Paul McCartney, Imposter

Reader 1 in these columns has passionately argued that Paul McCartney died in 1966 and a surgically altered person has usurped his name, backlist and personal fortune these forty-six years, but I think it unlikely.

It would mean Paul wrote And I Love Her and a fraud wrote The Long And Winding Road and Yesterday. It would mean I met the real one, and Bryan Brown made Give My Regards To Broad Street with an upstart. It would mean Sir George Martin lately conversed, in the recent film on his long life, with a doppelganger about events in 1962 he was not, it seems now, present at. It would mean the Liverpool school friends, including Pete Best, he has caught up with lately and talked of old times with, were conned by him, and so were his blood relatives, including his dad, for decades on end. It would mean the stars of A Hard Day’s Night and Let It Be are different people.

Reader 1 may not know how hard these things are to arrange. If the real Paul died, there would have been appointments the next day he did not keep, and at least three weeks in which his replacement was auditioned, put under the knife and trained to sing, talk and compose like him, given his house keys and wallet and gorged with his recent memories. What three weeks were these? How were his grieving extended Catholic family silenced? Where is the body?

She speaks of a different chin-shape and she may be right. But dental intervention can cause this, and so can the ‘work’ the current Knight of the Realm might have had in the last twenty years to keep himself, for whatever reason, looking youthful, as he almost certainly has. Voices can alter too, as any student of Frank Sinatra, Bob Dylan, Satchmo, Tom Waits and Lauren Bacall can easily surmise.

But, in the end, too many people would have had to be in on it, and to have kept a terrible secret for too many years, and have not been bugged by the Murdoch people talking about, for it to have happened.

Bob Dylan had a motorbike crash at 24 and nearly died. James Dean had a car crash at 24 and did die. Some conflation of these two things in the mind of an addled fan on LSD may have started this going, plus some disappointment in his later songs.

But, hell, he wrote a Liverpool Symphony. Would a phoney do this? Why would he do it? He married, raised kids, sent them to the local state school, spent every night of his married life with Linda. That sounds like the 22-year-old I met in 1964 whose genial self-mocking style of Scouse banter was the same in the George Martin film last year.

It is hard to imagine he is anyone else.

Leave a comment ?


  1. I’m concerned about all the school shootings in America, the frantic gun buying, that’s all too real. Is there anything we can do to help and put a stop to it…

    Paul’s songs are beautiful, that’s enough for me.

    • The school shooting was also a scam. The kids weren’t murdered. It was just stage acting to try and take the guns away. The frantic gun buying is merely rational behaviour under the circumstance.

      Its seems out of character for the shadow government to actually spare human life in their various media schemes. But in this case they have done just that.

      • To Bird/Reader,I’m happy to take a break from here and leave you to your Paul/faul conspiracy theories.

        As Seinfelt said: See you around…( or not!)

      • ‘The school shooting was also a scam. The kids weren’t murdered. It was just stage acting…’

        You seem like a particularly despicable grub, Bird, with your ongoing hyperbole and florid attachment to subjective fantasies.

        If, as DQ has alluded, you’ve been playing this game on The Drum for the last few years, then I imagine your devious perversities have become second nature.

        Enjoy your karma, idiot.

        • Look what is the matter with you? Its not me thats despicable. Its people like you that are running cover for the mass-murderers who steal from us all. You are a “good German” pretending you cannot see the two different men in the video I left.

          I’ve left a video proving that Paul I is not Paul II. Got it!!!!

          Your intellectual handicap is what these guys were after. Its worked. Now you are wrong. Admit it. Don’t do amateur work for these assholes.

  2. Very well argued. Looking at your analysis of the amount of people one putative imposter would have had to oercome, it’s hard to believe there are people who insist that the Holocaust never happened and it’s all a fraud. But there are.

    Did you meet McCartney while he was in the Beatles?

    • He did, and he made a film with Werner Herzog but refuses to write about it, did Werner tell you any Kinski stories Bob?

      • Yes he did, very funny ones too.

      • How’s the chafing going? I encouraged you the other day to cut it off and run, allthumbs, run, but you never replied…

        I assumed you’d succumbed to the yoke of authority despite the emasculating nature of having to do the bidding of men dressed in khaki safari suits with cryptic illuminati symbols taped to their breasts.

        And Kinski’s public image has been refreshened for 2013, for his fans and detractors alike…

        • Canguro I am growing used to it and I suspect it is less bothersome than coming of a treadley at light speed, tram track was it?

          Klaus would have been ideal for a Celebrity Big Brother household, I am disappointed to hear of his abuse of his daughter from the man that claimed to have slept with, from memory, around ten thousand women. I am waiting for Graeme to level the same amount of abuse at Bob that you and I copped, I have made a list to see if he manages to tick all the boxes.

          Well back to the garden, I have to spend four or five hours in a wooden horse digging a tunnel, the weather is cooler today, but its still crowded with James Garner and the malingerer Donald Pleasance in this small wooded box.

          • No tram track but a tricky piece of misaligned kerb on my favourite bushtrack hack.

            The tramline wheeltrap ‘flick ‘n toss’ effect works equally well whether you’re cycling in Moonee Ponds or Macquarie Park, so it’s a question of choice - what you’d rather be looking at when your eyes are at ground level…

  3. It is not the first time that someone has fantasised about a famous person dying and an imposter taking their place (with just as much merit in the argument). Katherine Susannah Pritchard was unable to see the development of Henry Lawson from the ‘blood staining the wattle’ days until his latter works. Unable to take this in (Maybe Christopher Hitchens died twice and had two imposters) she took to her CPA paper Tribune and proposed this as a theory to explain the changes.
    A person of my acquaintance actually took to using a screen name of Old Lawson a dozen years ago but soon gave it up when the forerunners to the so-called ‘progressives’ immediately used their normally-forbidden ageism to devalue (and avoid) the arguments. Quite a bit of fun all round then and glad to be reminded of it by this latest outburst of ‘what if?’.

  4. Great analysis Helvi …. (not).

    “It would mean Paul wrote And I Love Her and a fraud wrote The Long And Winding Road and Yesterday. It would mean I met the real one, and Bryan Brown made Give My Regards To Broad Street with an upstart. It would mean Sir George Martin lately conversed, in the recent film on his long life, with a doppelganger about events in 1962 he was not, it seems now, present at. It would mean the Liverpool school friends, including Pete Best, he has caught up with lately and talked of old times with, were conned by him, and so were his blood relatives, including his dad, for decades on end. It would mean the stars of A Hard Day’s Night and Let It Be are different people.”

    Bob try and think of the evil that this project entails. Our controllers are at a different level of evil even then Gengis Khan. And some analysts think the Khan’s behaviour was an example of Venetian bankers outsourcing.

    They are just so evil. The horror and depth of their evil protects them. This is why these guys get away with their genocidal behaviour. With founding the Soviet Union, bringing Hitler to power. With turning women and children into crispy burnt critters by allied bombing raids and then convincing us that Churchill and Roosevelt are great heroes.

    Supposing a German army takes over a non-Russian Soviet town. They fight against only soldiers, capture or destroy their opponents weaponry and so forth. But then the SS come in and slaughters all the civilians. Hitler and Stalin are slaughtering all the same people in all the same areas. Its co-ordinated genocide from above. Martin Boorman is a Soviet spy who broadcasts information to the Soviets from out of Berlin under Hitlers knowledge and protection, meaning that Hitler himself is working for a higher power.

    In the same way as the German army have an SS we have our own SS. Unspeakably evil. And so what you describe here is just how rotten they are on a sort of spiritual level. They don’t merely seek to thin our numbers down, to get us fighting each-other, and all the body count stuff. They want to destroy even our souls. Make us think we are nothing but animals. They build up icons for us and then murder them. They are like the Judge in Blood Meridian, who makes copious notes on rare animals only to immediately kill those rare animals once the notes are made.

    As to the idea of Billy Shepherd being an upstart, its a feature of these guys to think many years ahead with their psyche ops programs. David Rockefeller built the WTO. He built it sold it and watched it fall. He is on video admitting that he had a ringside seat.
    It may be that the project to destroy the buildings was conceived prior to them being built in the first place.

    That is just how these guys operate. So its not the way to go to suggest that Billy Pepper (ie Billy Shepherd aka Sargent Pepper) was an upstart. He was probably a key part of the songwriting team right from the start. It was likely part of the plot to murder some of their young charges right from the beginning. Just as murdering astronauts was likely built into the Apollo project once Kennedy himself was killed.

    Part of the project of these guys is to conceive a world of fraud. Fraudulent science, fraudulent heroes. Fraudulent everything. Its hard to think of these things without an assumption of demon possession but the reality is that this evil is an evolutionary outcome of the banking practice of fractional reserve.

    Its not like Billy Pepper has any choice in the fraud his life has become. You must not be judgemental about him. Many of us cannot be bribed. Some of us cannot be threatened. But all of us will do their bidding faced with bribes, threats, the murder of loved ones, and the murder of third parties just to make a point.

    A whiff of an hint of a whisper of the idea that Billy Pepper might squeal, and he would be as dead as John Lennon, or an astronot who wished to confess about Apollo. The world is not full of conspiracies. There is only one.

  5. Here is a video of Paul McCartney and Billy Shepherd. They are speaking months apart. Billy has not yet had his eyes done. Or the rest of the surgery. Some of the discussion is to do with likely psyche ops programs.

    You cannot look at these without knowing that they are too different people. Think of the mental pressure and programming involved that could get anyone to deny that these are too different people?

    You look at it. You know reader is right. But still the pressure that has been put against you is so strong so what can you do? This is psyche ops par excellence. To put that pressure on the public so much as to shut public thinking down. And they are so comprehensive about it. They put fluoride in the water as a chemical aid to their mass-media schemes.

    • I see what you are saying, Graeme, I wouldn’t be sure they are the same man….but nor would I be sure they weren’t. The quality of picture in the second clip is much better than the first, obviously and (assuming as I continue to do that he is the same man) he seems to have lost weight…..Pictures can be tricky, as is notorious among criminal lawyers for example who are used to the fact that legit pictures of the same person can look quite different.

      Likewise your Italian forensic scientists don’t carry quite as much weight as you assume. They can be very fallible; any criminal defence lawyer I think will tell you that the tendency of juries to trust “scientific” evidence against human probability is a flaw in our system which continues to produce false convictions, the Chamberlians in just the best known case. The science may be objective and infallible but the scientists who administer and interpret it are not.

      I still want my threshold evidence from Pauls friends/family. The trauma of Paul being murdered and replaced by an imposter must have left marks on the behaviour of those who loved him no matter how much bribery and intimidation they faced. Many people would rather die than be complicit in the murder of their friends and family, at least some people like must have known Paul.

      • “I see what you are saying, Graeme, I wouldn’t be sure they are the same man….but nor would I be sure they weren’t. ”

        No this is not true. You know they are different men. You know this totally. But you are programmed by the very success of the pysche ops operation to deny this reality to yourself. So looking at this video puts you at war with yourself. It paralyses you mentally.

        Their antics are a rolling thunder of evil which divides and splits the vigilant in society and sends them all off on tangents. It destroys public vigilance itself and so that the oligarchs can carry on with their stealing and their murder to protect this slavery. I was a libertarian. Now I see that the allowance of the accumulation of great wealth is a threat to the rest of us. I was a pessimistic anarcho-capitalist. Now I see that government is necessary to take these oligarchs down.

        As to the forensic exercise, this is not some sort of difficult thing. You have two different men. You get the photos, find consistent objects which allow you to equalize, or you equalize for eye width and you can tell with total certainty whether they are different people or the same person.

        All sorts of tricks are done to rewrite the photographic record. This is truly high-tech Stalinism. They can morph the younger Pauls face to make it longer. They can squash Sargent Peppers face a little bit. They can never quite get away with it and the entirety of the photographic record cannot be rewritten.

