Excellent pictures, but this question was definitively resolved by Chris Farley during his interview of Paul in 1993. Sir Paul said, “I wasn’t really dead.” Enough for me.

In ALL of the photos showing Paul’s feet he’s wearing American cowboy boots. These usually add a bit over two inches. He probably always had custom-made lifts inside them, which can add another two inches fairly comfortably. You can get lifts that add three inches, but it’s hard to walk in them. However, on stage Paul didn’t walk around that much, as Mick Jagger does. If he practiced a lot and didn’t move too much on stage, he could have added five inches, which made him at least as tall as John. John’s wearing boots in some of the shots, but they look more like regular English Lobb or Lobb-style boots than cowboy gear. Otherwise, the photographer’s angle and lens can change apparent proportions a LOT. And in one of the photos with Jane Asher, Paul’s obviously leaning forward. It’ll take a lot more than these photos to make him dead.

It is pretty irrelevant to rely on people’s comparative height as an argument for the demonstration, since height cannot be ascertained from photos. Or may be it is a deliberate deflection?

It is the Beatles themselves who gave rise to the rumour of PMC’s death, when they recorded secret messages about his passing, to be read backwards on their vinyl records.

There is much more challenging evidence that PMC post-1966 wasn’t the same person. The original artist had dark brown eyes, but the one who replaced him has indisputably green eyes. There is no way such a change could have happened naturally in an adult person.

Furthermore, the cranial and odontology analysis performed by an Italian forensic pathologist, published in the Italian version of Wired magazine, provided objective evidence that PMC pre-1966 and PMC post-1966 were not the same person.

http://www.hugequestions.com/Eric/TFC/FromOthers/Paul-McCartney-Italian.html

If biometrics data is so reliable as to allow billions of people pass through borders with just automated machine checks, than surely it is also reliable enough to determine Paul McCartney’s identity?

For any rational person, it is more likely than not that Paul McCartney was replaced by a lookalike musician. The reason is economic: British pop music was an important contributor to the country’s GDP in the 1960’s. PMC dying in a car accident in Feb 1966 was an economic catastrophe, so “some people did something” about it.

The PMC conspiracy is quite benign and harmless. But it shows how powerful the Anglo school of propaganda and psychological operations, a la Tavistock, really is, which was able to maintain the cover up for decades. People refuse to recognise to having been fooled because they can’t accept they are not that smart.

Well, yes. Being a youth of that era, it had enough of its own nuttiness and weird beliefs going on. Along with the novel and truly creative stuff, some things almost matched the idiocy of the stuff that goes on today.

A few years ago I read “The Life and Death of Paul McCartney” by Nicholas Kollerstrom.
It convinced me that a deceased Paul was replaced by “Faul”.
An interesting case.
From a review on Goodreads —

I didn’t realize this, but the number of unusual premature deaths of people who knew the pre-1966 McCartney is statistically improbable. Furthermore, the timing of such deaths could not be coincidental. For example, roadie Mal Evans’ manuscript Living the Beatles’ Legend was due to be submitted to the publisher on January 12, 1976, but he was killed on January 5. The suitcase containing the manuscript vanished and has never been recovered.

Hmm …

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/26714586-the-life-and-death-of-paul-mccartney-1942-1966

MK Ultra were involved in turning Western youth into drug and sex addicted morons, instead of Soviet socialists. Teenagers said later, they were paid money to scream and go into hysteria. Paul McCartney in the last stage of his life, spoke out against drug usage and wanted to retire. That seems more likely for his death than this fanciful Vatican weapon. There is something very mysterious about the whole Beatles saga. Half the British police force was involved in guarding them from their fans instead of closing down the concerts. Clearly, they all had doubles as photographs demonstrate. The murdered Lennon bares no resemblance to the Lennon meeting his relatives in New Zealand in 1965. Lennon from a fostered home was said to appear to have limitless money to fund his education and his musical instruments. The death of his mother by a police car seems staged. If you want to be really paranoid, Lennon’s birth is listed a few months after the rumoured birth of Hitler and Nancy Mitfords child in England.

I am sorry. I meant Unity Mitford.

Every time I think I got out, they pull me back in!- Michael Corleone (roughly)

I straddle the fence on this seemingly ridiculous subject but somehow still lean toward hoax. I just can’t understand why Beatles Inc. felt the need to create and perpetuate this hoax.

There are some very compelling photo collages that show different “Pauls.” Why?

The clues embedded in songs and album covers are undeniable.

The lads were almost surely freemasons and surrounded by occult symbolism from the early days. Why?

My brother speculated that the differences in appearance could be attributed to plastic surgery (collaboration with MJ no accident) but that isn’t satisfying.

The music is great but there is something very sinister about the Fab Four. Disappointing.

