View Active Topics          Latest 100 Topics          View Your Posts          Switch to Mobile

Paul McCartney was replaced by a double in 1966, experts say

Discuss Other Topics not related to the Paranormal or Conspiracies (within reason of course).

Re: Forensic experts say Paul McCartney was replaced in 1966

Postby NinjaPuppy » 25 Jan 2011, 18:22

ProfWag wrote:Since most of us love a good conspiracy or mystery, how about this one: The Beatles didn't break up until the '80s. They just went underground and formed Klaatu.

No conspiricy there actually. If a writer has songs that don't get used, the find someone who can use them. Depending on contract agreements, they may not be able to publicy sing them or take credit for them. It's not uncommon for songs to find their way into the world through unknown groups.

Contractual agreements usually control the bands as well as the individuals involved. What contracts can't control is the creative process, so they find a way to do their things through other means.

That was a great find ProfWag. Many years ago I had thought that the group 'Badfinger' http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Badfinger sounded a lot like the 'Fab Four' and I see that from this wikipedia entry, I was not the only one.

Here's a bit of 'proof' that song writers find ways to get their music out there to the public....The song was written by none other than, Paul McCartney and produced by Apple Records.
User avatar
NinjaPuppy
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 20:44






Re: Forensic experts say Paul McCartney was replaced in 1966

Postby achillies000 » 24 Jul 2011, 16:42

Don't forget that because Paul isn't wearing any shoes on the cover of the Abbey Road album, that confirms your story as that symbolizes a dead person in a coffin who also don't wear shoes.
[Spam link removed by Moderator]
User avatar
achillies000
 
Posts: 1
Joined: 24 Jul 2011, 16:18

Re: Forensic experts say Paul McCartney was replaced in 1966

Postby Craig Browning » 24 Jul 2011, 22:44

OMG. . . I always thought that was the Beetles!

Then again, there are those that swear that McCartney is the anti-Christ and their success came by way of a "Webster Arrangement" :roll:
User avatar
Craig Browning
 
Posts: 1526
Joined: 13 Feb 2010, 05:20
Location: Northampton, MA

Re: Forensic experts say Paul McCartney was replaced in 1966

Postby NinjaPuppy » 25 Jul 2011, 01:14

It's Beatles, not Beetles. Here, I have PROOF!

Image
User avatar
NinjaPuppy
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 20:44

Re: Forensic experts say Paul McCartney was replaced in 1966

Postby Craig Browning » 26 Jul 2011, 02:30

NinjaPuppy wrote:It's Beatles, not Beetles. Here, I have PROOF!

Image


THAT BUGS ME! :lol:
User avatar
Craig Browning
 
Posts: 1526
Joined: 13 Feb 2010, 05:20
Location: Northampton, MA

Re: Forensic experts say Paul McCartney was replaced in 1966

Postby NinjaPuppy » 27 Jul 2011, 02:46

LOL
User avatar
NinjaPuppy
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 20:44

Re: Forensic experts say Paul McCartney was replaced in 1966

Postby TheRanter » 10 May 2012, 18:42

Scepcop wrote:Check out these side by side comparison photos of an interview with Paul McCartney in 1966 vs. 1967.

Notice every aspect of the face. Look closely. Don't they look like obviously different people?


Image


Just going by the photos you posted, on the differences between Paul (left) and Faul (right) here is what I see...
  • Paul has a more rounded, squatter skull shape than Faul, who's head seems more oblong vertically.
  • Paul appears to have a longer, V shaped jaw line, whereas Faul appears to have a slightly more squat, slightly wider, rounded jaw line.
  • Paul has a rounded, pointy chin, whereas Faul has what is commonly referred to as a "butt-chin".
  • From a side profile, Paul seems to have a rounded face, whereas Faul seems to have a flatter facial structure.
  • Paul seems to have a smaller forehead than Faul.
  • Paul seems to have a narrow mouth, whereas it looks to me like Faul is purposely trying to make his mouth appear narrower than it is. As evidence, compare the top 4 right side photos of Faul to the bottom photo, notice his mouth is wider in the last photo?

I could probably find more differences if I sat here longer and kept comparing, but I want to move on...