        I don’t like to be the bearer of bad news. Its sickening just how evil these people are. And just how they have all the levers of power in their hands.

  6. I’m nearly there, it has been much easier than I thought. You have to transcend upwards for a number of levels, take in a broad historical sweep, focus in on an alternative but related key area, tunnel down and through until you rejoin all the various streams at the point at which they enter the ocean and then, only then, do you come to examine the McCartney issue, this time in its proper place, by now something of a sideline, if a central one. It’s quite long however I am going to edit like I’ve never edited before. And it’s pointed and pithy throughout - peuw! peuw! peuw!, knocking down those cards. It’s easy. The only thing holding the knowledge fountain back has been the conspiracy sites’ tendency for over-specialising as well as poor paragraphing and lay out. It is nearing the time when all the suspects will be called to assemble in the drawing room. Coupla days.

  7. You can’t change the shape of the palate and Faul has been photographed with varieties of weird ears, none of them the same. Take it up with the Italian forensic scientists who published the comprehensive findings in 2009 because as they would know, photographic evidence of this nature is permissable as evidence in court. They are pre-eminant as scientists in their field in Italy working on cases involving the Pope and the mafia. They were undertaking the task to prove once and for all that Paul was Paul. As the information came up showing otherwise, they did further examinations to try to disprove their own data and worked against the publication deadline to try to get the facts to come out the right way, so in the end it was a very thorough process. As with Truby in ’69, their findings were a definitive no, not the same, pas a tout. They finished by saying that even though the findings are definitive, “Paul” is a celebrity therefore nothing can be said definitively. But everyone accepts the evidence of Saddam’s doubles. Saddam was a celebrity. Disagree with the evidence but just accept that it is there, know something of what it involves and who it was who performed the investigation.

    Faul cooincidentally, out of nowhere, appeared on the Letterman show the night the Wired article was published and Letterman mentioned the theory that he had been replaced by a double, to which Faul replied, “yeah, I’m him”. If you slow it down after his non-denial denial, you can see his evil, lying eyes.

    Heather Mills referred to “The Great Conspiracy”, which I thought would make a great title for a novel. One day, while having an affair with President Johnson, Judy Prisk meets a man called Parles Hanson while hitchhiking and attends the Summer of Love and Monteray festivals with him before he is wrest from her by the feds and she is gunned down outside of a hotel by a JD Salinger fan.

  8. “But, in the end, too many people would have had to be in on it, and to have kept a terrible secret for too many years, and have not been bugged by the Murdoch people talking about, for it to have happened.”

    Why does not this same reasoning also pertain to the JFK Assasination?

    • It does. Its the same conspiracy conducted by the same crowd. They get away with this because they control the media and they factor in strategic killings right from the start of their various schemes. There are murders involved with the Beatles psyche ops. But there are many many more involved with “The Big Event” that is to say the Kennedy hit. (This is its actual name given by the murderers themselves.) The so-called Kennedy curse is ridiculous. Its just the Kennedys all being murdered by the shadow government.

      The rewards for being in on their scams and murders are as immense as the threats that go along with them. Nixon, George Bush senior and Johnson were all in Dallas at the time and Ford was part of the cover-up team. That is four Presidents in on the hit.

      The same system worked in the Soviet Union. Subsequent Soviet leaders right up until Gorbachev had all been mass-murderers for Stalin.

    • No, there need only have been the three hit men, Trafficante, Dulles, Hoover and Ruby, three or four Dallas coppers and, at arm’s length, LBJ. No-one would have blabbed for fear of being themselves, like Oswald, stalked and killed.

      About the same number as took out Jimmy Hoffa. And Osama Bin Laden.

      Oswald’s actions after the shooting suggest he was utterly innocent of absolutely everything.

      I mean, he went home to get a pistol to defend himself, and then went to the pictures.

      After shooting the President?


      • Bob there were much more people involved with that one. Cord Meyer was in on it. Howard E Hunt confessed. James Files confessed. It was a truly huge operation. Handsome Johnny confessed and was dead within 72 hours. It was just a massive operation. I always thought that conspiracies could not be big since when three males know its no longer a secret. And when more then two women talk in one room about a subject then that too is no longer a secret. But these conspiracies are gigantic undertakings involving hundreds of people.

        Take 9/11. Barring covert ops technology rigging up those three buildings involves months of work with the gear coming in on pallets. Thousands of people must be in the know. But it doesn’t matter. We have to shift from the small conspiracies paradigm to the gigantic big conspiracies that are all really the same conspiracy.

      • Mr Ellis, have you read DeLillo’s “Libra”?

        Tell me your thoughts.

        • No. Does it give Lee a motive?

          No-one else has.

          • The evidence from interviews with Oswald :

            “No, I have nothing against the President. As far as I am concerned the Vice-President has about the same sort of views on most matters, so what would be the point of killing him?”

            (That is an expansion of the notes taken by Oswald’s interviewers, the Dallas police and the FBI, and if not exactly suppressed, quickly buried by the Warren Commission.)

  9. (SORRY:Mixed up the headings!) The only thing that died was Macca’s (and other musicians’) ability to write hits anymore. The Beatles have always amazed me. It took me a long time to appreciate Lennon. For 30 years I always thought McCartney was “the one”.Then I started listening more closely to the voice parts. Its AMAZING that U can listen to something many times and over many time periods and STILL can discover new things, hear different nuances! Then it got to me-that guy Lennon would be singing lead one minute and then alternate to a harmony line and then come back to lead. Also, some of the harmonies he sings are REALLY weird-that is why I grew to like him-a cruel man in many ways but a good muso. Please Please Me comes to mind-that monotone/drone harmony line. Prolific songwriters they were.Christ we hear of bands like the Eagles. The Beatles wrote more songs in 4 years than the Eagles (as great as they sound) did in 35 years!

    Not many people are aware that Lennon and McCartney wrote very few of their songs together. U can usually tell who wrote what by who sang them. This brings me to my other point.The pain of the songwriter. WHY IS THE WINDOW OF OPPORTUNITY for writing songs so brief/small.Billy Joel,Elton John,Burt Bacharach,David Gates,Leiber and Stoller,Neil Sedaka,Springsteen,Neil Diamond, Crosby Stills and Nash,-just to name a few!,These people wrote most of their hits over a few short years then ZILCH!! No more? Why hasn’t McCartney written another Yesterday or All My Loving or Michelle. I have listened to all of his stuff and he wrote his strongest melodies in 2 batches a 4 year period and an 8 year period-and all a long time ago.

    (Maybe you have to be HUNGRY to write your best stuff? Or maybe most of life’s experiences occur then? His 8 year period nowhere near as good as the four year period and since then weak. WHY? No songs as good as Just the Way U Are or Your Song left in the bag?Why has David gates never written another “If”? Do songwriters shoot their lunch all at once? SO, why is the songwriting window of opportunity so small? Is it because there are only about 14 notes in the musical alphabet or are we are running out of combinations of those notes? I dunno.

    The song-writing disease even struck the Bee Gees! I didn’t think they would EVER run out of melodies…but they did-did not have a number one since the 70′s Stayin’ Alive. No,Macca is STILL very much alive. Still looks young and for sure has had “touch ups” and for sure wears a wig or a “weave” like Cliff Richard. He has a VERY strict diet. I know that.

    • It is wrong to try and gauge success by something being “No 1”. Creativity (and universal success) by the Bee Gees goes far, far beyond 1970, as an example.
      Because “These people wrote most of their hits over a few short years then ZILCH!!” does not apply to them at all (or others once you look) you must get a whole working life view to make considered judgements.

      • All artists strive for number 1′s Macca still does.It is a sign that they are not only accepted by fans but also their peers.Why do you think at concerts these guys perform 90% of their old catalogue and not most of their new stuff? I am not being sarcastic.What I am doing is trying to explore the chemistry of songwriting…why is thew window of opportunity so bloody brief.Go to a sting concert….they display good manners as they tolerate the new stuff but as soon as he belts out Message In A Bottle or Roxanne the place explodes. Are U trying to tell me Sting does not want this to happen with his later stuff?With respect, U know fuck all about the way musos think old son!For mine the Beatles were the greatest that ever existed. Well in my time….and Dylan,of course!

        • Unfortunately there is only on Dhafer Youssef:

          Play it loud and dance.

          • allthumbs, if this were Broomy, you’d get a big slurpy mwaah! If Fedallah, an original comment that tied together unrecognised interstices and shed a different beam of light…

            But I’m neither, and can only say thanks for the pointer - I hope my capacity to enjoy wonderful music never flags… you’re a champion.

            • Glad you liked it Canguro. Talking of Hitchcock Bob, mentioned Bernard Hermann and Morricone and fine as they are I was always partial to the music scores of Bugs Bunny cartoons by the likes of Carl Stalling. The closest in feel to some of that I found is Gordon Goodwin, I have been playing this all day and its a bit of a cartoon day on this blog today,you don’t often here this kind of precision playing anymore, and they really lay out around the 2.20 mark.

              I got a flu on the plane, I’m turning in for the night. Cheers

  10. Look I understand why you are running away. The evil of our controllers is beyond belief. Their reach is scary. The proof of their crimes is total.

  11. “(SORRY:Mixed up the headings!) The only thing that died was Macca’s (and other musicians’) ability to write hits anymore.”

    The last comment was meant for Helvi. But there is no excuse for you being an idiot Wombat. You have already been proven wrong. Two people cannot be one no matter what church you were brought up in.

    Their output in that four year period was fundamentally impossible. It implies a shadow team.

  12. As long as Paul wrote ‘And I Love Her’, I’m happy.

    Most celebrities theses days are surgically altered, aren’t they, and most of us won’t ever know them personally, it’s all a performance, all the world’s a stage, yada yada yada.

    • Think of the ethics behind what you are saying. Now that we know that there were two Pauls that explodes the whole thing as a well-crafted stage act. So we can no longer know who wrote what. You are saying you are happy at the murder of Paul I, John, the intimidation of everyone else and a huge operation to damage the culture perpetrated as a gigantic fraud. A young man was murdered two times over. First he was killed then his identity was stolen. There is nothing in this story to be happy about.

      The only way to defeat our masters would be to get rid of most artificial persons. Set up our societies with the main goal of opposing fractional reserve everywhere, and prohibit anyone ever getting more then 100 million in wealth.

  13. It is a good day isn’t it!

  14. Graeme, I don’t find anything unbelievable in our rulers being as evil as you describe; what I find hard to beleive is them being that smart and organised.

    Look at Assange, how hard should it have been to get him? Yet so far he continues to be Bugs Bunny to the American Elmer Fudd. There was of course a massive conspiracy to get Assange but my point is that we can see the broad outlines of that conspiracy - plenty of details remain unclear but the broad outline we can see. And given the amount of resources invovled it hasn’t been all that effective.

    Or, an example closer to home, Graeme, if the conspiracy is so all-pervading how come you and Reader 1 can go around exposing it with impunity? Maybe you are part of the conspiracy - told off to expose it with unconvincing arguments thus bringing the theory into disrepute, or causing maximum demoralisation by having people half-believe it?

    Or maybe the Paul/Faul theory is itself the conspiracy….that seems a more elegant way of spreading demoralisation…

    All-pervading conspiracies do in a sense exist. For example when I was young there was an all-pervading conspiracy to pretend that child abuse, especially sexual abuse, did not exist or was much rarer than it was. Conspiracies of this kind are essentially headless, not consciously created by some small groups of individuals.

    And then of course events in the world link up in all sorts of patterns that most of us are not aware of until we smoke a lot of dope. But to notice a pattern is one thing and to interpret it correctly is another.

