The Biggest And Greatest Conspiracy Of All Time Is Truth: Paul McCartney Really Did Die In 1966

[phillyflyers]

https://www.scribd.com/document/503441685/Forensic-science-proves-Paul-McCartney-was-replaced

Paul McCartney is dead: proof he was replaced

"I'm looking through you, where did you go? I thought I knew you, what did I know? You don't look different, but you have changed ...

plasticmacca.blogspot.com

 

[Archie]

no doubt

 

[phillyflyers]

TikTok - Make Your Day

 

[phillyflyers]

TikTok - Make Your Day

 

[stormtrooper8]

Chris Farley confirmed it was a hoax

 

[djefferis]

One of those theories that just doesn’t hold up to me.

First - why kill Paul ? His popularity was waning fast by 1966 - he was an overnight sensation but that was fading - just like Elvis, 3 years is about the max for a teen sensation to run its course. Taste change a lot between say 15 to 18 Or any 3 year period through the high school years. He wasn’t even the most popular Beatle - Ringo had him there easily.

Secondly - Lennon was the one catching all the heat after his “bigger than Jesus” comments made news that year.

Finally - no one saw him as an “icon” in ‘66 - was just just another person ne of those English kids who were puppets. The Stones had an edge to them - the Yardbirds too. The Who was the first generation of punk before we knew what punk was - but no one knew what The Beatles would become. It was assumed they would fade away like all the other novelty acts before them.

It wasn’t until he connected with the Eastman‘s that he gained true financial “genius” in his corner. Linda’s family gave him access to what he craved most - connections to powerful people who would allow him to control his own career destiny and not keep him obligated to another manager taking a huge chunk of what he earned.

I mean - tell me their manager wasn’t a suicide - I’d buy it. There were reasons to get rid of him. But Paul - makes no sense, especially given it took 3 years before anyone noticed.

 

[djefferis]

double post

 

[djefferis]

Chris Farley confirmed it was a hoax

 

[BMR Genie]

I'm also seeing videos saying the same for Tupac and Michael Jackson.

 

[djefferis]

Tupac being murdered was at the pinnacle of his career and makes sense - smart enough to know when he was being used by certain people and likely to break away from them and take away their meal ticket.

MJ - he was so far gone - no one was making anything off his music or likeness for a decade. Enjoyed a slight pop in sales once he died - but he’s worth no more now than he was his final days - no one forgot about his weirdness.

He and Prince shared some similarities in that regard I guess - of course Prince kept much tighter control of everything - including his music and his image.

 

[phillyflyers]

The purpose of posting the Italian article is because this is proof that Paul was replaced.

The voice analysis up until 1966 and the analysis after 1966 proves it's two different people singing.

Paul was killed in a horrible accident. So why keep the band going and not tell the truth?

The aftermath of World War II. England was still rebuilding and the government was getting hundreds of millions in taxes from the sale of Beatles albums.

They simply couldn't afford to let the band die.

How does one's eye colour change, grow 2 inches in height, and sing with a completely different voice as proven by analysis?

They don’t. He was replaced.

 

[phillyflyers]

 

[phillyflyers]

 

[phillyflyers]

Again, we have yet another voi e analysis proving two different people from two different time periods.

Before and after 1996.

In this paper we have presented the Let IT Corpus, namely a corpus of one-hundred four transcriptions
from speech to text of Paul McCartney’s interviews collected from the Beatles Interviews Database and
YouTube. The aim of this research is to detect possible differences and similarities in Paul McCartney’s
speeches before and after 9th November 1966 (date of his supposed death). For this reason texts have
been organised in two classes: I) before and II) after. We investigated three different text classification
approaches and we detected that all methods achieved high percentage of accuracy classifying texts in
two different classes referring to two different periods. To reinforce these results and on the basis of the
analysis of the stylistic features set out above, it is clear that the way of modulating the words of Paul
McCartney is quite distinguishable between the two periods examined.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/337888881_Paul_is_dead_Differences_and_similarities_before_and_after_Paul_McCartney's_supposed_death_Stylometric_analysis_on_transcribed_interviews

There isn't any doubt it's two different people.