements very controlled, for this early interview. Many early interviews have been doctored (faked a bit) now, but this one has his genuine face and his acting skills are evident; he did not always try so hard, PID theory says.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tVu15exnQDA
Posthumous Tricks and Eulogies
Insertions of older items also exist. PID theory says that these are to trick the viewer and listener, but also to honor the dead friend, Paul.
The giddy, younger Beatles in Magical Mystery Tour film (1967) “Wizard Tower” scenes, are taken from lost footage, says PID, and added to honor Paul posthumously in the film. Paul has makeup and a wig on, so some think it is older Sir Paul, but his glowing, unique smile indicates it is young Paul. (The movie includes many PID themes, as well, including a "resurrection." with Sir Paul presiding.)
Also, songs sung by Paul were put on albums posthumously, to honor him and to confuse the public, if PID is correct:
She's Leaving Home (Paul, harp added later, with a false creation myth for the song),
Fool on the Hill (a mix of Paul and Sir Paul),
Her Majesty (Paul, originally planned to be the very last Beatles release).
PART FOUR
Formal Forensic Scientists
Photo-Forensic Scientists Weigh In
As mentioned in part one of this article, there are occasional photo- and audio-forensic scientists who speak on this topic. For the photo-forensic scientists, most use definitely flawed methodology, whereby all photos were of Paul anyway, or no very different-looking photos were used.
However, the Italian version of the magazine, WIRED, in its August 2009 issue, published an article summarizing claims of two scientists, who, using photo comparisons, were baffled to discover that Paul seemed definitely to have been replaced. The article was never translated or promoted in English, which makes sense for PID theory. PIDers have translated it.
The scientists have been mocked, ignored and the article untranslated, officially. Note: they used a few slightly doctored photos in the comparisons and still came to the conclusion.
The WIRED Italia magazine article, August 2009:
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...D%20p1.jpg
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...D%20p2.jpg
Audio Forensics
As to the voice evidence: In 1970, an audial forensics professional from Florida, named Dr. Henry Truby, commented publicly that detected three “voices” for “Paul”, in post-1966 songs.
We can now know, through careful PID work, that after 1966, posthumous Paul recordings were interspersed with his replacement’s: it is a way to honor Paul, by the surviving Beatles, and to confuse the public.
In addition, some songs are very processed. (Yet, there could be a third actual singer, as well, on Sgt Pepper album, possibly Donovan Leitch, seemingly referenced by music duo Simon and Garfunkel, in "Fakin' It" single, 1967, which will figure into this article later.)
DNA
Some people wait for DNA tests of family. If the cover-up is considered “for grave reasons of state”, such tests would be scuttled. However, a blood test did rule out Sir Paul as father of a long-known illegitimate child of Paul. The court's compromise was to give her legal state benefits, but not call her Paul's child and bar any further court cases. PID says this is a clever international solution to quiescence about a double.
Related to these requests are that more people would do vocal analysis of spoken and sung tones of voice. Unfortunately, other than one who writes with a strong bias toward PIA, claiming he was neutral, very few have done such analyses. The problem is extreme familiarity as strong bias.
PART FIVE
Name of Double; Place, Cause and Date of Death of Paul
Name
The actual name of the replacement and the date and place of death for Paul have been worked out. Although nicknames such as Shears and Shepherd were used, his last name, “Campbell”, was inadvertently leaked in an early paper in 1969, afterwards showing in historical evidence and seemingly said by “Sir Paul”.
Much evidence, some by “Sir Paul” and George Harrison themselves, says the first name “Bill” or “William”.
So Bill Campbell is the the likely name of the replacement, if he is a replacement.
Death
As might be expected, if PID is true, one of the areas most concealed about PID, besides the double's name, would be the circumstances of Paul’s death. Family, friends and colleagues could have been subject to threats, bribes, and disinformation.
There are always suggestions of a car “accident”. Some indications are that a car hit him, rather than that he was in a car.
The evidence also fits that he was pulled out and shot or bludgeoned in the head. A car might have just been staged near the body or the Beatles been told that he had been hit by a car.
The supposed injuries, shown in increasing detail and once with forensic accuracy, always show a serious or mortal head wound.
Where
All of the serious, though little-known evidence points to Liverpool as the scene of death, probably near Abbey Road in Liverpool.