    But the idea of an attack on popular music as way of controlling society is not incredbile in itself. I think it was Plato who remarked that the quickest way to change the character of a nation was to change its music …if you told me that Lennon was whacked by the CIA I’d be much less sceptical because that is about the elvel of sophistication I attribute to th

    • “Graeme, I don’t find anything unbelievable in our rulers being as evil as you describe; what I find hard to beleive is them being that smart and organised.”

      They aren’t the least bit smart. They have a few tricks that they use every time. Once you have their list of tricks down, everything they do is transparent. This is the UNilluminate. They are dropkicks. Their operations aren’t even competently performed.

      As to Assange, while I guess I have to support him, he’s just an example of these guys controlling both sides of the argument. See how it was the John Burch society that first put it about that the communists were really controlled by capitalists? Mr Welch was picking up his orders and his cheques from one of the Rockefellers. They allow for discussion of their wrong-doings as long as they don’t lose strategic control.

      By having the Burch society tell mostly the truth, and then having them demonised, this helps them control both sides of the argument. They control both dysfunctional schools of economic thought in Australia. The Keynesians never see public debt they don’t like. The Neoclassicals never see private debt they don’t like. Each are committed to one half of the bankers scam. The two rational schools …… Austrian and British Neoclassical, were both squashed, but they are also oligarchy-apologists. So no matter where you go they control matters strategically. Assange is a 9/11 apologist. They stopped the best economist of the century, Von Mises, getting a paid university job. Then they co-opted him through the Volker fund. A Rockefeller front organisation. He never came out completely against fractional reserve and his thinking is pro-bigshot.

      In reality we could have small government egalitarianism. But not a single economic school will stand up for such a concept even though the study of economics strongly supports that this is the right and good thing to aim at.

      Everything is for the bankers. Nothing is against the bankers. Nothing is outside of the bankers.

      “Graeme, I don’t find anything unbelievable in our rulers being as evil as you describe; what I find hard to beleive is them being that smart and organised.”

      Its manifest that they are at least organised enough to carry this off. And why not. They have unlimited funds. You know that they are organized enough since its impossible for a man to change his skull shape in such a short time.

      Look at the pressure that is on you mentally. You know they are two different people. But you cannot admit it. That is massive success of psyche ops. Truly this is one of their more powerful operations.

  15. I can’t believe people are taking Graeme Bird’s inanities seriously.

    His views on nearly everything are summed up as :

    “totally deranged”.

    Either send him up or ignore him. Take your pick. No third option.

    • But Graeme Bird and Reader1 make such a great pair.

      Brings to mind the old saying about a wet fart looking for an arsehole to emerge from.

      The difficulty lies in deciding which is which.

      • You too you obnoxious idiot. Lets have your theory of adult skull growth. Give it up bitch.

        • Give it up botches. Skull growth and morphing? The impact of this conspiracy on the big scheme of things is minimal. Surely Mr. Bird your energy would be better invested in something worthwhile. Even if Faul is Faul and not Paul who cares at all, or in the slightest?

          Calling fine writers obnoxious idiots is not wise. (Hi Polybius.)

          Banned for life.

          • Of course my time could be better spent. Do you have a theory of adult skull growth? This is what these guys do. They are stealing off us. To keep the stealing going they keep the vigilant in the populations hands full, they paralyse the capacity for rational thought in most of the population.

            And we see their total success in this matter on this very thread. There is no theory of adult skull morphing. Yet these guys continue to believe.

      • Polybius, my theory is that Reader is Graeme(r)…

        • You could be onto something there, Helvi.

          They have much in common: the same ridiculous self-importance, the same sort of silly ideas laid out at excessive length in monumentally dull posts, the same adolescent narcissism, and the same squeaking outrage when others refuse to take their idiotic drivellings seriously.

          • They/she post/s early in the morning, during the day, late at night and during the night hours, they/she must be sleepless in Seattle… :neutral:

    • It seems like Bird gets 24hr access to the computer in the day room, and they don’t monitor his activities.

      Rich pickings for those interested in schizoaffective disorders and paranoia.

      [Sorry Bird, but DQ is correct: you're seriously unhinged. No rationally functioning integrated socially normalised individual would carry on with the insane drivel that you've been vomiting all over the blog for the last week.]

      Polybius, a great pair, but wow! What do you get for the investment in time and thought?

    • I don’t believe in the Faul theory DQ. That doesn’t mean there is nothing to learn from it, if only about evidence and belief. The de Vere theory of Shakespeare for example I think to be nonsense, that doesn’t mean that nothing can be learnt from it.

      For example if forensic scientists, even Italian ones, positively supported the Faul theory and it is false (as I continue to assume) then that should very much interest you as lawyer. Is that true about the Italian scientists? No-one seems to have denied it.

      It has been said that paranoids usually are being persecuted, though not necessarily by the agent they suspect. Conspiracy theorists may notice real patterns even if they wrongly interpret them, for example by attributing conscious intent to unconscious behaviour…..

      Sadly music was not a big interest of mine in my youth, so I don’t know as much about the Beatles as many. But Paul M, he didn’t age at all well did he?

      Yeah, Graeme and Reader 1 do come across as a bit unhinged. That doesn’t really prove anything….in fact if they were right I’d expect them to come across as more unhinged than they do.

      • s far as the Italian scientists are concerned, their methodology is suspect.

        The data would appear to be incomplete and inconclusive, and their very findings are hedged about with contingencies.

        As for skull comparisons, I would have thought a skull would be required rather than a few photographs, or even many photographs given that many were deliberately or accidentally distorted.

        The alleged comparisons are defective and far short of the standard required of any forensic evidence.

        This conspiracy is a total failure, without credible evidence, without reasonable motive and in defiance of sense logic and analysis.

      • I take it then that you are on town supply and that you get about in a fluoride-stupor.

        You’ve just seen a video of the two different men, months apart.

        • No, We saw a very distinct picture and a much more distinct one.

          The first one was indistinct enough that a completely confident indentification or non-identification was not possible.

          I refer back to the threshold issue, the treshold issue is waht was the reaction of the many many people who knew Paul personally to the supposed appearance of Faul?

          What was the reaction of the people who knew Paul to the second video? These are questions which really have to be answered, Graeme.

          • No you are lying. You saw two different people and you know it.

            • Do you remember this cutie from the eighties?

              How about this one?

              They are the same girl.

              One nose job ended her movie career - she became unrecognisable.

              So all it takes is something small to radically change a look.

              In Macca’s case he retains enough of his old features when you allow for aging, the variables inherent in photography and other dental and possible cosmetic work.

              Photographic and similar mediums are not reliable enough to make definitive conclusions on this.

              • Its not subjective looks change you blockhead. She looks like the same girl. Noses may be cut but the skull cannot change much, except perhaps from a lot of human growth hormone which Hollywood actresses are said to use quite a bit of.

                The exercise of fitting her skull and eye width would reveal no likely changeover.

            • Actually I am being carefully honest.

              Yje first picture isn’t very good, but it does give the impression of round-faced cuddliness that we associate with Paul M. In the video you post with a much better picture he does appear sharper faced than I think of him abeing, taht round-faced cuddliness isn’t there. Doing a quick internet flick I notice some other pictures without that round-faced cuddliness and I think I am picking up what Reader 1 and presumably you also mean by “Faul”.

              Am I right here? But people’s faces change according to the set of their features and mood and weight (and of course surgical intervention)…the changes can be very striking. I don’t see anything that would cause me to waive the threshold issue. You really should address it.

              I did a quick internet search for Bill Shepherd and Billy Pepper etc and in case anyone was wondering they are not figments of Graeme’s imagination. Bill Sheprherd was a busy session musician who did work for the Beatles among others and is said to have been working for the Bee Gees in the 1980s. The Bill Shepherd Orchestra also produced albums of Favourite Cowboy Songs and the like. He or his tombstone can probably be located although I doubt this would convince Graeme. “Billy Pepper and the Pepperpots” was the supposed band that produced a home-brand Beatles-type album with Beatles covers and some original songs. Graeme might be right that Bill Shepherd did this. But ti seems to be just a cash-in album , even from the jacket sleeve of “Merseymania” one doesn’t get the impression that the Pepperpots was a real band. They “disappeared” because they didn’t really exist.

              All this I find of some intrinsic interest. I’d love to have a copy of “Merseymania”.

              • No you are not being honest you are a LIAR. And I’m not buying this affable veneer either. You are lying. And I’m not going to buy this good cop bad cop routine that you and Malcolm aka Doug Quixote are playing on .

                You are a fucking liar. And if you were fair dinkum, since you expressed some doubt, you would find more information. You would have gone to the internet and found out if I was right or wrong. You wouldn’t be just relying on what I thrust in front of your fucking malign fucking face.

                Rather you would be searching the internet for the rest of the story.

                Now you filth mate. And I don’t buy your friendly tone. And I’m no interested in no good cop bad cop shiite that serves as cover for genocidalists.

  16. Okay lets have it. And hurry up about it. Tell us your theory of adult skull growth and morphing.

    A surprising number of their scams involve cover stories that are simply physically impossible. If not I would never have found them out.

    • Have you any photos of a headshaven McCartney. Given his abundance of hair you would need ine to discern his skull shape under it.

      His facial hair varied enormously after 1966. His scalp hair may have also.

  17. If you don’t have a theory of adult skull growth your irrational and gutless point of view is merely faith-based. Nothing can deny this reality. Now I don’t expect any public figure to admit they are wrong and I am right. But you anonymous people are taking gutlessness to a new level.

  18. I would love to engage Bird, but I do believe there is a little green man in my garden standing under a mushroom, taking pictures of my house.

    I will have to investigate, he may be giving the GPS coordinates to the mother ship hovering above my prize Grevilleas. They maybe getting ready to beam me aboard to the good ship Lolliypop.Beam me up Bird.

    • Lets have your theory of adult skull growth you sissy. You are not even a man. You are a bum-sucking homo. Look how determined is your flight from manifest and known truth.

  19. Graeme I presume it grows with the passage of time after being born, and stops when one reaches being an adult.

    Of course there must be anomalies in this process, I mean to say, some of the people that comment on this ere blog I fear would be battling to get their own heads through their own front door. But than again, some have them shoved up their own arse so theirs must be below par, I would think.

    In your own case, I presume you must push yours around in a wheelbarrow or possibly in the back of a ute.I can only imagine you trying to find a hat to fit it. I mean, you’d probably need the main sail off a tea clipper to keep the sun off, a sun that has been frying your brains for too long.. Is that why you are as dumb as a bag of hammers?

    • “Graeme I presume it grows with the passage of time after being born, and stops when one reaches being an adult.”

      Right so you know that I’m right and you are wrong and you are being an obnoxious little bitch by denying this.

  20. Well Bob Ellis, are you reading the graffiti splashed across your web site?

    Guano, perhaps; Bird-droppings that is about all it is.

    It was amusing for a while, like watching a person embarrassed by a home video, or by a prank call.

    but it soon loses its novelty, especially when the guano hits the fan.

    I told you so.

    • Lets have your theory of adult skull growth or lets have your retraction. Give it up. This is not even a difficult subject.

    • I have no idea whether Bob can block specific addresses, but if he can then Bird’s is crying out for the kill switch.

      I was mulling on this subject yesterday, musing that there will be a pre-Bird and a post-Bird environment to this blog, the arrival of the madman will mean the end of reasonable exchange.

      I’ve seen this before, one disruptive lunatic is enough to ruin it for all.

      • Its pretty simple. Give me your theory of adult skull morphing or give me your retraction. Note the sheer power of the shadow governments war on science and reason? You have to have such a war or we would stop their system of financially induced slavery. Here we have a situation in which you CANNOT physically be right. I cannot be wrong. And its not a difficult matter.

      • Well Graeme you are correct in everything you say. Paul died and was replaced by the other guy.

        Can you tell me when the shadow men controlling our government are going to get rid of the fake Julia and stick in Tony Abbott as I’m sick of this present outfit and want a change..

