About 'Paul is dead' ..
-
Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — Paul McCartney
gsc-57 — 14 years ago(February 03, 2012 09:37 PM)
is just not easy to do a ADN? to stop all the rumours?
i mean i hate the fact that ppl compare photos of him when he was 15 or 20
nex to a photo in his 30's 35's
is obviously that he changed , he seemed more mature and that happens to all of us, i can say im not the same i used to be when i was 15 now im 19
my face os larger,my nose is kinda different
Just with see how he acts and his expresions you can tell that he is not dead.
look a this photo
http://images1.fanpop.com/images/photos/1400000/Young-Paul-paul-mccartney-1474617-462-600.jpg
then
http://images.wikia.com/simpsons/images/d/d9/Paul_mccartney.jpg
doesnt looks the same ! well he does but he changed a little
but that foto is when he was 15-17 to 24-27
i cant tell as well mustache and different hair make you look different. -
gsc-57 — 14 years ago(February 03, 2012 09:46 PM)
But then here we go, the only thing that i dont get, is all the 'clues' songs,covers,etcetc.
has someone already asked him that? or to beatle?
or at the same time it could be that the songs says paul, and from that they took every little detail (date,accident,year,etc)and because of that they find something that says or sounds like 'PAUL' now it has to be real.
many songs has subliminal messages
is stupd to say.. isn strange that they stoped doing concerts,interwievs after the 66? HE IS DEAD
all started for a rumour then they took that year to make it fit ,you know?
sorry if you cant understand me, my first languaje is spanish. -
gsc-57 — 14 years ago(February 03, 2012 09:55 PM)
i forgot to say,
i this video (help)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H6EqPOkVhjg&feature=related
0:18-0:21
his face is different,like he gain some weith
im not sure but i think that video is from 1965
and looks exactly the same in any photo after 1967 ,obvs with out the mustache. -
gpicto — 14 years ago(February 05, 2012 06:37 PM)
It's all a joke that the Beatles pulled on their fans. Paul is alive and well, and the same Paul today as in 1963. It was a self-hoax.
Marriage is between one man and one woman, to the exclusion of all others. -
gpicto — 14 years ago(February 10, 2012 08:36 PM)
I think the Beatles did it for a laugh. And because they were often accused of putting things into the background of their songs that that didn't really. So maybe they decided to start the Paul is Dead thing to amuse themselves and see if anyone would actually notice.
And it took until the time they were breaking up before someone did notice.
Marriage is between one man and one woman, to the exclusion of all others. -
conchord_phan — 14 years ago(February 11, 2012 08:47 AM)
I LOVE The Wings but I believe it's possible the Beatle was replaced. People will do anything these days for money money money. #omnomnomnom lol
Another recent discovery:
I just read an article in the paper saying that Paul McCartney is finally accepting a star on the walk of fame. In 1993, he was the first Beatle to be asked to receive a star but was under the weather. Well, now all the members have received a star - Paul McCartney being the last.
..so was it just bad timing in '93 or was it out of respect for the other Beatles members? If I were a replacement, I would only see it fair that the other members received a star first.
Treat each day as if it were your last. Please be a child sponsor for World Vision. -
tobian85 — 14 years ago(February 11, 2012 10:15 AM)
I LOVE The Wings but I believe it's possible the Beatle was replaced. People will do anything these days for money money money.
Strange, if you love that band as you claim, that you don't seem to know that it was simply "Wings"no "the" was used. Also, I'd be interested in seeing back-up for the following claim:
In 1993, he was the first Beatle to be asked to receive a star but was under the weather.
If that were true, why on Earth would the ones in charge make him wait NINETEEN MORE YEARS before allowing him to "accept" a star?
Also, I just read an article last night on Yahoo News about Sir Paul's star. I posted the link in my topic on this MB titled "A Star for a StarFINALLY!", so I see no point in copying the link in this reply, but here's a snippet containing relevant dates:
McCartney's star was placed outside the Capitol Records building, alongside those of band members John Lennon, George Harrison and Ringo Starr.
The Beatles were given a star as a group in 1998, more than 25 years after they split up. Lennon and Harrison were given their individual stars several years after their deaths in 1980 and 2001 respectively, while Starr got his in 2010.
Hundreds of fans of the Fab Four gathered, clutching memorabilia, to see McCartney honored for his 50-year legacy in the music industry.
Please show me anywhere in this quoted section that says Sir Paul was "offered a star in 1993". And I am sure you will not find, if you take the trouble to click on the link I provided in my separate topic and
read the linked article
, any statement that even hints that he was offered a star back in 1993,
five years
before The Beatles as a group received theirs.