The Beatles studio near Abbey Road in London was named “Abbey Road Studios” from “EMI Studios” after the album commemorating the death of Paul. There are many mediaeval abbeys in England and many such roads. If Paul was killed on one, the sad irony would be that the Beatles had to walk on another every day at the studio in another city.
Dead Body
Burial, or a funeral, was likely on the grounds at the government-affiliated orphanage called Strawberry Fields. Whether the real body was put into the casket is another issue.
Date of Death: IIIX = XIII
We do not need to know an exact date. However, there is a numeric, hidden art clue supposedly left by the Beatles on the bass drum of Sergeant Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band album (1967). When it is mirrored up and down, halfway down the normal lettering, it says "IIIX HE ^ DIE". The "^" points to the "Paul" figure (though it is actually Sir Paul on the cover).
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...0/iiix.jpg
Aside, Sir Paul is holding a wooden English horn instrument in the image, which is, like the oboe and bassoon, a double reed instrument; this is significant as a pun, if he is a human double. The drum is a bass drum and Paul was the bass guitarist.
PIDers divided the numbers in the bass drum clue into two Arabic (11) and two Roman numerals (IX = 9).
This gave an American dating of November 9th, and a UK dating of September 11th. Other evidence, including the period of a basic gap in Paul's whereabouts, showed that sometime in September was the more likely month.
However, since 2016, the clue was reevaluated to be one simple Roman numeral, XIII, but actually backwards,, not only upside down. If the only numbers were backwards, they would be like many Beatles art clues.
The numbers would therefore read not IIIX, but XIII.
This death date would be Tuesday, September 13th, around midnight, UK time.
This explains all other evidence available, including several news items – and is a simpler, more elegant form of clue.
The drum-skin lettering style also fits this idea.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...0roman.jpg
For a tombstone, it would be:
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...0stone.jpg
IIIX also probably means that three real Beatles were still alive and one was X-ed out (dead).
Interestingly, Paul is supposed to have been alive, at a public event, on that specific date during the gap period. There are even specially doctored images and a confused historical record for that date.
Was the cover-up trying to mention him as being alive on the thirteenth, specifically on that one date, to quell immediate rumors of his death?
https://hyperspacecafe.com/Thread-Paul-McCartney
https://hyperspacecafe.com/Thread-Paul-I...er-Is-Paul
https://hyperspacecafe.com/Thread-Paul-M...ly-Is-Dead
https://hyperspacecafe.com/Thread-Ringo-...ed-in-1966
https://hyperspacecafe.com/Thread-Paul-M...ut-at-Last
https://hyperspacecafe.com/Thread-Paul-M...-Operation
https://hyperspacecafe.com/Thread-Paul-M...e-Harrison
https://hyperspacecafe.com/Thread-THE-AS...-MCCARTNEY
Quote:Was Paul McCartney Murdered for Opposing the Deep State?
Henry Makow (October 21, 2023):
It's the weekend. As a change of pace, I present an article by a reader, Clare Kuehn, that casts Paul McCartney's murder and replacement in a new light. "Mark Lane said Paul was convinced "Oswald couldn't have done it," and wanted to write his very first film score for Lane's upcoming film of his book, Rush to Judgment. Had Paul written his first film score and backed such a film, in the heady days for the Beatles, in 1966, and only three-and-a-half years after the assassination of JFK, the dam against JFK-assassination conspiracy case-making would have broken."
Brian (October 22, 2023):
It's all too apparent that Paul McCartney was replaced by one "Billy Shears." His eye color changed from brown to blue, and he grew 2-3 inches in height at the age of 23. There are many well-done YouTube videos that cover the many differences. The best book about the replacement of Paul is Tina Foster's 'Plastic Macca,' where she has a chapter covering the new "Paul" getting the real Paul's history wrong. I'm uneasy about a sinister end to Paul's life, and stick to the accidental car crash theory. But, anything is possible in our controlled/backward society.
https://henrymakow.com/2023/10/was-paul-...ed-fo.html
Paul McCartney Is Dead – A Case Theory Overview
Clare Kuehn
October 9th, 2023
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...Newman.jpg
CHAPTERS
Part 1 How Can We Think about Paul's Supposed Death? – And Some Photographs
Part 2 First Principles: Nothing In the Way of the Claim
Part 3 The Material Evidence: A Broad Historical Fit; A Surprise; Faces, Music
Part 4 Formal Forensic Scientists
Part 5 Name of Double; Place, Cause and Date of Death of Paul
Part 6 Murder of Paul?
Part 7 Murder = Redrum: The Art Clues of Beatles and Others
Part 8 Nuns, Saints and Icons
Part 9 Fall-Out and Conclusion
Footnotes
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...20comp.jpg
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...mp%201.jpg
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...20real.jpg
PART ONE
How Can We Think about Paul's Supposed Death? – And Some Photographs
In mid-September, 1966, something happened with the Beatles that would rewrite the history of music forever. James Paul McCartney was missing from media coverage for months.
When he supposedly appeared again in mid December, he appeared in all ways to be very different than he had been, just seven or eight weeks before.
When the film of the Beatles “Hello Goodbye” aired in November, 1967, on the Ed Sullivan TV show, the figure of Paul was extremely awkward and lanky. Why did they send a film instead of doing an in-person appearance, as before? He moved awkwardly, not with the effortless, fluid movements of Paul.
Numerous fake and distorted films began to appear; music was altered in pitch during remastering; cryptic comments were made. What had happened to the "beautiful boy"?
The rumor that Paul died started almost immediately, we now know. Most sources say it was created in late 1969, but it was in print in early 1967.
If Paul was replaced in the public eye, some powerful people had to manage passports and legalities: the powerful economic export the Beatles represented had to be continued. Some people now are considering that he was murdered, instead of dying in a natural accident. If he was murdered, some common suggestions follow.
This Overview
The case called “Paul Is Dead” (“P.I.D.”) is something we can think about, no matter what we assume. We can only cover the broadest outlines of the case, allowing readers to fill in details and find some already-identified complex references themselves (do more "personal research" into the matter).
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...l%2014.jpg
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...y%2011.png
The Claim
24-year-old Paul McCartney of the Beatles died in late 1966 and was publicly replaced by another man.
Simplicity and Unusualness
PID is, at root, a simple claim, but a permanent double is more complex than a person who continued in a public life. If PID is simplest to explain all the evidence, PID does not break the principle of simplicity. “Occam's Razor” is that principle.
Also, while PID is extraordinarily unusual, it can require no extraordinary evidence: evidence can only come in ordinary forms. The rest is mere feelings of extraordinariness or ease of decision-making, using "best evidence", preferred, simple forms, which are always missing in cold cases.
All Evidence is Bad Evidence?
Evidence may be evidence points on a table, so to speak, but not "actual" evidence, of the final kind. Perhaps some pieces indicate that unsure directions become surer, when in combination.[1] Beyond evidence and logic, court and history arguments are won by the quality of jury: the equanimity of listeners' minds. What kind of listener are you?[2]
Because this is an overview, not every objection can be raised and answered, or answered in full here, but all have at least reasonable answers.
Official Forensic Scientists
As we will shortly see, in part four of this article, two forensic scientists did come out in support of PID, against their initial assumptions.
But there have been some others who did not use the extreme examples of Sir Paul's seemingly different bone structure, nor account for any fakery. They came out with a different result. Would they have, if they had done so?[3]
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...istics.jpg
Faces, Sounds, Statements Both Ways
Some people see two or more “Pauls” in historical evidence, some only one. Perceptions can be shaped by emotions in either direction, yes. If one is a proponent of either PIA (“Paul Is Alive”) theory or PID theory, the opposite side comes into view only by resifting and analyzing photos and all other evidence. Part three discusses the photos, but we will present some here.
Sorting Photographic Materials
One only has to take most of the early photos of Paul early and compare them to most of the post September 1966 photos to notice a problem. There are also some sure indications of photo doctoring (photo fakery), as we have seen.
Faces
The following photos are originals. Can you tell?