Not only did Ringo say he died in a video, so did George Harrison. Other clues: in some 70s show -concert video I noticed he played bass with his right hand when as Paul he played with left hand; the Abby Road barefoot thing; the line from “A Day in the Life” saying he died in a car crash because “he didn’t notice that the light had changed”; the post 1966 Paul just looks different especially on album covers; the “Billy Shears” Sargent Pepper’s intro (Shears being “Faul” as they say); the “new Paul” suddenly seemed to not get along with Lennon…and maybe othe clues, but these are the ones I remember most. All stated on various videos. But then again, a lot of what the Beatles did was psy-op stuff….maybe they planned it that way, and he could very well still be alive after all. I just have my doubts.

Anyone who thinks Paul McCartney’s stunning artistry can be duplicated by a talented look-alike knows absolutely nothing about the realities of professional songwriting and musicianship. “I wasn’t really dead.” Duh.

Anyone who thinks Paul McCartney’s stunning artistry can be duplicated by a talented look-alike knows absolutely nothing about the realities of professional songwriting and musicianship. “I wasn’t really dead

Many of Paul McCartney’s most successful songs were written in collaboration with John Lennon. They had already been composed, but were not yet recorded by the time PMC’s purported accidental death in a car crash was announced in the Beatles’ English fan magazine, on 7th Jan 1966.

A lot of songs were ready in the pipeline, that would only have to be sung by his replacement. This is not unheard of: an exceptional artist such as Prince mentioned that he had hundreds of songs kept in a vault, that he left un-recorded by his untimely passing.

PMC did not write anything remarkable with the Wings, after the Beatles broke up, unlike Lennon and Harrison who both wrote all-time classics in their solo career.

The denial story was in a fan magazine published in January 1967, not 1966.

In regards to the famous songwriting, Mike Williams has created a video of his analysis of whether some of their songs, including huge hits such as Yesterday, were ghost-written or plagiarized (something Harrison didn’t get away with when he stole the music for the lovely hit, My Sweet Lord).

The video is on Bitchute, and maybe even on YouTube, on the Sage of Quay channels. It is long and at some points tedious, but also revelatory at other points.

Video Link

I thought Theo Adorno wrote all their songs and music, as well as most of the other bands. Or so it is claimed by John Coleman and others.

https://digilander.libero.it/jamespaul/fc42.html

https://digilander.libero.it/jamespaul/fc42.html

Scroll down a bit to comparison photos of Paul and Jane Asher. Based on obvious height differences there are two possibilities: photo tampering or two Pauls.

Paul isn’t dead….he’s a drunken douche….a globalist nitwit like Bono.

Clapton seems to be the only one with a lick of sense.

….a globalist nitwit like Bono.

Globalist, I don’t know, but “Paul McCartney” is definitely the greatest Israel sycophant among established British artists.

He married Jewish ladies, so sympathy towards the Jewish people is very understandable, but he takes it to another level altogether by explicitely supporting the genocidal government in the concerts he regularly gives in Occupied Palestine. So maybe that’s his way of paying back the chance he was given in 1966.

This radio debate sticks to Billy Shears as the imposter double. Blogs insist that Billy Shears, actually William Shears Campbell, was Canadian or American. Substituting a North American accent with a working class English accent without slip ups is really impossible in studio interviews. Rarely if ever achieved even in movies. Other blogs say the double was an English working class lad contemporary musician, Phil Ackrill. That seems plausible. Maybe Billy Shears, first chosen in a McCartney look alike contest, was brought in as an emergency. When media interviews were required, Phil Ackrill replaced him and is the present imposter. The original Paul McCartney looked exactly like a stereotype young white musician. They could have turned Charles Manson into Paul McCartney. The whole Beatles thing was clearly a Tavistock propaganda program. England was still a very bleak and class privileged place in the 1960s. Communism was potentially a magnet for the disaffected young. The name Lennon has consonance with Lenin. Lennon was charismatic like Lenin was less than fifty years before.

He married Jewish ladies, so sympathy towards the Jewish people is very understandable, but he takes it to another level altogether …

Never paid much attention to McCartney past his
poor taste in women. Your comment made me curious.

Paul McCartney: The Jew-ish Beatle?

https://jewishworldnews.org/paul-mccartney-jew-ish-beatle/

5 dancing shlomos

“Tall Paul” was Chairman Volcker. 6′ 7″.

If they needed to substitute a deal Paul why not substitute him with his own brother who was a successful pop musician himself with a string of hits including a No. 1 UK Christmas hit? Surely he would have been the best choice but then they would have had to fake his own death. Or perhaps run his own career in parallel.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_McGear

And if Paul truly died why didn’t his brother spill the beans about it but went along with calling the fake his brother?

And if Paul truly died why didn’t his brother spill the beans about it but went along with calling the fake his brother?

Because the McCartney family was remunerated for keeping the legend going.

Nobody would have won anything from making Paul’s passing public. Britain’s GDP, Her Majesty Revenue and Custom HMRC, the Beatles’ agent Brian Epstein, the tribal investors behind him, the surviving Beatles, Paul McCartney’s real family, everybody gained crazy money, fame and status from PMC’s career seemingly continuing its course.

The only person who really lost to the scheme was PMC’s unique and illegitimate German daughter, but she got financial compensation paid even though her DNA didn’t match, so that was taken care of too.

Paul is ALIVE!!!