On the other hand, if you provide a link to a credible source (not just WikiPedia) that backs up your claim then we'll talk.
That doesn't mean, however, that I'll accept your "reasoning" for Paul's supposed death and his double's "noble" refusal of the star. If it turns out to be true that he was asked back in 1993, he could well have refused it by saying something like, "Not until after you give one to The Beatles as a group," which would have been entirely appropriate. True, John got his earlierbut he was
dead
. Paul might have feltvery understandablythat dying was a pretty hefty price to pay just to get that silly star.
I wonder if he'll ever be free from that !@#$% rumor/hoax. On the day he actually does shuffle off this mortal coil, maybe a bunch of people will protest that he's actually still aliveand dwellling in an ashram somewhere in India.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Do not pity the dead, Harry. Pity the living and above all, those who live without love. -
16d0
The_Beatles — 13 years ago(August 09, 2012 09:34 PM)I get a kick at how serious some people take this and actually believe it. There are websites with so much stuff on them trying to prove that Paul had actually died. But the one thing that proves he didn't die, is John.
There was a time after they broke up that John was not happy with Paul. He was angry at him personally and jealous of Paul's success as a solo artist. There is no way he would have kept quiet about that not being the real Paul. It just wouldn't be in his nature.
".we're lucky if we last three months."
John Lennon, 1963 -
conchord_phan — 13 years ago(August 11, 2012 10:38 AM)
There is no way he would have kept quiet about that not being the real Paul. It just wouldn't be in his nature.
I don't know. If it were true, I don't think jealousy would be enough for John to reveal the past. Revealing any hidden truth of the Beatles wouldn't only affect Paul's career but the rest of the Beatles (and their history). The same situation can be applied to a member and his/her respected organization.
The history of their future could have changed, if this was found to be true. They would ALL be seen as liars. Ringo Starr may have never been the conductor on the tv show, "Shining Time Station" etc etc.
For this reason - I don't see how we can argue, by looking at other situations such as jealousy amongst band members. Sometimes theories, whether true or not, are JUST interesting to read.
Treat each day as if it were your last. Please be a child sponsor for World Vision. -
Ceephax — 12 years ago(June 18, 2013 08:10 AM)
I don't know. If it were true, I don't think jealousy would be enough for John to reveal the past. Revealing any hidden truth of the Beatles wouldn't only affect Paul's career but the rest of the Beatles (and their history). The same situation can be applied to a member and his/her respected organization.
The history of their future could have changed, if this was found to be true. They would ALL be seen as liars.
Yeah, I do agree on that one. I really don't know what to think about this 'conspiracy', it's not so much about the looks I focus on (that's hogwash to me, they look identical), but the messages in their music (backwards and forwards), and the clues in their artwork, especially Sgt. Peppers Lonely Hearts Club Band. Even when you listen to Strawberry Fields Forever, A Day in the Life, Glass Onion, Come Together and especially I'm So Tired (backwards at the end- Paul is a dead man, miss him, miss him) and take note of the lyrics, what's the deal there?
Not to mention when it was initially broadcast on the news.
There's so many things about this that beg so many questions. It could well have been a hoax for publicity, but also a MAJOR career killer if people did catch on (you never know what the reaction might have been), it could be all the drugs, but the evidence in their artwork and lyrics, and some back masking, is all too evident and bizarre.
Either case, I used to love them, but the whole Britpop scene and especially that god awful band
Oasis
kind of ruined them for me. -
tobian85 — 12 years ago(June 18, 2013 10:32 PM)
Either case, I used to love them, but the whole Britpop scene and especially that god awful band Oasis kind of ruined them for me.
By "them", Ceephax, may I assume you're referring to the Beatles? If so, I don't understand how that works. To me, it makes about as much sense as saying, "I used to love Shakespeare but that whole Victorian/Edwardian theatrical scene and especially that god-awful Shaw ruined him for me", or "I used to love Rodgers and Hammerstein but that whole later American musical scene and especially that god-awful Sondheim ruined them for me."
Can you please explain how Oasis ruined the Beatles for you?
The best things in history are accomplished by people who get tired of being shoved around. -
MadamaButterfly91 — 12 years ago(June 23, 2013 01:33 PM)
The whole "PID" is a huge hoax. Paul did not die in 1966, he just had an accident with minor consequences, take a look here:
http://beatles.forumfree.it/?t=64148449
and here:
http://www.beatlesbible.com/1965/12/26/paul-mccartney-moped-accident-l iverpool/