Paul 1965, 1966 (including the time, December 26th, 1965 when he was likely beaten up, 9 months before being possibly murdered, per PID; it was claimed to be a moped accident):
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...ul%201.jpg
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...ul%202.jpg
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...ul%203.jpg
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...ul%204.jpg
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...ul%205.jpg
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...ul%208.jpg
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...l%2010.jpg
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...ul%209.jpg
Sir Paul, noting bone structure, not age:
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...ll%201.jpg
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...et%207.jpg
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...et%201.jpg
Safety and Critical Thinking Skills
People are wired to want truth with safety. When truth is scary, we tend to avoid it. Some cognitive scientists have even warned people, who may or may not have low skills, from applying classical critical thinking skills to conspiracy theories, presuming a definition that the very term means something scary, crazy or stupid, using biased methods.
Some people are of low skill, it is true, but should not high-end skills always be applied, in full-spectrum skepticism, so as to determine dangerous tomfoolery?
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...0Trick.jpg
Paul and Sir Paul
To determine truth or falsity, we begin by categorizing the historical figure “Paul” as “Paul” and as “Sir Paul” henceforward, even if the designants are actually one real person. (The putative replacement claimant went on to be knighted, as well as seeming to be older than Paul, born about 1937).
PID requires a conspiracy as a cover-up, whether Paul died naturally or by murder. Let us build up the case and compare it to the opposing side, calmly, reasonably.
Conspiracies and Theories
Properly defined, most of history and law is conspiracy theory.
It may be necessary to reread that sentence.
Any group activity can be called conspiracy by an opposite group, with or without a plot. Explaining and defending claims, even after accepting them, is the activity of theorizing. Theories, i.e., may be good, bad or indeterminate – and unofficial or official.
The phrase “conspiracy theory” goes back to the 1890s, not to the CIA in the 1960s. Its opposites are only lone-person theories or no-event-at-all theories – not finality, reality or value. From 1890 to now, "conspiracy theory" can be used neutrally, to mean a case or explanation of a conspiracy, or a posited conspiracy.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...20real.jpg
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...y%2013.jpg
For example, both subjects above are plausibly the same person, though one might "see" two; we can consider them as Paul or as Paul and a double; if we have lighting and "lens distortion" (perspective focal length distortions) at play, we can say they are plausibly the same. PID theory says they are Paul and that the double is much different, but sometimes resembles elements in the first photo. (We will get to focal length problems in part three.)
Could there be a conspiracy, a big and wide one?
PART TWO
First Principles: Nothing In the Way of the Claim
The Public as Dupes
Some PIDers say they first felt a jarring sense of loss of “attraction” to what they now “know” is a double. Older PIDers point out that they could not copy or share broadcasts, back then.
The issue is really whether the public was considered, by the cover-up arrangement, as needing to know. PID evidence suggests that the cover-up was actually awkward and difficult; still, most people, understandably, do not spend time on learning new information, in case PID is the correct theory of events.
Background and Conspiracies of Silence: Official Mechanisms
Doubles require legal help and passports, if we do not mean a mere distracting decoy at a public concert, etc.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...%20art.jpg
Such means are acknowledged by intelligence agencies. If Paul died and was replaced, to pull it off would require some “official” involvement. Even if intelligence services helped after an accidental death, a cover-up would normally continue to cover up the original “help”.
Historical Precedents, A Proof of Concept
PID case theory hinges on known historical methods of spy-craft and deception in war, and political usage of doubles for protection.
Still, permanent public replacement of a known figure seems to start with Paul.
Early 20th-century spy and dancer Mata Hari had a public double, while elsewhere on assignment. However, she was, in turn, set up to fall, as well.
Josef Stalin (USSR), had four doubles – long suspected. One major one has spoken out, who was “classified”, until recently.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...Stalin.jpg
By the Second World War, British Intelligence used a long-term, temporary, semi-public double for General Bernard “Monty” Montgomery – not for safety, but to trick the other side for battle plans.
In 1944 the Allies used a "Ghost Army" of inflatable tanks and personnel carriers to fool German recon missions.
WWII British “Operation Mincemeat” disrespectfully used a poor man's corpse, with fake documents and uniform, to trick German intelligence, effectively speaking, “for grave reasons of state.”
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...%20JPG.jpg
Co-conspirators As Circles of Silence
Family and friends would have to be aides, co-conspirators (by name or not), via threats, bribes, or half-truths. We have some evidence pointing to each of these, but do not need to know specifics here, to determine if Paul was replaced.
There have been a few legal affidavits done by family and fans, about various parts of the case. However, most back off, even if only tangentially related to the case, and others say more publicly that it is not up to themselves.
Are they all lying?
Motivations for a Cover-Up
British Prime Minister Harold Wilson's government has been described as "floating" the British Pound Sterling for four years "on the back of" the Beatles, although this is a simplification. News of Paul’s death could have affected the British economy. Cover-up of a natural or an unnatural death could well have been cobbled together for this reason.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...201964.jpg
In 1965, the Beatles were given an economic-military honor thanks to Wilson, himself, who nominated them. Other recipients of the Members of the British Empire (MBE) award complained. Wilson and the Beatles are pictured above, in 1964.
Murder by "the state" or "its" affiliates, for any reason, would be further motivation for a state cover-up.
PART THREE
The Material Evidence: A Broad Historical Fit; A Surprise; Faces and Music
Was Necessity the Mother of Invention? A Sea-Change, 1967 Onward
Those familiar with Beatles history and the personalities of the band members, have remarked on the seriously striking changes which occurred around early spring, 1967.
The manic and depressive demeanor of all members of the band except the replacement stood in stark contrast to earlier days. Wild styles, colors, and facial hair became the vogue, tied in to the Beatles. Meditation, occultism, drugs, loose living and a repudiation of middle-class values became widespread, as the replacement’s influence made the surviving Beatles more or less follow his lead.
This was even as the youth culture of the world mimicked the mores and concerns of the Beatles themselves.
Gap at Early Posthumous Period, 1966
Gaps in knowledge, if embedded in contextual evidence, are perfectly acceptable for consideration; sometimes, gaps are highly significant to court case-making (theory) and history.
Absence of evidence can be evidence of important absence. Defacement of Cappadocian rock churches (Anatolia, Turkey) is determined by specific areas missing: faces.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...adocia.jpg
For several months in fall, 1966, only two or three news references Paul's supposed behavior and whereabouts exist – an extraordinarily surprising gap.
Reports in media recollect how “Paul” did not “look like Paul” to some fans at the end of that period, about early November 1966.
First Printed Rumor, 1967, Not 1969
PID's detractors state that the idea of PID was rumored first in 1969, among “those crazy American college kids of the 1960s,” but the rumor was in print by early February, 1967. Moreover, people credibly state that they had heard or figured out that Paul had died, the previous fall.
“Beatles Book,” a Beatles-affiliated magazine, UK-only back in February, 1967:
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...ok%201.jpg
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...ok%202.jpg
This first-known, in-print rumor was a surprise find. It was a discovery based on the hypothesis that Paul may have died.
It disinforms about timing, survival of Paul and exact place of the events – but the basics confirm later case theory: Paul was the only Beatle affected, a car seemed to have been involved and the events occurred in England.
It also seems awkward. Perhaps it was in response to real rumors. This acknowledgement was never repeated.
Plastic Surgery, Prosthetics, Hair, Moles, Hands
Some suggestions exist of plastic surgery on Sir Paul, beyond any official surgeries. The best indicators are too complicated to go into here; they are that Sir Paul had his first surgeries in Kenya, in a British-intelligence-affiliated hospital, in about October-November, 1966.
The use of prosthetics occasionally by the supposed replacement, especially on ears. Moles “move around” on Sir Paul. Hands are sometimes similar (doctored?), sometimes not.
Hair whorl and texture are also seemingly different on the putatively two men, although some fake photos do exist and some contrary real ones.
When PIA theory acknowledges any of this, it is explained as done for fun and cosmetic surgery.
Body
Body height is harder to determine than complexities of faces, because very often a context for height references is needed. The Beatles claimed to be what seems to be 2 or three inches taller than they were and Sir Paul claims the same height: 5'11" for Paul and John.
Because of indications that Sir Paul is taller than was Paul, plus some distorted photos, some PIDers now claim that Sir Paul is 6'3", which is countered by good evidence. Without getting into the weeds of this debate here, it is likely that Paul and John were about 5'9" and Sir Paul is about 5'11'-12", with far bigger feet.
The Hofner Bass and Body Height
For upper body measurements, we could have used certain photos with the Hofner bass in them, when it was held and photographed in a certain angle. But Sir Paul officially "lost to theft" Paul's extremely valuable Hofner bass and had it rebuilt. He had rarely, if ever, used it after the supposed death of Paul. (PID case theory says that this is because of photo comparisons and the fact that he is a bigger man, preferring a bigger guitar.)
The original guitar would form a measuring stick. He now uses it in photos. PID theory suggests that he simply hid the valuable object and had it rebuilt to make all relevant photographic internal measurements more deceptive.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...hofner.jpg
Doctored (Faked) Photos
Mostly, it is pictures of Sir Paul which are doctored. Some of Paul also get doctored, but nowhere near as often. (Some fakes of Sir Paul are paired below with Paul.) Can you tell?
Sir Paul head with Paul face added in (below). Not a bad job, but left eyebrow shows a break and long chin unnatural to mouth:
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...ke%204.jpg
Older, 1968 Sir Paul with younger Paul face inserted, grey-reddened in color to match general tones of old photo around it:
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...20fake.jpg
The following example below should be obvious, but a few things which were done – highlight added to nose, dark edge exaggerated; contrast increased, showing more stubble information from original negative. Bottom lip moved down, teeth inserted, lower cheek lines near mouth and nose added:
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...ke%202.jpg
Paul on the left (below) is also seemingly doctored around the eyes. Sir Paul with Paul's face inserted (right):
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...ke%202.jpg
Sir Paul on left, composite (below), with elements from Paul photo on right, also probably using a Paul mouth from another photo. Highlight added to nose on "Sir Paul", eyes darkened and points of highlight added, shadow added to Paul eye ridge at nose. Areas of change highlighted except eye ridge and irises:
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...20fake.jpg
Paul (left). Mouth, nose bridge and Paul's right eyebrow, half of left eyebrow, cheeks and mouth doctored into Sir Paul photo (right):
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...ke%203.jpg
"A Hard Day's Night" Movie (1964) and "Hey Jude" BBC TV Production (1968, "remastered" or faked, circa 2015)
Careful viewers will notice that some copies and broadcasts of "A Hard Day's Night" movie have been slightly stretched. This is especially true for scenes with Paul in them. Is this done to look more like Sir Paul? Per PID theory, it is.
Others may notice that the close-ups in "Hey Jude" have been computer assisted (are a CGI, computer-generated image). It is as though Paul and Sir Paul were morphed and laid onto the images, with a computer. They are not limited to having a clearer face; it is far more Paul-like in this 2005 "BeatlesVEVO" on-line release, of circa 2015. Why?
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...ke%202.jpg
Anyone who looks for still photos from the "Hey Jude" television release from 1968, will find very few available now. The following one has the exact chin area and some other parts of a photo of Paul in another photo; see below.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...20fake.jpg
But Sir Paul here, also known as "False Paul", "Fake Paul", shortened to "Faul", still has a seeming dissimilitude with Paul. This Sir Paul seems to be wearing prosthetics and the chin doctored.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...ke%203.jpg
If anyone has the original television film from 1968, it would be good to share the stills with PID proponents.
Why all these fakes?
A YouTube channel sounding like a spy channel, called "Jack McFile" shows many, many hundreds of new fakes with real photos, a few old fakes – and Paul with Paul photos (pre-1967). It uses fades between them, to confuse the two faces as well, not highlighting problems. Fades have usefulness in some contexts, but not in most situations with fakes. Why such efforts, if not by a spy? PID says it is because it is more deception.
Sir Paul in Art
Artists instinctively have to “morph” Paul into Sir Paul or draw them differently, in many cases, it seems.
Moreover, many ordinary fans, natural PIAers, who are not even considering PID, have been upset at a computer airbrush artwork (done by AI, some say, but it seems to be an artwork using computers). Why are they upset? The artwork is typical of some photos of Sir Paul. If he is Paul, there is no problem. Do they just find him ugly, and have been not noticing his “change” from youth?
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...%20art.jpg
Could Paul have grown from the following, into the previous?
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...l%2011.jpg
To be sure, many pictures of Sir Paul younger are doctored, but certainly not all. He looked better, younger, in some photos, but not in all angles.
In other words, he seems to become more unlike Paul in how we notice telltale features, but he was always predictable for his own bone structures.
Distortions by Lens Focal Length and Curvature
To be sure, distortion occurs in photography. Aside from photo stretching and other fakery as seen above, natural uses of light also distort what we perceive. The photos below are all plausibly the same people in photos with cameras using different focal lengths in the lenses.
Could parts of the deception have been deliberate usages to deceive the public using “lens distortion” (actually perspectival distortion), plus the common occurrences of this phenomenon.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...on%201.jpg
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...ession.jpg
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...on%206.png
They are plausibly one person. (Source for focal-length comparisons: here.)
Is that all that is happening for the historical figure called “Paul McCartney”?
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...icking.jpg
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...rd%202.jpg
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...20ears.jpg
Note that on the last Sir Paul image, there has been fakery using the Paul photo: the lips are together, with the same little bulge in exactly the same lower lip shape with the chin, as in the first photo. The chin and ridge of the nose, with the brow, are grabbed from the Paul picture. (Look closely.)
Other than that doctoring of the last Sir Paul photo, are all of these, above in this section, the same people with lens distortion?
Music
Sir Paul is known for being more of a piano player with talent. He does “rock” hard on the bass at times, but Paul had more lilting abilities on the instrument and tended not to look down. Body language between the two persons, according to PID, is also quite different, except when Sir Paul is putting in an effort to copy a move, here or there.
Is Sir Paul left handed?
No. He does drum cross-overs differently in some rare photos, does not do the more complex guitar work Paul did on his own and rarely looked down for.
Although both men have been pictured using each hand in some situations, Sir Paul can be determined to be primarily right handed, not playing guitar on screen for one and a half years, and never with as much facility as Paul. He had help in studio and got good at more simple moves.
There are some who say differently handed playing is too hard. But it is not, with the considerations above.
Talent is something that people often think is unable to be compared between people, but that is not true, if we are careful. Sir Paul has talents, but is not as free with his energy; he has more of a driving, or awkward presence than Paul. Or does he?
Pitch of Music and Spoken Voice
Various songs by the Beatles, defined as Beatles by including Paul himself, have been shortened by a few seconds during “remastering” and raised in pitch; others are just slightly raised in pitch, to change Paul's generally huskier voice into an “easier high note” like Sir Paul, PID theory says.
The following video demonstrates voice types. Sir Paul is keeping his mouth and eye movements very controlled, for this early interview. Many early interviews have been doctored (faked a bit) now, but this one has his genuine face and his acting skills are evident; he did not always try so hard, PID theory says.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tVu15exnQDA
Posthumous Tricks and Eulogies
Insertions of older items also exist. PID theory says that these are to trick the viewer and listener, but also to honor the dead friend, Paul.
The giddy, younger Beatles in Magical Mystery Tour film (1967) “Wizard Tower” scenes, are taken from lost footage, says PID, and added to honor Paul posthumously in the film. Paul has makeup and a wig on, so some think it is older Sir Paul, but his glowing, unique smile indicates it is young Paul. (The movie includes many PID themes, as well, including a "resurrection." with Sir Paul presiding.)
Also, songs sung by Paul were put on albums posthumously, to honor him and to confuse the public, if PID is correct:
She's Leaving Home (Paul, harp added later, with a false creation myth for the song),
Fool on the Hill (a mix of Paul and Sir Paul),
Her Majesty (Paul, originally planned to be the very last Beatles release).
PART FOUR
Formal Forensic Scientists
Photo-Forensic Scientists Weigh In
As mentioned in part one of this article, there are occasional photo- and audio-forensic scientists who speak on this topic. For the photo-forensic scientists, most use definitely flawed methodology, whereby all photos were of Paul anyway, or no very different-looking photos were used.
However, the Italian version of the magazine, WIRED, in its August 2009 issue, published an article summarizing claims of two scientists, who, using photo comparisons, were baffled to discover that Paul seemed definitely to have been replaced. The article was never translated or promoted in English, which makes sense for PID theory. PIDers have translated it.
The scientists have been mocked, ignored and the article untranslated, officially. Note: they used a few slightly doctored photos in the comparisons and still came to the conclusion.
The WIRED Italia magazine article, August 2009:
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...D%20p1.jpg
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...D%20p2.jpg
Audio Forensics
As to the voice evidence: In 1970, an audial forensics professional from Florida, named Dr. Henry Truby, commented publicly that detected three “voices” for “Paul”, in post-1966 songs.
We can now know, through careful PID work, that after 1966, posthumous Paul recordings were interspersed with his replacement’s: it is a way to honor Paul, by the surviving Beatles, and to confuse the public.