        • That is a harder matter to read. We don’t have undeniable physical fact to extrapolate from on this one. I agree with you though. As appalling as the Liberals are, its time for a change. I think its usually good to get rid of the incumbents.

          I don’t claim to be able to read them on every matter. But the key thing is when you see something that you think must be impossible sociologically and yet has to be true forensically, then if you can handle the implications, you can extrapolate a great deal.

          Think of the world we live in. We live in a world where Barrack Obama has tried to pass off really bad fake documents. This is so odd. The CIA has the capacity to produce really excellent fake documents. And yet the decision was made to pass of really crude fakes.

          This is such a strange fact that much can be extrapolated from it. All I will say is that Julia is serving the globalist agenda with such fidelity, and the shadow government is running now at such a frenzy, that they will work pretty hard to keep her in.

          Sorry to bring you that bad news. She might not win but she will get some help.

          • Hmmm a good point you make about Obama. A definite plant if ever I saw one. I once said he was a Manchurian candidate sent to bring America down. They all laughed at me here when I said that and now Bob (who might be controlled by them) has banned me so my words will soon disappear from this blog site…

            We’ll have to massage the Newspoll figures again and get the people onside and docile…

            We’ll get O’Shaughnessy to ring them on the hottest day when most Labor people are on the beach or in the theater writing film reviews! Most people have no idea what evil goes on around here…

  21. Sounds like we all need a higher power to believe in. Have you ever considered the fact that if clearasil got rid of all your pimples then you would have no need of it? It is much easier to give up our lives to something bigger than to live them. Please bob no more of this.

    • Finally the man has arrived The one we have all been waiting for. The fellow with the theory of adult skull shape- change.

      It’s a pity this fellow turned out to be an ethical retard. Never mind. Onward.

  22. Apropos of different chin shapes, what has happened to Bob Carr’s face?

    • He may have been substituted by a doppelganger. :lol:

      • I’ve known Bob Carr for thirty-nine years and it’s the same chin, the same voice, the same man.

        • That may be so, but have you done scientific analysis of photographs, and voice print analysis?

          Those Commie doppelganger-creators are very clever; just look at Faul mark II who has fooled everyone for over forty years!

          Of course, it might just be the fluoride in the water.

          (warning : the above post may contain satire and not be entirely serious)

          • According to hubby Carr’s has blonded his hair, I think he just he just looks wrinklier…
            The voice is still the same.
            He never was a looker, so he did not have anything to lose, besides hair….

            • Bob Carr possesses quite menacing features. Had he moved in the same circles as Hitchcock, I’m sure he would have inspired and starred in the greatest horror flick of all time. Never mind the birds, it’s The Bobs I want to see.

              I watched the hobbit last night which was remarkable. It is a shame the LOTR films were condensed into only three films.

              Also, to Chris; See A Climate of Doubt.

              • Thank you William, those Americans are an interesting crew indeed.
                Meantime I hope you noticed the link on the end of the other thread.
                Judging by their statements we have in Australia persons from Julia Gillard, Warren Truss and the worshipers from the altar of AGW downward all being more knowledgeable on the climate then the IPCC.
                Who would have thunk it.

            • Busted! I made an earlier entry suggesting that following the successful seeding of certain ideas and arguments, this blog ought to be renamed Face Talk, but the hand was quicker than the eye and I clicked Submit on a different email addy.

              The post wasn’t posted, and sits awaiting the moderator’s ok.

        • In a recent ABC interview his chin lacked its distinctive dimples and looked a little elongated. Botox, I thought. Then I noticed he seemed to have some difficulty in moving his lower lip and charitably assumed he had had some dental procedure.

  23. More side conversations to make reality go away.

  24. There once was a time where we just applied science and accepted the results. This simply will not do for the oligarchy. If science is applied and the results accepted that is the end of the tyranny of the inbreeds. They have successfully trained generations to hate the scientific method. On the drum Doug Quixote would pose as a scientist. He called himself Malcolm. He hated nothing more then science and evidence. But the opposition to reason has become general. This is why reasonable people attract dozens of nuts to their blogs to wrong foot them

  25. In the end we keep science and truth alive because of LOVE. Love is all you need. And if you HAVE-love … will want to keep science and truth alive.
    So I cry for love. Because imitations boring:

  26. I think I know Bob’s racket and I think Bob is all about LOVE. Now I wouldn’t expect John Howard ( just for example) to agree with me. But I think that is what is what our old friend Bob is all about.

  27. You cannot hide from me Bob. I found you out.


    The song is stronger now that we know the truth. The love is stronger now that we know the frightful threats put on these boys.

    He’s talking to both dead Paul and to John at the same time. And he means it.

  29. This is my favourite song from Paul II. He is singing to his current wife and to the newly assassinated John Lennon.

    Its a truly beautiful song. But I ask you? What could Paul II do?The French horns are a killer. They make me break down and sob. But tell me truthfully. What could Paul II do??


    The photo comparisons here utterly destroy Reader1 and Graham’s argument. All that was required was to find *one* matching before and after pair. Not surprisingly, there are several. Read the OP of the linked thread. As Doug mentions above, the photos used in the Wired article were doctored to begin with. The forensic scientists involved didn’t even bother to check they were working with exact copies of the originals…

    I always liked the theory that the >1850s revival of fairies, ghosts, and all things paranormal directly coincided with the invention of the photograph.

    “It’s true, godammit! See, the photo says so, and we all know photos speak truth!!”

    • Perhaps you are correct, and these photos are the real deal but anyone with any knowledge of digital imaging will tell you how easy it would be to doctor evidence either way.

      It is like JFK or the twin towers. I don’t know who flew the planes into those buildings, or who was on what knoll or in what depository.

      As opposed to the climate change debate, when you ask what is anyone likely to get out of such a hoax? Funding is the answer given by the skeptics, so 98% of climate scientists attest to the role humans play by pumping the enormous volumes of CO2 into the atmosphere because they are deluded leftards in need of a pay cheque. Regardless, the consequences rate somewhere between cooking ourselves into Venus and the premature strike of the next ice age, thus it is an issue to be taken rather seriously.

      The war on terror, similarly changes the entire globe. It is a waste of time to even examine 9/11, I mean not to offend anyone but these matters are discussed in the jungle. What does it matter if George Bush is the spawn of Aleister Crowley? It would explain the magic shoe shield.

      But what of Faul/Paul. Forget the photos. You have a first hand account from someone that met the fellow in question and still you continue. I’m waiting for the punchline, every time I’ve heard this story before it has been from an acid eater, usually based entirely on a secret message in the flowerbed on the Peppers album. Besides, oh it matters man, what on Earth does anyone care?

      The tipping point on this issue is 98% against the doppelgänger.

      • The one thing that truly upset me last year, the one that won’t go away, was the fourteen year old Pakistani schoolgirl who was shot in the head by the Taliban for wanting to go to school. Paul McCartney/Pakistani schoolgirl, at the moment and until further notice I’ll opt for the Paul/Faul debate, because what is anyone going to be able to say about shooting a fourteen year old girl in the head because she wanted to go to school?

        And here’s the thing, what I have noticed and find not unpleasant, is in many matters my serious, considered, outraged disposition in regards to many important “issues” has been mightily dissipated during my participation on this blog, not that I don’t care anymore, but I don’t care as much as I used to, in some cases where I previously held hard and fast opinion I no longer care at all. During my time on this blog, the world has carried on regardless of what we have said or proposed or argued or ranted about. There is certain resignation that I attribute to my lack of, what should we call it, resolve, to maintain the rage. Can one not care quite so much, no longer be so committed, even admit defeat, rise above the whole question, escape the responsibility for the way of the world and still be allowed to have a voice or not? Is it still valid? Either way there will be consequences. Don’t get me wrong I wrestle with this stuff on a daily basis, and five minutes from now I might give a different answer, it’s like the nightmare you have that follows you your whole life.

        • Look its the same problem. Its the same people causing the problem. The shadow government started revving up the Muslims as soon as they lost their Soviet Union. So they started helping to build Mosques everywhere from about 1993 on. They started sponsoring the groups that then got hyped enough to cause us problems.

          Where do you think the Taliban gets the resources to fight? From the US and its allies. The ISI in Pakistan and Saudi and American money. The Shadow government sponsors both sides of the fighting. Always. They brought Hitler to power. They founded the Soviet Union. All they do is keep us fighting and always with a strategy to get as many humans killed as possible.

          So when you are considering the murder of Paul, John and Brian you ought to consider it as the same crowd that murdered that 14 year old.

        • I’ve never met an enlightened being who is moved a scintilla by the state of human affairs and conditions in general on the face of the planet. Identification and knee-jerk reactivity are not consonant with that degree of awareness.

          You can spend your whole life being ‘moved’ by various externalities: social injustices and other causes to attach ourselves to; other inequities, political and so on - the list is endless.

          Ask yourself, how would Buddha respond? Stick a peg in the ground and call it the big B. And another, that’s me. How far are they apart? That length, that gap is indicative of what lies ahead if I really want to get anywhere in this life… (and it’s the only one I’ve got or’ll ever have).

      • The CO2 hoax is to control and ration energy and water, get an international tax, and to weaken the idea of the independent and sovereign nation. There is no mystery there.

        Its not a separate conspiracy from the Beatles atrocity. This is why these matters are not merely of historical or popular importance. They are vital to understand. Its vital to see the modus operandi of our oppressors and the mass-murderers of humanity, so we can target the small number of evil bastards involved.

      • It was James Files on the grassy knoll with a Remington fireball. A sited hand-gun. The model coming out for the first time that year. There was no-one in those planes they were remote controlled.

        Just in case you wanted to know. But there were more shooters, in the Daltex building and at least one in the stormdrain where they stopped the car. The Zapruda film has been doctored and Zapruda himself was most likely an accomplice.

        But you wanted to know who was near the grassy knoll. That was Files.

    • But, but, Wil…if they can control our music, they can control our *minds*. You do understand you’re actually living in a fourth-dimensional prison, yes? Faul is just the tip of the iceberg…you think the Queen would ever have knighted the real Paul!! I dunno, something like that. Yada yada Jews yada CIA something something.

    • Thats just a fake up. You real pictures from real artifacts that cannot be faked.

  31. The scientific method has had a run lately.

    One critical part of the scientific mthod is this : a Theory holds good so long as all evidence can be reconciled with it.

    One piece of contradictory evidence however will destroy a Theory.

    Just one piece.

    This Conspiracy Theory has more holes than Swiss cheese and more contradictions than Plato, Marx and Mao combined.

    • There is no contrary evidence. All the evidence fits. Whereas your theory is disproved wrong by your own admission.

      Your theory is that its the same person. But the evidence cannot be reconciled with this wrong theory since the skull shape has changed. The spacing of the eyes has narrowed and the skull has grown longer. The man is maybe three inches taller. So your theory is wrong, by your own admission.

      You are an idiot mate. And a compulsive liar. And you hate the scientific method.

      • This was the rebuttal from another forensic scientist about the so-called scientific method employed by the Italians:

        your text to show as a hyperlink“>Facialidentification and reconstruction is a very complicated process
        which requires measurements using actual human skeletal remains not
        photographs. Even anthropologists have difficulty sometimes reconstructing
        the depth of tissue around the eyes and nose to fully determine the person’s
        weight. This website has attempted to take photographs and apply scientific
        principles in forensics that are just not applied that way“.

        Also see my comment above hyperlink.

        There is no point ridiculing those who remain skeptical on this.

        With the suppositions put forward to date, it is entirely reasonable to remain skeptical.

        • A rebuttal is meaningless. Its just to keep stupid people happy. What you need is evidence. Or a theory of human skull growth. You’ve already seen that there is two different people talking on video. If you equalize for eye width the second blokes skull has to grow massively since his skull is longer, and as well his eyes are closer together.

          What is a rebuttal going to do about that? What would 1000 rebuttal’s do? Nothing.

          • No, the rebuttal is meaningful because it goes to the heart of the point which you start out from: the assumption that there are two different skull shapes.

            You’ve drawn this conclusion by observing some videos and photos.

            Without comparing the skulls themselves there is too much room for error.

            • Its not the least bit reasonable to remain skeptical. Its clear brain damage. Only psychological warfare can explain that level of the total denial of manifest truth. Its something straight out of Orwell for you monstrously stupid people to be able rationalise away reality like this in such brazen fashion.

              Here is a series of steps to guide you through the evidence. Probably you didn’t seek this out. Probably you required yourself to deny matters to such an extent you sought out the feeble debunkery and denialist sites first up.


              • No, it is entirely reasonable to remain skeptical.

                You are advocating the theory, it is up to you to provide very convincing evidence in addition to being able to rebut the many reasonable questions that have been asked in good faith by a number of us who have taken the time to contemplate this morbid topic.

                You have inevitably failed to do so, and continue to fail, and your ongoing fanaticism and dribble count for nothing, without you being a highly qualified forensic specialist with Macca’s skull sitting in your lab.

                Put the issue to rest Bird, you are coming across as a madman.

                • So that is what the rebuttal consisted of? Ha ha ha ha ha. You mean to say that we need two different skulls from two different people?

                  Then you would say …. ” Well yes these are two different skulls so they are from two different people and so what”

                  Good lord you are an idiot. So that is the rebuttal? That is it?

                  You are advancing the theory that they are the same person. Then by your own admission your theory fails. Because you haven’t brought a scrap of evidence that they are the same person. Don’t bring your one-sided Popperian idiocy here.

                  Just have a good look at yourself mate. You are a moron. And clearly you are a public servant or on the dot mom.

                  • I am personally not saying anything.

                    A forensic Scientist apparently said it.

                    If you are not one of them I will take their opinion more readily than yours.

                    • It doesn’t matter anyone says you idiot. Only evidence counts. Holy crap. You just aren’t that bright are you.? No you are not. And now it comes out that you don’t even know who said it, or what exactly they did say, or even if the fellow was really an expert. Your use of the word “apparently” gives you away. What have you added to this story. Obstruction on the basis of stupidity.

            • You haven’t explained what the rebuttal did, nor showed how the rebuttal could possibly overturn the evidence. You just said that there was a rebuttal. Its two different people. Different eye colour, eye-spacing, eye-shape, height, chin shape, everything different. They didn’t even start out as plausible look-a-likes. You have to have more pride then this. You cannot let these lunatics do this to you when its such an open and shut case.

              How you going to cope with more serious stuff like the global warming fraud, or special relativity, if you can be taken in on the simple stuff?

              • Follow me veeeeery closely.

                The salient feature of the rebuttal was posted above.

                Facial identification and reconstruction is a very complicated process
                which requires measurements using actual human skeletal remains not

                All clear?

                • No its not complicated at all you are a liar. Its straightforward. And the experts have presented this matter in as clear a way as one could possibly hope for.

                  • The “experts” you cite relied on a photo.

                    Other experts in the same field say this can never be a conclusive way of proving it.

                    All clear?

                    • You loathsome piece of shit it doesn’t matter what they say. They can talk all day. They cannot change the truth. The truth being that the pre-70′s pictures show two different people, one slowly morphing back to the other and that skull size and shape doesn’t change in adulthood.

                      Its not a dingo’s fuck what say. They haven’t come up with evidence. And you haven’t. And you haven’t found anyone who has. You cannot hire someone else to find someone who can do it for you because the skull doesn’t change enough in adulthood.

                      For fucksakes you are deranged mate.

                • So you didn’t have ANYTHING. You simply made a claim that a straightforward procedure was complicated when it wasn’t. No evidence whatsoever. The reason its straightforward and undeniable is that skull size doesn’t change in adulthood. When you have that fact the evidence becomes total. Note that you have NO evidence. Just a wrong statement on forensics.

    • DQ says that one counter-example destroys a theory.

      No, few theories would hold up on that test. As Chomsky says “No amount of facts can destroy a theory, only a better theory can do that”. The better theory in this case is I think that Paul grew older.

      The one counter-example rule comes from mathematics.

      • What sort of theory is that? The whole point is that our skull shape doesn’t change when people get older. Unless through acromegaly which cannot happen in 3 months.

        And the record disproves your theory except to the extent that we all grew older as well. God you are an idiot. What is the fact that we all grow older got to do with anything? That we all grow older doesn’t explain the data.

        You are such bullshit-artist mate. You have to count yourself as criminally insane. The theory has to explain the data. Growing older doesn’t explain eyes getting narrower, skull getting longer, and man getting taller. You make me want to puke on you.

        • Well, Graeme, you haven’t addressed the threshold issue of Paul M’s family and friends. That is from people who could talk to him and smell him and so forth, not just peer at unreliable photos. You really should talk to some criminal lawyers about this, they deal with this kind of issue all the time. There is a common law rule of evidence that in general photos or videos should not be admitted unless the photographer is available to be cross-examined. It is because of just such problems as we have here.

          The threshold test is a general one; some people (quite likely including Graeme) believe that George Washington was replaced by one Adam Weishaupt of the Bavarian Illuminati. An ingenious theory it nonetheless fails the threshold test. Thomas Paine, for example, who knew Washington well and feared no man, would have noticed the imposture..

          • Its not a threshold issue you moron. Because nothing that the family does or says or doesn’t do or doesn’t say can make a persons skull change in adulthood.

            Stop calling it a threshold issue when its not a threshold issue.

            You haven’t even so much as formulated this non-issue as an argument. Generally speaking the shadow government keeps people quiet by way of shocking strategic murder. They all noticed. Why would say anything? You have to be kidding. If you are going to notice something, say something, and the only thing you get for it is death or the media won’t report it …….

            …. You are an argument short? What is the argument. What is the response you think they didn’t make? How do you know ANYTHING about how his family handled his death? The media is controlled so what do you know how they responded.

            First make it an argument FORMULATED as an argument. And then secondly tell me how that argument could make his skull change shape?????

  32. That later Beatles stuff is a bit laboured and mournful.

    I think they sang it best with their early work, the shortest, sweetest songs:

    • I hate to be pedantic dottie, but, your particular tune selection is from the White Album, their third last album, which probably puts it in the “later Beatles” period. Just saying. Written in India, one of Paul’s favourite melodies. The scientific method must be adhered to no matter what the cost.

      • I watched ‘Interrogation’ last night, followed by the Bill Hicks story. For what it is worth, I feel I have done you a wrong, or perhaps a few wrongs. Please keep writing.

        • I love Hicks, and it’s too bad he died so young. Was looking for a good quote to toss at you, but it’s a rich field and I’m a poor judge…

          Maybe this…

          “Did you know that when a guy comes, he comes 200 million sperm? And you’re trying to tell me that your child is special because one out of 200 million — that load! we’re talking one load! — connected. Gee, what are the fucking odds? 200 million; you know what that means? I have wiped civilizations off my chest with a gray gym sock. That is special. Entire nations have flaked and crusted in the hair around my navel! That is special. And I want you to remember that, you two egg-carrying beings out there, with that holier-than-thou “we have the gift of life” attitude. I’ve tossed universes…in my underpants…while napping! Boom! A milky way shoots into my jockey shorts, “Aaaah, what’s for fucking breakfast?”

  33. Bird, you are coming across as a madman

    Slowly catching up, GrahamP?

    This bird’s got ‘I’m mad’ tattooed across his forehead, ‘Lunatic’ across the seven fingers of his left hand, and ‘Nutcase’ across the other seven.

    The real deal, and pretty comfortable with it if his scats on these pages are any indication.

    Why you other posters keep engaging with Bird is a mystery, unless it’s to do with the old spectacles of kicking the dog on the chain or poking ants’ nests or throwing stones at the village idiot. Do you really think you can squeeze a notionally rational answer out of him if you keep hitting him with logic-based questions and answers?

    Amusing, maybe, for a day, unfunny at the week’s end, and just a sad display of a broken being at the end of it all…

    • Point taken Canguro and well put. :lol:

      I’ll leave it here.

    • I can’t decide if he needs a Weedon Scott, a Grey Beaver or a Beauty Smith but really I doubt the bird is of any real pedigree. He just might be One Eye, though most likely he is Jim Hall or oddly, Lip-lip.

    • And there was I thinking it was a secret!

      I am trying to draw our Mr Bird out enough that our distinguished host will apply the razor.

      What has happened here will otherwise spread across every other thread like an outbreak of Bird flu.

      Bob Ellis, where are you?

      • I am trying to draw our Mr Bird out enough that our distinguished host will apply the razor.

        Probably not necessary Doug.

        He stands out like an Ostrich in an aviary with Finches.

        Or better put perhaps, a Tit among Corvids. :lol:

        • Soory, I was writing lyrics for a musical.

          It does look like insanity to me, insanity in a cirrespondent who in previous times, on Unleashed, seemed ofttimes thoughtful and sensible.

          I haven’t read all he and Reader 1 have said.

          Did either supply a motive these McCartney killers might have had for taking out a boy as harmless, in 1966, as an Everley Brother?

          • No clear motive has been put forward by either.

            No attempt has been made to rebut reasonable questions.

            No credible evidence has been supplied.

            Just accusations of idiocy to all who remain skeptical.

            Mr. Bird, is undoubtedly intelligent.

            But, to put it delicately,lacks psychological equilibrium.

          • Bob I didn’t think that I would actually get some of these people thinking a little bit. That they may be THINKING at last, is not something I can prove but I can feel it.

            You are a public figure. You don’t need these people on your case. You should take this thread and the other one of readers off-air after maybe one more week.

            It was not my intention to put you under any sort of risk of chastisement or worse. I just wanted to beat some sense into these people.

            Though I’m sure there is little risk of it, please don’t agree with me in public. The rules are different for you.

            I’m not so much in danger since they know that I know how ruthless this crowd is and need no convincing. But its different for you and reader. Reader is anonymous and unimportant. I’m up front and unimportant. You are a public figure.

            In the northern hemisphere they might casually bump reader, warn me, and burn your house down to warn you. So my advice is to only give it another week, take the reader threads off air. Maybe put them back once in awhile for the sake of debate.

  34. “The war on terror, similarly changes the entire globe. It is a waste of time to even examine 9/11…”

    What can you possibly mean by that? Thats the attitude of a lunatic. We were suckered into entirely pointless wars by this false flag operation. Muslim militancy was itself a product planned and carried out by Western shadow government. 9/11 is an Arab blood libel performed by NATO shadow government. Not by Arabs. The Arabs that have disappeared (not all of the accused by the way) were murder victims of the shadow government. Not terrorists. The planes were airliners they were military planes.

    I supported those wars. I was taken in and taken for a ride all because I didn’t bother examining the way the buildings fell.

    You cannot possibly mean what you are saying.

  35. I mean what I say Bird, you homophobic simplophile. I was watching Sports Tonight when it flashed on the News, I was very drunk the night they got Saddam and very exited. Not because I supported the wars, but because I naively thought that it would be over. Instead of who shot the girl in the head, or who flew the planes or launched the missiles, better to ask who has the most to gain from such events? There is fruit here as opposed to where you are; Up the theoretical shit creek without a paddle or a tissue; Where the thunder is wet and nothing is real.

    • Look the CIA … that is to say one arm of the shadow government … they put Saddam in power in the first place. They create the problem, then the solution, and kill hundreds of thousands along the way.

      Now how can you say that 9/11 isn’t worth examining? Like the Paul case, this is a case where the official story cannot physically be true. So if you don’t examine this you cannot possibly understand the way the world works.

      • “Here we go round the prickly pear, prickly pear, prickly pear.
        Here we go round the prickly pear at three o’clock in the morning.”

        You are the whimpering and if there was a shadow government of the likes that occupies your mind, your kind of flatulance is exactly the kind of hot air ‘they’ would like you to be blowing.

        • There is no Higgs Boson. That is just more bullshit as well.

        • Look you fucking moron. Why do you think investigating 9/11 is a waste of time, given the consequences that NOT investigating 9/11 had. Since 9/11 was carried out by Western forces, this is consequential obviously.

          So how can your point of view be sustained? I thought John Howard made a reasonable case. But I wouldn’t have thought so had I known that 9/11 was a false flag. Which is undeniable from the sheer physics of it.

  36. What lunatics you people are. You are demented. You have been proven totally wrong, to the nth degree, and yet you cannot admit it. This is just childish. You are mental degenerates. Clearly you are all public servants. Yet this is precisely what psyche ops is meant to achieve. Its meant to disarm the public mentally. They can no longer tell right from wrong any more even in this most clear-cut, proven to the nth degree, case.

    None of you have even come up with any evidence for your wrong theory for the love of god. Most of you no longer know what evidence is through the promotion of stupid people like Popper and stupid ideas like special relativity. You’ve all been subject to a war on your minds. And its a successful one. Knowing that the human skull doesn’t change in adulthood, you still cannot get this story right. You could not be more incompetent as analysts if you tried.

    If any of you have jobs of any consequence you ought to think about stepping down.

    • Do shut up Graeme,
      you sound shrill,

      I imagine you with a


      voice and small dots of half dried spittle decorating the corners of your mouth.

      Would you care for a handkerchief?

      • Alright then lets go over it again. You are an idiot. Why? Because skull shape cannot change much in adulthood. Because you have pictures before the 1970′s showing clearly and without any doubt whatsoever, two different people. Because when you equalize for eye width and try and superimpose you get radical differences …. and so forth.

        So I KNOW I’m right. I’m not guessing. And it isn’t a hard subject. Okay so you are a moron who hangs around other morons trying to make the truth go away.

        • A Bronte Reader

          I don’t accept your thesis,

          you have made a poor case;


          SHRILL, and

          without the necessary


          That you DO NOT address the questions put to you by this chorus of posters only


          the paucity of your case.

          If you care to impress - do so by outlining, clearly, your



          Short of that, I would like my handkerchief returned.


          • No I haven’t made a poor case you lying piece of shit. Your skull cannot grow and your eyes cannot reduce their width in adulthood. The photographic analysis, spelt out in great detail in my link, proves therefore that they are two different people.

            Thats the end of the story you idiot. Alright. So it isn’t a problem of evidence. Its a problem of idiots. Those that don’t agree are morons.

            The link takes you by the hand and just walks you through it.

    • I’d love to hear you explain the problems with special relativity, Graeme, but not as much as I’d love to hear you explain the problem with Popperian falsificationism.

      I’d also be interested to hear how come the all-pervading conspiracy hasn’t silenced you.

      I’m tempted to think that you work for the Power yourself, your task being to spread obviously baseless conspiracy theories to discredit the real ones. But maybe that would be a little paranoid,

      • Why did they do it, Graeme?

        Why did they kill him?

        Please answer this.

        Why did they not kill the much more subversive Cliff Richard?

        • If the Beatles are really a team effort of many more people then the four, then this has to be made totally secret. If they decide that they are going to use these working class kids for a rolling series of media events to create some sort of psyche ops against the public, then they need to keep this a secret.

          But it appears that the plot involved killing and replacing their apparently most prolific songwriter and most popular Beatle right from the start. Look at the effect it has had on this very thread. It paralyzes thought. It puts extra work on the vigilante, and encourages people not to trust the evidence of their eyes.

          So its a forerunner for 9/11. For the relentless bank stealing. For this sort of thing. Its a constant war against the public. Against the publics capacity to think clearly. If the public can think clearly they can expropriate the oligarchs and stop the massive subsidies they always get.

          Its the shadow government that are the subversives. They are not so much right-wing or left-wing. They create the wings and make sure they keep fighting with each-other without resolution.

          • More and more the conspiracy sounds like an evil god, the Demiurge perhaps of a gnostic cosmology.

            But why haven’t they silenced you, Graeme? Why didn’t they take out Bob Dylan, that would have been easier and I think more effective? Or did they? Is he a double too?

            So many 60s and 70s radicals changed their views Horowitz and Rubin and Leary spring to mind. Doubles? How come Abbie Hoffman escaped then? Occam’s Razor suggests a simpler process.

            • Good Lord. Why would anyone want to hurt Bob Dylan. For one thing that would deprive them of more Bob Dylan output.

              These are mass-murderers. These are not philistines.

              • Bob Dylan sell his soul to the Devil.

                Like most of them.

                • I don’t see that at all. I think he’s been an exemplary artist. Well of course these pop and rock stars tend to have excessive access to girls, and this tends to lead to sadism and bad treatment if a man is spoiled in that way. I have no reliable information on his personal life and don’t want to know. But in terms of his place in the modern culture I don’t see how you could have a better influence.

                  • You see and hear only what you want, much more escape the attention of a bird who cannot fly yet.

                    • Look I just don’t want to know any unverifiable scuttlebut. I’m only talking about his work as an artist and his position in the culture.

      • Like most philosophers Popper gets a pretty good idea and pushes it further then it can go. Falsification is fine but it must be convergent. Its no shortcut. Your hypothesis is falsifed forensically, convergently and totally. So falsification can be useful. What we are really after though is verification. A Popperian twit can never seem to find verification for his hypothesis. Rather he just sits back and raises the proof bar for the other fellow sky high. Its like playing tennis with some idiot who reckons your net is 50 feet high whereas they don’t need one.

        The philosophers always raise someone up who finds and excuse to emphasise bivalent deductive certitude over induction. So someone like Hume attains immortality by trying this on. The reason is that bivalent deduction requires education but even a baby uses induction.

        Special Relativity is a typical shadow government racket. They hate scientific progress and they want to monopolize on any technology. So they are always sanctifying anti-scientific idiocy like Special Relativity.

  37. “The man is maybe three inches taller.”

    Graeme, you’re referring to photos like this for what you’d regard as evidence, yes?

    We all know that John and Paul were both 5’11″, therefore this photo shows clearly that this can’t be the Real McCartney etc etc. Fine, except for a little thing called linear perspective.

    Experiment time: hold up your hands in front of you at the same distance from your face, palms facing one another, fingers extended upwards. The tips of your fingers should appear at roughly the same height. Now, move your right hand 2 inches closer to your body. OMG!!2! The fingers of your right hand just grew in length by a couple of inches. Those pesky Jews really are out to get us.

    Or: watch the ‘I Will’ clip dottie linked to above, and pause at the 10 second mark. What’s this? John is actually several inches taller than Paul!? But I thought they were both supposed to be 5’11″?

    Geez, I wonder if just maybe the camera was positioned above the performers? Easy enough to prove. Raise your hands again, and this time move your head, not your hands, to the left by about 6 inches. Now move your head upwards by 2 inches. Let me guess, the fingers of your right hand just grew again…

    Now – think about this for a second – I wonder if the same rules of perspective also affect facial feature positioning and ‘skull size’ when shot with a short depth of field (the type almost always used for portraits and interviewing subjects – not that it matters, pick any depth of field you like) from various angles? Then think a bit longer about the possibility you might be similarly bending the facts - like an imperfect camera, and like all of us do to some degree - to fit your own view of the world.

    • “Graeme, you’re referring to photos like this for what you’d regard as evidence, yes?”

      No you don’t do things on the basis of single photos you dropkick. You compare and contrast different photos. But clearly this is the second Paul. He doesn’t even look the same yet. He needs a few more years of surgery before he will become a passable double. In this photo you would have all sorts of difficulties of perspective.

      • Ok, more than one photo…got ya. Here’s another one:

        Hey look, John’s taller then Paul again. What do we conclude then? That John’s clearly taller than Paul in real life – or that maybe this time the shot was taken from below the performers (as in the beach shot)…I think I’d place my money on the latter.

        • Look you moron. Lets go over it again. You don’t use a single photo. You cross-compare two or more photos. And obviously, though you have many photos you choose ones where you don’t have perspective problems.

          Got it dummy? But we do know that the first Paul was around the same height as John and George, and the second Paul was taller. This just didn’t happen by natural adult growth.

        • If you watch the movie “Let It Be” its pretty clear that Paul II is taller then all the others. Now they’ve flipped it on its side on youtube to make it harder to see everything that clearly.

          But there is no controversy about it. People see that he was about the same height then, and taller later, and they just accept that such things are possible.

  38. Note the obsessions: the one-trick pony of skull growth, adherence to conspiracy stories, the sense of privileged possession of arcane knowledge and inside information, the certainty that he alone knows and that all others are dunces, idiots, fools, charlatans.

    It’s symptomatic of persistent neurosis or some organic pathology.

    Not that it matters, and it certainly doesn’t but I’ve seen enough lunatics in my time - they’re pretty transparent. Pure psychopathy is harder to pick, but Bird’s got something else going - BPD, methamphetamine psychosis, - what exactly is the problem, Bird?

    • Have you thought of castration? I mean it wouldn’t be responsible passing on the stupid gene right?

      • Good call Bird, and noble of you to come up with the suggestion.

        What’s your preference? I could do you quick with a razor blade - we’d have to gag you to stop the squealing, or there’s the elastrator, the rubber band around your nuts (that is, if they haven’t atrophied from all the meds), or, my favourite, the emasculator, for its dramatic crunching sounds…

        Your call Bird. You’re obviously lucid enough to recognise the danger you pose to society, but are you man enough for the next step?

        • Nicely played onto the onside and the dry weather allowed that to run very quickly to the boundary for another four runs, straight off the middle of the bat, and I would advise all of the kiddies who may be watching to take note as to how that shot was made. He saw the ball nice and early and moving his feet just enough to allow the ball onto the bat and a quick flick of the wrist, head over the shot all the way, masterfully done, you will not see many shots handled with such aplomb, almost cheeky it was, and take a look at the sour face of the bowler as he watches that ball run so easily towards the boundary. And the umpires call for drinks.

        • Richie: Yes Bill, he’s going to have to use some heavy duty vanish to get those red stains out of his creamy whites the way he is working on that ball, my word.

          Tony: If you arsk me it’s bloody stupid the way he continues to target his leg stump. The batsman will just keep plugging away and picking them orf.

  39. Skull growth is all you need. Because you don’t have skull growth in adults. Now am I going to fast for you, you degenerate?

  40. Its just amazing how competitive you people are. Nick is actually competing to be more stupid then the rest of you.

    • Nah, to be honest I just enjoy a good game of Last Year at Marienbad. Could show you photos - hundred upon thousands of authentic photos - until the cows come home, but because they don’t depict what you already believe, and what you’ve already concluded, it won’t make one iota of difference. You’ll still stick with the same few you see on every conspiracy site as all the proof you need.

      • Well obviously you don’t use photos wherein you have perspective problems. It doesn’t matter how many photos you can find that don’t prove the point. What matters is that some photos are available that are useful for forensic analysis. And you use those ones. Only something as stupid as you would choose photos that are useless for the task at hand.

        But its not a difficult matter. In 66 you have one bloke. In 67 you have another. Then slowly the first one morphs back towards the other. So its not really something that even requires forensic analysis. Its just like if I started pretending to be you. It wouldn’t take.

    • Here’s one taken front on in 1968. They look pretty much the same height to me:

  41. So many things, billed to be controversial, are not controversial at all by the standpoint of science. We see people lying all the time. People not accepting the evidence. This is one of these cases. You all know you are wrong unless you are absolutely certifiably insane. Yet you just lie about it.

    Over at Catallaxy I cannot get a single working economist to admit that the Keynesian multiplier is pure idiocy. They won’t make good with the evidence for it. But yet they won’t deny it. Its simply about people lying all the time.

    The hatred and denial of evidence, the ubiquity of the faith-based approach, the incapacity to understand what is a thresh-hold issue and what is not, these have all been induced by the elite. They go so far as to exalt people like David Hume and Karl Popper in order to carry this sort of thing off.

  42. If you follow my paradigm you hear George Harrison talking about the scandal the entire time. Here he talks about big brother watching him. About the Beatles involving 8 people. He keeps dropping these lines as if he’s only joking. In his songs and in his interviews. Of course he’s never going to say “Paul is a different person…” or anything like that. If this means an instant death sentence.

    • No the interview doesn’t fairly bear that interpretation at all. George does talk about some of the wacky theories about the Beatles, there was one apparently that they never really went to America at all but sent doubles.

  43. But it is a threshold issue, Graeme.

    If someone killed by son and replaced him with an imposter what threat would keep me quiet? None, I think, I wouldn’t keep quiet even if the heavens fell. And if I did, the horror would drive mad…You should read the the Chamberlian case, an innocent woman went to jail because the police and a jury ignored this type of threshold evidence from eye-witnesses and preferred to go off on a forensic frolic.

    This simply couldn’t be done without very clear traces. By your own argument literally thousands of people must have kept mum and shown no symptoms of guilt fear horror while Paul was murdered and replaced.

    You show no sign of realizing how unlikely that is.

    • Express it as an argument. What do you know about the families response? You know nothing. So you have nothing to accuse them of doing or not doing in terms of their response. Of course they noticed. But what is your argument in terms of what they should have done about it and why are you claiming you know they did not do this? And how does this make Paul grow taller and his skull change shape?

      • You are attempting to reverse the burden of proof here, Graeme. Just pointing out the logical fallacy involved.

        • There is no burden of proof in epistemology idiot. I made no logical mistake. You don’t get a handicap and your request for a handicap is usually a sign your views are baseless. Take your Popperian irrationality elsewhere. There is never a burden of proof. There is never a null hypothesis. There are only competing hypotheses. And no-one but an idiot what demand a handicap.

          • Yeah there is a burden of proof when you challenge the obvious. If I say that you are really a talking parrot called Nigel who juggles machetes for a living in Brunswick St Fitzroy, then I need to provide evidence for that rather than thus challenging you to disprove it.

            Burden of proof is closely allied to Occam’s Razor. Do yo ha e a private system of logic?

            • Bad methodology. If you start off with three to six hypotheses in parallel and you rank and re-rank them in accordance with the new data as it dribbles in, then the bad hypothesis will fall in terms of plausibility without you having to lock in a formal handicap.

              You have to set it up like that or you will be immune to the sort of shocks of enlightenment that good methodology can deliver to you.

    • I’ll stop, eventually… there’s only so much banging of one’s head against a wall that one can stand, but for the last time, why are people continuing to fool themselves that there is a discussion to be had with this parasitic energy-sucking oxygen-waster?

      When will you cotton on to the fact that it’s all about Bird prosecuting his florid fantasies and paranoid ideation? There is no exchange, no dialogue, no development. It’s just Bird being, well, Bird… in all his loopy nuttiness.

      You show no sign of realizing [anything, really.]

      Symptomatically, people in Bird’s boat live in an insight-free zone, unaffected by the conventions of social norms or the general empathetic considerations accompanying exchange. The guy reminds me of a turd-machine, churning it out, pile by tedious pile…

      • Its akin to moonie de-programming. Its no forensic puzzle. Its proven prosaic knowledge. But if you have been brainwashed, and you have, you will just lie and do anything to deny the reality.

    • You use a completely inappropriate word here. You use the word “unlikely” …. This is not a question of probability. This is a matter of TOTAL CERTAINTY. Like the 9/11 thing in terms of the acceleration profile of how the buildings came down.

      This is not some sort of game of chance. This is a matter of total and incontrovertible certainty. Now you are trying to trump something that we know for sure, with a string of matters you know NOTHING whatsoever about. You cannot trump knowledge with ignorance. You don’t know how these people work. They are practicing warfare against the public, which includes the families of their victims.

      What is the father going to do? How do you know he didn’t do it? You cannot answer either of these questions so you are trying to trump total knowledge with personal ignorance.

      • I think it more likely that the “Paul is dead” theory id the government conspiracy aiming to subvert peoples’ sense of reality. That conspiracy would be much easier to arrange and just as effective for its stated purpose.

        And that would explain why the conspiracy hasn’t silenced Graeme.

    • There was all sorts of behaviour related to fear guilt and horror. All sorts. Why claim stuff didn’t happen that you know nothing about. John was changed forever by this. Went eccentric. George too. They were never the same.

      But as to the family how on earth do you know about their reactions? You know nothing. And how does any of your lack of knowledge affect skull shape?

      • It is a dog that barked in the night issue, Graeme. Many people, a mini subculture, who never met paul M are able to publicize the Paul is Dead theory with impunity. They are apparently known as pidders, after Paul Is Dead.

        So why no-one who actually knew him? None of them care that he was murdered?

        You haven’t made your case on the skull shape, you must know that. It is possible to find a scientist who temporarily supported all kinds of bodgy theories…there were scientists who argued that AIDS was psychosomatic for example. But others examine their work and more info comes in and the river rolls on. Although the crank continues to cherrypick the research, no matter how discredited, which supports their theory. It is an old story.

        Nor have you made your case on the falsity of special relativity. What about general relativity?

        • Its come out now in the last few years. One of the features of the shadow government is the “lesser scandal tripwire” and “lesser scandal protection”.

          This is where they set up a concentric series of scandals. So we have some really big scandals on the fly right now. The biggest one being that 9/11 was a false flag. So now they drag out this scandal from 46 years ago, and it serves as lesser scandal protection for the sort of thing that legally would wind the oligarchs up in Guantanimo and then would have them dying through needle injection.

          The general public getting to bust them on 9/11 was a big accident. It took until 2006, when youtube had them busted wide open with a smoking gun. But they are slowly securing their control of youtube through the Google takeover.

          But anyway they were accidentally caught with the smoking gun with 9/11. Hence the career of Obama; a sort of walking scandal ……. as lesser scandal protection.

          So around 2009 this Paul-Is-Dead scandal was also dug up from the vault, to keep the competent analysts even more estranged from society and even more weighed down, demoralized, unemployable, juiced up, and so forth.

        • “Many people, a mini subculture, who never met paul M are able to publicize the Paul is Dead theory with impunity. ”

          The dog that didn’t bark … Well yes your second good idea today. But PUBLICISE you say? With what? To publicise something you need media. The shadow government controls the media totally. On the private side they do so by picking media moguls. Since the media business used to be of low risk OPERATIONALLY this leaves the aspiring mogul to take on a great deal of FINANCIAL risk.

          Hence those who control the financial sector can pick winners. They will pick people of genius ability who they think they can control. Then they will give them the fractional reserve subsidy ….. the better part of the benefit of new money creation. So you get some bloke starting off from South Australia and soon he has a world media empire.

          Now they ruthlessly punish these guys if they stray. First they set them up with low interest loans, but loans most of their book has to be rolled over every 18 months or so and I believe it comes out of JP Morgan for most of the big American media.

          With enough debt its the debt-pushers that run things and not the shareholders as the theory suggests. Now occasionally a media mogul doesn’t do what he is told. He gets dumped on and pulled before all sorts of tribunals, and survives within a whisk of bankruptcy or jailing. Then we had a Canadian who was a true genius. They got it right in terms of his ability but got it wrong in terms of his character. So no problem. He winds up in jail, with middleman Posner putting him there, and now he comes out with his wings clipped.

          Another of the moguls was assassinated at sea.

          Particularly prior to the internet publicise means media. If the shadow government can control the media then you and me cannot know the reaction of Pauls relatives and friends. We cannot know how many of them had accidental deaths before the others got the point.

      • How did John and George “change”, why would you expect two highly evolved people like John and George after what they went through in regards to the Beatles, to remain the same. “It is the self made man that is truly shallow”. Are you the same man you were Graeme at twenty four? John was always eccentric, they all were to some extent, would you expect them to be the same forever?

        • After 66 that is when they became eccentric. Took up meditation. They started actually LOOKING LIKE they had used a fair amount of drugs as opposed to the media blasting the information they had taken these drugs to all the small children. You get that Swami deal. They looked wounded. All you need is love, which is mostly true but its a funny thing for a spoilt young man to be composing music about. Their feature songs became much darker. Except for Paul II’s who now has to act like this sweet-hearted exemplary character the whole time.

  44. “Its just like if I started pretending to be you. It wouldn’t take.”

    Exactly - and yet it did. For every single person who has ever known or met the guy, including Bob - it took. For a handful of anonymous hucksters/credulous doofuses on the WWW, and one Graeme Bird - it didn’t. Let me weigh that up in my mind for a second…

    “its not really something that even requires forensic analysis”

    Oh? Because I under the impression that was exactly what it required. It was *all* about the skull growth or some such. You didn’t exactly faff around in making that clear earlier.

    • Well obviously if you get killed and then I show up and say I’m you, and I don’t even look like you its not much of a forensic puzzle. Now suppose then I start morphing towards your look over time. That is still more evidence that I wasn’t you in the first place.

      • Well another way of interpreting this might be that Paul became stressed and lost some weight, making him look a bit more sharp featured and changing the set of his face. Selectively chosen photos, especially where one of them is indistinct, might give the impression of possibly a different man.

        Then as his life picked up he put a little weight back on and the set of his face softened again…he “morphed” back to looked more like the man he was before.

        That seems to pretty much cover it.

        • I’ve read all your other new posts to day and philosophically speaking they are all rubbish. Except for this one. Here for the first time you bring forward A THIRD HYPOTHESIS. But any scientific enquiry performed professionally ought to have 3-6 hypotheses in parallel. Even if one or two of them are just dummy-hypotheses thrown in for the sake of methodology.

          For one thing it will remind you that there is no null hypothesis, and that the null hypothesis so-called is just a thinly disguised competing hypothesis with an unfair handicap. This epistemology was brought about by exalting second-rate thinkers like Popper but also Carl Sagan. Carl, desperate for a handicap, said that, extraordinary ideas require extraordinary proof. But your quote of Chomsky (who has found wisdom with age and finally become a wonderful human being, and thinker) is far closer to the mark.

          Now I want to admit right here that this third hypothesis is way out of my league to disprove. Only the “business as usual” hypothesis has been disproved TOTALLY. Not this or many other potential other hypotheses.

          I cannot possibly disprove your third hypothesis to the nth degree with my puny resources, because we’d have to go back to source and verify all the source materials as having been of the correct vintage. This would require a massive hunt around all the second-hand record stores. I reckon it would take a lot of flight-time, access to the experts who did the job and other independent experts. So plenty of money and maybe a full years man-hours.

          Also you are quite right that your third hypothesis would do the job of psyche ops just as well as the murder theory and probably better. It would be even harder to arrange then the murder and replacement theory. But that doesn’t matter either because this crowd has unlimited resources and its chief tactic is to blow enormous amounts of smoke in the publics face.

          Which brings me to how mean-spirited you are. This is a great post. A breakthrough in terms of your plausibility and methodology. Makes me now think that you are more evil then stupid.

          But elsewhere today you’ve brought up Occam’s Razor. Occams Razor ends on the boundaries of spooktown. Occam’s Razor can never be used in human conspiracy. Since the deceivers work by way of a series of concentric circles of scandal. With each concentric circle they have the lesser scandal tripwire set up in advance.

          They also work with a series of levels wherein each level has its own particular set of lies. As one observer (of NASA) puts it: “The lie is different at every level”

          These guys will blow smoke for the sake of it. Take Oswald for example.

          1. When Oswalds friend Rubinstein allegedly shot Oswald, on live TV, there was no blood. No-one saw any blood.

          2. Plus when Oswalds wife brought up the skeleton from Oswalds grave the skeleton was too tall to be that of her husband.


          3. This is not to imply that I know Oswald survived. Rather its a feature of these guys that they will blow as much smoke as they possibly can


          4. ruling out any possibility of using Occam’s Razor when it comes to shadow government conspiracies.

    • “You use a completely inappropriate word here. You use the word “[suppose]” …. This is not a question of [supposition]. This is a matter of TOTAL CERTAINTY”

      Apparently not.

      • No you are lying. Its a matter of TOTAL CERTAINTY. The reason we know this is that skull shape cannot change over a period of a few months in adulthood. Its not supposition. Anyone who says this is a liar.

      • “The reason we know this is that skull shape cannot change over a period of a few months in adulthood.”

        You have *zero* proof that his skull shape changed over a period of a few months.

  45. I have TOTAL proof. I’ve provided the link with the TOTAL proof. But again. Its no biggie. Because one bloke is there in 66 and a totally different bloke takes over in 67 under conditions where there is no mistaking the two different men. And then his look starts morphing backwards. So part of the pysche ops is to make it really obvious. To make it so there is just no mistaking the difference.

  46. We have something similar with the Obama fake documents. They went out of their way to make these documents really bad fakes. This could be nothing else but deliberate and planned years ahead. This is powerful warfare against the public at large. It throws the vigilante and the intelligent into total despair and damages them socially and materially. And it further trains the rest of the sheeple to reject reason.

    Well the same goes here with these working class boys. The people who created the Beatles probably thought that four working class boys were lower then whale-shit anyway. The thinking would be that setting them up for murder right at the start is no problem. Not two the mandatory Jewish middle-man when all this evil stuff is going on. The shadow government are always employing Jews as middlemen.

    • “Not two the mandatory Jewish middle-man when all this evil stuff is going on. The shadow government are always employing Jews as middlemen.”

      Thankyou. It was only a matter of time. Got what I came for, and happy to bow out of the thread completely at this point.

      • Ha ha ha ha. Look at the tripwires a sheeple like you can be manipulated by!!!!!! This is just a fact. Old John D Rockefeller used the Jewish middleman Trotsky. Gave him all this cash-money directly. When it came to wiping out the Russian ruling family they went to Jews, every last man, to be the assassins. Also today when it comes to setting up the American dictatorship they’ve got all these Jews passing all the legislation.

        This is just a feature of their tactics. Then they set up the tripwire so that every time you point out that they are ruthlessly using Jews as middlemen they spring the trap. They don’t have many tricks but this is one of them.

      • Well for the folks at home who have had to get up at 3am this morning to see this remarkable event take place, it must come as a huge disappointment, given the drama that was first promised with the much heralded return of this much maligned fighter who declared he would win the World Championship as a matter of course, to see him so easily dismissed in the third round. His amateur record was never very good to begin with, nineteen losses from nineteen fights, his few years as a pro saw some trophy wins against mismatched opponents but never convincing enough to gather to him a group of loyal fans. It didn’t start well when the fans stared booing from the sound of the first bell and it went downhill from there. He failed to lay a glove, he even had trouble struggling out of his robes during the referees instructions before the fight began, got tangled up in the ropes early on in the first round and even his own trainer failed to assist him to get free. All of the judges points went against him from what we can gather, the referee disliked him so much at one stage the ref held on to him while the champ whaled into him without getting the slightest admonition from the referee and the crowd cheered. After the fight he blamed the promoter and the boxing association and even though he was out for seven minutes after being knocked down, he still believes he won the fight.

  47. Your link looked exactly like Paul. He’d lost some weight, bags under the eyes, more gaunt in the face - but there’s no doubt at all that was Paul.

    What you have is the very opposite of total proof. ie. zero proof.

    Your psyche ops theory is laughable nonsense, and Occam would be appalled by your “morphing backwards” convolutions.

      • Still looks exactly like Paul. Videos don’t tend to change that much just because you link to them again, Graeme.

        • No you are lying or insane. Most people have actually forgotten what the first Paul looks like. When they think of Paul now they think of the second fellow. And why not? He’s been Paul twice as long as the first fellow ever got the chance to before he was culled by people who really couldn’t give a toss about working class Catholics.

          • ‘No you are lying or insane. Most people have actually forgotten what the first Paul looks like”

            But how can they forget when there is and always has been an absolute never ending supply of images available. I mean he must go down in history as one of the most photographed humans on the planet. I checked my Rubber Soul CD Cover photo with the original 1965 Album owned by my sister, it is the same image. It would almost take a superhuman effort over the last 50 years to try and forget what the “first” Paul looked like. “most people”, took a survey did you?

            • Many of those who haven’t forgotten will have been sidelined or demoralized by the controversy. Powerfully effective psyche ops.

  48. “The Graeme Bird Memorial Thread”.

    Yes. It got up to almost seven hundred comments.

    “Anyway, the thread is getting too long and with no end in sight…so I’ve closed it.” :smile:

    • Yeah those guys couldn’t turn a trick. PZ Myers is such a dummy. He’s an anti-Christian posing as an atheist. A real low-life and with the scientific capacities not exceeding that of a high-school biology teacher. Looking in the context of the three threads I participated on I stomped them on every subject.

  49. Well I’ve just done some research on you Graeme Bird and I kneel before you.

    You are a rock superstar in the blogging world.

    You can argue a detail for over 800 posts! And thats before the thread is locked! Awesome! You’re a legend man! Anyone who can do that, I have a lot of respect for. Thats dedication.

    You have come to the right place.

    Delusion reigns supreme here on Bob Ellis’s blog. I hope you are able to apply some of your forensic skills to some of Bobs more dubious musings. I notice on your own blog site, you describe yourself as a prophet. Well, Bob’s also a prophet of sorts so if ever he locks horns with you - that should be fun to watch. Prophets at 10 paces! My money would be on you, by the way, as he has a limited vocabulary.

    I wish you a long and happy stay here and look forward to reading your future insights.

    • Hey Frank, did your research take you here?

      You’ll find a graven image of your superstar there, along with a range of his choice witticisms. Make sure to print the picture and keep it close to your breast. Use it like a genie’s lamp, rub it often, longingly, lovingly, and wish that his wise words may come to you, too.

      Do let us know how your newfound adulation develops. The image of you on bended knee trilling your admiration to the pixellated abstract would be a sight to behold…

    • I thought the performances “wooden”, I believe the kettle drummer made a fortune out of that series, and absolute fucking fortune.

  50. Graham how could I have doubted you?

  51. You’ve been programmed to hate evidence.

  52. No. I have gone through life only believing half of what I see, and five fifths of fuck all of what I hear. I am programmed for sex, drugs, and rock & roll.

    Not necessarily in that order.

  53. What I don’t get is you replace Paul 1 with Paul 2 who eventually who is more successful, more talented, earns more money, accumulates more fame, becomes a better musician, knight of the realm, pro-vegetarian and pro animal activist. He marries into more wealth, becomes a byword for genius, loved by young and old, a living legend and to a certain mature age was able to make women wet their pants. And the Shadow Government did this to punish the public and do this they had to remove Paul1 because he may have not fulfilled those expectations that Paul2 went on in spades to complete? Or were the authorities just showing off?

    Graeme, as I understand some of the offhand remarks you have made in this thread, you are of the “Birther” school in regards to the legitimacy of the Obama Presidency is that correct? You should tread carefully because Bob is quite a fan of the U.S. President, but that should not stop you giving us your thoughts.

    And just one other question were the Jews responsible for the rise of Hitler, was their a Brian Epstein figure that helped AH get the gig?

    • See if you think of Paul and John as musically uneducated “ideas-men” and you think of Sargent Pepper as being one of these guys who is a virtuoso piano player at the age of maybe 10 and someone who then goes on to master another six instruments …. Then if you want to create a band that the teenagers are BOUND to respond to, it is best to split the roles up. You have the ideas-men and the better performers on the road. Yet travelling on the road with them you have the shadow team.

      Otherwise when you give them all this wall to wall publicity and then co-ordinate various matters to do with them with other media events to have a full spectrum effect …. well it will backfire. Because what you need is a band that seems to have it all. So you would have Billy Pepper and the rest of the team following these guys around in great comfort with all the recording facilities on tap.

      Now supposing after you replace the first Paul. Force him into early retirement as part of his contract. Kill him because he looked like he might go public …. the evidence does not tell us what happened to him exactly………

      …. Suppose you do that. How good do you think the next album would have to be??? It has to be FANTASTIC. And I think Sargent Peppers Lonely Hearts Club Band would have had to have been one of the most fantastic albums to that date. More man hours. More audio engineering. It completely stomped Pauls major competitor (Brian from the beach boys). He was like Goethe realising that he could never best Shakespeare.

      So supposing the shadow government had gone with your way of doing things. Well the psyche ops couldn’t last. Because the replacement could not fill the shoes, did not look like him, and couldn’t get away with it.

      What they are trying to do is demoralize the competent analysts, make them unemployable, and make them forsake any challenge to the tyranny of the inbreeds. So of course the album following the replacement of Paul had to knock everyones socks off and it did. It may have been the simple recourse to swapping Paul I and Paul II and making Paul I go to the shadow team, sending Paul II into the lime-light. The evidence doesn’t permit us to know how well Paul I was treated one way or another. It simply rules out business as usual. I could have said so earlier, but what has prompted me to refine my claims is that Jeremy Dixon came out with the first excellent post that runs against my own.

  54. It is important to remember that some of the people who haunt places like this are actually clinically insane: on the nut-pension and taking psychiatric drugs.

    I suggest that we have such a one here.

    He deserves our pity and we should stop responding to his posts as it only makes him worse.

    • I think every word you say here is true. I think you are clinically insane but I won’t advocate drugs for you because over the long haul the drugs don’t work. Rather get away from aluminium cookware, fluoride, and chlorine. Take as many of the good minerals as possible. Try to get more sleep. This sort of thing.

      Then maybe JUST MAYBE you’ll figure out that physical certitude trumps sociological speculation every time, and maybe you’ll get it sorted that skulls don’t change shape after adulthood.

      • I rest my case.

        • Why? Because you are an idiot? Where do you think alzheimers came from? It came from all that aluminium cookware that showed up in the 20′s. And when the big corporates found this out they doubled down by putting it in our SALT our vaccines, and pretty much everywhere else they could put it to cover for their earlier mistake.

          As opposed to fluoride which was a deliberate and successful attempt to poison the water and dumb down the population right from the start.

          Chlorine was a case where the war profiteers came home from the war and had all these surplus chemical war agents. So why not put it in the water? Actually it had its uses, but it ought to have been superseded by now.

          Both Chlorine and Fluoride are HALOGENS so they both displace the Iodine molecules on the thyroid hormone. Anyone with diabetes in the family or ancestors that have come through famine are rendered damaged by these poisons. Only people who are naturally hyper-thyroid can possibly escape the damage. Fluoride is a nerve-and-brain toxin.

  55. To Lolo: Can you list your top ten films?

    • Where is this coming from? Some of you confused people always want to take an intellectual site and making it perverts dating forum.

      • I have no need for dating, nor talk with you. Please cease and desist from making comments in my direction. You are not an intellectual’s boot lace but a mollusk.

        Take the pills GB.

  56. So, this the bird?
    I remain in awe of his verbosity, his prolix is beyond measure.
    Your explication of the duplicity of McCartney and the forces that were, radiated of a dazzling intensity that had me beyond grasping any point behind it. at all.

Leave a Comment

* Copy this password:

* Type or paste password here:

100,148 Spam Comments Blocked so far by Spam Free Wordpress

NOTE - You can use these HTML tags and attributes:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>