I wanted to share some things I recall from a film called "Paul McCartney Really is Dead: The Last Testament of George Harrison" which is claimed to be based on micro cassette recordings made by George Harrison shortly before his death. The film lays out all of the clues about Paul McCartney's alleged car crash in 1966, which resulted in his death. I'm going off of memory here, and please forgive me if I'm off, it was a year ago that I saw the film, but I'm planning on watching it again, so after I do, I'll update this if necessary.

According to the film, the Beatles were at the studio doing some recording sessions, when a disagreement between Paul McCartney and the other members of the Beatles broke out. Eventually this disagreement turned into a heated argument, and almost a fight, which is when Paul stormed out of the studio and went for a drive. Whilst Paul was out driving, it began to rain. Paul continued driving, and eventually came upon a girl in a blue dress, name Rita (the film claims she is where the lyric "Lovely Rita, Meter Maid" comes from, as she was in a blue dress) who was walking down a country road, trying to catch a ride. Paul stopped and picked her up. At first, the girl was unaware it was McCartney, but eventually she realized who she was riding with, and began, forcibly, to try and kiss him, which resulted in McCartney jerking the steering wheel, causing him to crash into a tree, resulting in him being thrown from the vehicle, smacking his head on the tree trunk, and dying.

The rest of the Beatles were summoned to the scene of the accident by the Police. Upon arrival is when they were first informed that Paul had been killed in an accident. They were then shown his body, which hadn't been removed from the scene of the accident. They then met a man who was only referred to as "Maxwell", who was a British MI5 agent. "Maxwell" then informed them that they (MI5) were going to replace Paul McCartney with a look alike, the reason being that because of the Beatles extreme popularity, the British government was deeply concerned that if it were discovered that Paul McCartney was dead, that hundreds, or possibly thousands of young girls enamored by Paul McCartney would possibly try to kill themselves upon learning of his death. "Maxwell" told them that they were to continue on with the band, working with the replacement Paul McCartney, or that they would all join McCartney. It was at this point that "Maxwell" showed them McCartney's body, pulling the sheet off of McCartney's face and said "Looks like a Walrus, doesn't he?" (the film claims this is where "I am the Walrus" comes from).

The film mentions that in either 1965 or early 1966, there was a radio station contest for a Paul McCartney look alike, who's winner was a close match to the actual Paul McCartney. It was this man that "Maxwell" is said to have gotten as the replacement for McCartney. While the winner was close in appearance, he wasn't close enough, and the film claims that "Maxwell" arranged for him to have the needed facial surgeries to convincingly fill in for McCartney. The film further claims that it was scarring from these surgeries that resulted in the change in the look of the Beatles hair, and McCartney's sudden adoption of a mustache.

There's a bunch of stuff I can't recall so well after this point, but here are things I do remember.

According to the film, the remaining Beatles and "Faul" (which the film claims was the Beatles' nickname for the replacement) eventually began to feel dishonest about what they were doing, perpetuating a lie, and hiding the death of Paul McCartney from the world. They felt that the fans deserved to know. So they began to hide clues in their music, and on their album covers. Small ones, because they knew that if they were too overt, "Maxwell" would likely make good on his promise that they "would all join McCartney" if they didn't play ball. Eventually, "Maxwell" learned of the clues they had placed, and was unhappy, and reminded them to go along with the cover up, or that he'd fulfill his threat, and he ordered them to stop placing clues about McCartney's death into their music, which they did, at first.

Eventually, John Lennon began experimenting with more subtle ways of leaving clues in their music, this is where the backwards masking came in. So they backwards masked things into their music, hoping that "Maxwell" wouldn't discover them, or that if he did, he wouldn't be so mad, as it was backwards, and it wasn't easy to discover.

According to the film, after the Beatles had broken up, John Lennon wanted to inform the fans of Paul McCartney's death, and why they did what they did, but "Maxwell" convinced him not to. Years later, John's conscience was eating at him, so he contacted the other members, and Faul, and told them that he was going to go public. The other members and Faul strongly advised against it, but John couldn't take it anymore, and said he was going to go public because it had been a long time, Beatlemania was over, and that it was time to tell the fans the truth. The film alleges that this is why John Lennon was shot in NYC, he was assassinated by MI5 to prevent the disclosure of the truth about McCartney.