In addition, some songs are very processed. (Yet, there could be a third actual singer, as well, on Sgt Pepper album, possibly Donovan Leitch, seemingly referenced by music duo Simon and Garfunkel, in "Fakin' It" single, 1967, which will figure into this article later.)
DNA
Some people wait for DNA tests of family. If the cover-up is considered “for grave reasons of state”, such tests would be scuttled. However, a blood test did rule out Sir Paul as father of a long-known illegitimate child of Paul. The court's compromise was to give her legal state benefits, but not call her Paul's child and bar any further court cases. PID says this is a clever international solution to quiescence about a double.
Related to these requests are that more people would do vocal analysis of spoken and sung tones of voice. Unfortunately, other than one who writes with a strong bias toward PIA, claiming he was neutral, very few have done such analyses. The problem is extreme familiarity as strong bias.
PART FIVE
Name of Double; Place, Cause and Date of Death of Paul
Name
The actual name of the replacement and the date and place of death for Paul have been worked out. Although nicknames such as Shears and Shepherd were used, his last name, “Campbell”, was inadvertently leaked in an early paper in 1969, afterwards showing in historical evidence and seemingly said by “Sir Paul”.
Much evidence, some by “Sir Paul” and George Harrison themselves, says the first name “Bill” or “William”.
So Bill Campbell is the the likely name of the replacement, if he is a replacement.
Death
As might be expected, if PID is true, one of the areas most concealed about PID, besides the double's name, would be the circumstances of Paul’s death. Family, friends and colleagues could have been subject to threats, bribes, and disinformation.
There are always suggestions of a car “accident”. Some indications are that a car hit him, rather than that he was in a car.
The evidence also fits that he was pulled out and shot or bludgeoned in the head. A car might have just been staged near the body or the Beatles been told that he had been hit by a car.
The supposed injuries, shown in increasing detail and once with forensic accuracy, always show a serious or mortal head wound.
Where
All of the serious, though little-known evidence points to Liverpool as the scene of death, probably near Abbey Road in Liverpool.
The Beatles studio near Abbey Road in London was named “Abbey Road Studios” from “EMI Studios” after the album commemorating the death of Paul. There are many mediaeval abbeys in England and many such roads. If Paul was killed on one, the sad irony would be that the Beatles had to walk on another every day at the studio in another city.
Dead Body
Burial, or a funeral, was likely on the grounds at the government-affiliated orphanage called Strawberry Fields. Whether the real body was put into the casket is another issue.
Date of Death: IIIX = XIII
We do not need to know an exact date. However, there is a numeric, hidden art clue supposedly left by the Beatles on the bass drum of Sergeant Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band album (1967). When it is mirrored up and down, halfway down the normal lettering, it says "IIIX HE ^ DIE". The "^" points to the "Paul" figure (though it is actually Sir Paul on the cover).
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...0/iiix.jpg
Aside, Sir Paul is holding a wooden English horn instrument in the image, which is, like the oboe and bassoon, a double reed instrument; this is significant as a pun, if he is a human double. The drum is a bass drum and Paul was the bass guitarist.
PIDers divided the numbers in the bass drum clue into two Arabic (11) and two Roman numerals (IX = 9).
This gave an American dating of November 9th, and a UK dating of September 11th. Other evidence, including the period of a basic gap in Paul's whereabouts, showed that sometime in September was the more likely month.
However, since 2016, the clue was reevaluated to be one simple Roman numeral, XIII, but actually backwards,, not only upside down. If the only numbers were backwards, they would be like many Beatles art clues.
The numbers would therefore read not IIIX, but XIII.
This death date would be Tuesday, September 13th, around midnight, UK time.
This explains all other evidence available, including several news items – and is a simpler, more elegant form of clue.
The drum-skin lettering style also fits this idea.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...0roman.jpg
For a tombstone, it would be:
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/im...0stone.jpg
IIIX also probably means that three real Beatles were still alive and one was X-ed out (dead).
Interestingly, Paul is supposed to have been alive, at a public event, on that specific date during the gap period. There are even specially doctored images and a confused historical record for that date.
Was the cover-up trying to mention him as being alive on the thirteenth, specifically on that one date, to quell immediate rumors of his death?