Overall, this film supplied plenty of clues, and it laid out a plausible story to support the assertion that Paul McCartney died in a car crash in 1966. Again, I might not be recalling this info with 100% accuracy, as it's been at least a year since I saw this film. I do remember that I found this film to be quite intriguing, I saw it on Netflix, so if it's still on there, I suggest watching it.

Any opinions, comments?
User avatar
TheRanter
 
Posts: 3
Joined: 10 May 2012, 16:19

Re: Forensic experts say Paul McCartney was replaced in 1966

Postby NinjaPuppy » 11 May 2012, 01:28

It's a fascinating story! I knew the tales of those messages in the music, along with a few more but never heard or recall anything about "Maxwell".
User avatar
NinjaPuppy
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 20:44

Re: Forensic experts say Paul McCartney was replaced in 1966

Postby NinjaPuppy » 11 May 2012, 01:29

Oh, and welcome to debunkingskeptics.com.
User avatar
NinjaPuppy
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 20:44

Re: Forensic experts say Paul McCartney was replaced in 1966

Postby ProfWag » 11 May 2012, 02:27

If Paul is dead, then where the hell is William Campbell!?!
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Forensic experts say Paul McCartney was replaced in 1966

Postby NinjaPuppy » 11 May 2012, 03:26

ProfWag wrote:If Paul is dead, then where the hell is William Campbell!?!


Obviously, heading off to WalMart:

Image
User avatar
NinjaPuppy
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 20:44

Re: Forensic experts say Paul McCartney was replaced in 1966

Postby TheRanter » 11 May 2012, 07:47

ProfWag wrote:If Paul is dead, then where the hell is William Campbell!?!


Come to think of it... I believe the film said that William Campbell was the contest winner who became "Paul McCartney"... Not 100% on that, but I am going to watch the film again either tonight, or tomorrow, so I'll double check that when I do.

And Thanks for welcoming me, NinjaPuppy.

I came across this thread whilst googling the subject, so I thought I'd join in the conversation... Maybe we can collaborate and dig into this a bit. Anyone interested? I know I am.
User avatar
TheRanter
 
Posts: 3
Joined: 10 May 2012, 16:19

Re: Forensic experts say Paul McCartney was replaced in 1966

Postby NinjaPuppy » 11 May 2012, 07:59

TheRanter wrote:
ProfWag wrote:If Paul is dead, then where the hell is William Campbell!?!


Come to think of it... I believe the film said that William Campbell was the contest winner who became "Paul McCartney"... Not 100% on that, but I am going to watch the film again either tonight, or tomorrow, so I'll double check that when I do.

According to this Google search (that I had to do because ProfWag didn't 'splain who William Campbell was) he is in fact the winner of the look-a-like contest as per wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_is_dead

TheRanter wrote:And Thanks for welcoming me, NinjaPuppy.

I came across this thread whilst googling the subject, so I thought I'd join in the conversation... Maybe we can collaborate and dig into this a bit. Anyone interested? I know I am.

Let's give it a go and see what turns up. I doubt we will turn up the real William Campbell but hey, ProfWag sure gave us some food for thought on this subject.
User avatar
NinjaPuppy
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 20:44

Re: Forensic experts say Paul McCartney was replaced in 1966

Postby NinjaPuppy » 11 May 2012, 08:28

I did find this most excellent YouTube video but the skeptics around here don't put much faith into YouTube vids.

User avatar
NinjaPuppy
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 20:44

Re: Forensic experts say Paul McCartney was replaced in 1966

Postby ProfWag » 11 May 2012, 20:52

NinjaPuppy wrote:According to this Google search (that I had to do because ProfWag didn't 'splain who William Campbell was) he is in fact the winner of the look-a-like contest as per wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_is_dead

That's why I love you Ninja, you're not afraid to do a little homework yourself. :D

So getting back to my question, wouldn't that have to be explained as well? Let's say they did replace Paul with ol' Mr. Campbell. Wouldn't a family member out there, somewhere, be asking the same question "Where the hell did William go?"
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

PreviousNext

Return to Off-Topic Board

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron