Beatles Conspiracy: Did Paul McCartney die in 1966 and get replaced by a double?

[Winston]

Check this out. Beatles member Ringo Starr confesses that the "Paul was replaced" story is true. lol

https://worldnewsdailyreport.com/former ... ook-alike/

In an exclusive interview with the Hollywood Inquirer, Mr. Starr explained that the “real” Paul McCartney had died in a car crash on November 9, 1966, after an argument during a Beatles’ recording session.

To spare the public from grief, the Beatles replaced him with a man named William Shears Campbell, who was the winner of a McCartney look-alike contest and who happened to have the same kind of jovial personality as Paul.

“When Paul died, we all panicked!” claims Ringo, obviously very emotional. “We didn’t know what to do, and Brian Epstein, our manager, suggested that we hire Billy Shears as a temporary solution. It was supposed to last only a week or two, but time went by and nobody seemed to notice, so we kept playing along. Billy turned out to be a pretty good musician and he was able to perform almost better than Paul. The only problem was that he couldn’t get along with John, at all.”

William Shears Campbell, better known as Billy Shears, does indeed “disappear” from records in 1966 and no traces of him can be found after Paul’s alleged death.

“We felt guilty about the deception” added Ringo Starr. “We wanted to tell the world the truth, but we were afraid of the reactions it would provoke. We thought the whole planet was going to hate us for all the lies we had told, so we kept lying but sending subtle clues to relieve our conscience. When the first rumors finally began about the whole thing, we felt very nervous and started fighting a lot with each other. At some point, it was too much for John and he decided to leave the band.”

Paul McCartney denies Ringo Starr's allegations. lol

https://worldnewsdailyreport.com/paul-m ... in-1966-3/

“I know that Ringo is growing senile and losing his mind,” says Sir Paul, “but he doesn’t need to invent such idiotic stories to attract attention. He probably heard that Wings was about to be inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of fame and he felt jealous. I’ve seen Ringo do and say many stupid things in my life, but this is one of the worst! If he’s so badly in need of media coverage, he could just invent crap about himself without implicating me in his delirium” he added with spite.

And McCartney's alleged daughter said:

“I have many proofs that Sir Paul isn’t really Sir Paul,” she told the mass-circulation Bild Zeitung. “The signature on the old court documents is false! We have found the signature is from a right-handed person, but Paul is left-handed. The sample isn’t even from the right blood type! I am sure that the man pretending to be Paul McCartney is in fact Billy Shears, and I want DNA testing on Paul’s brother, to clarify this matter once and for all”

[Winston]

"The Last Testament of George Harrison - Paul is Dead"

Documentary about an alleged cassette recording made by George Harrison in the hospital after someone tried to assassinate him in 1999 where he tells all about how and how and why Paul was replaced in 1966 and the whole story behind it. It's very fascinating and sounds very honest and has a lot of inside info, even if the voice is not really from George Harrison.

[Winston]

A neutral objective documentary analyzing whether Paul before and after 1967 are the same person or not. It makes some good points. For example if you look at John Lennon's photos from 1963 and compare them to his photos from 1973, he clearly looks like the same man with the same face, so no one questions his identity. However if you look at Paul McCartney's photos from 1963 and then from 1973 it's very questionable whether that is the same man or not. Because they don't look like the same man. They have similar features yes, but many people look similar without being the same identical person. Also McCartney's eyes look different too, more hazel color after 1967. They can alter the face with plastic surgery, but they cannot alter a person's eyes, which are the window to his soul. And it appears these eyes are from two different people and thus two different souls. Look closely and see. Also, an adult male cannot grow 3 inches in one year. That just doesn't happen. @gsjackson what do you think?

[Winston]

Check out this side by side comparison of interviews of Paul McCartney in 1966 vs one from 1967. Notice that they definitely do NOT look like the same man if you look closely and acutely. The facial feature are very similar. But the voice, body language, mannerisms, head shape, speaking style, hair, height, eyes, etc look significantly different. A man cannot change that much in just one year! A man's face cannot go from being round to being long and oval just like that, especially in just a year. That's impossible. Something looks very off here. Watch both interviews and see. Then examine them side by side at the end. You can't help but get a gut feeling that these are two different men. @gsjackson what do you think?

[Winston]

Here's a smoking gun that's hard to explain away. Check out these photos of Paul before 1967, and after 1967. One big thing stands out, and that is that before 1967 he ALWAYS parted his hair to the RIGHT, in every single photo, because the crown on his hair rotates his hair clockwise. But after the end of 1966 and onward, suddenly he ALWAYS parted his hair to his LEFT in every picture! That's a very big smoking gun that's impossible to explain away. You cannot change the crown direction on your hair. No surgery in the world can do that. This means they cannot be the same man. See below for proof of this.



Also, as one commenter pointed out, Paul was always bashful, but Faul was always cocky. So their personalities are different too.

reddishtykes 7 months ago
I've always been interested in his completely different character. Paul was bashful, Faul cocky.

[Winston]

Here's a new theory that's interesting. It says that the original Paul McCartney was replaced but he didn't die. Instead he lived on as John Halliday, who became the caretaker and custodian of Paul's home. Either because he chose to or because he had an accident in 1966 that dehabilitated him from performing. He resembles the original Paul McCartney a lot, and even has the same smile and facial expression and bashfulness, which Faul lacked. Also his wife also looks remarkably similar to Paul's first love, so she could be her as well. See below and decide for yourself. Also, Faul was a look alike named Billy Shepherd, aka Billy Shears, who was involved with the Sergeant Pepper band.

[Winston]

A longer video of John Halliday talking to tourists at Paul McCartney's house, which has become a historical site for tourists, for you to decide if that is indeed the original Paul McCartney before 1967 or not. It's interesting. The commentators below the video are divided on the issue.

[Winston]

The posters In the comments section recommends anyone interested in the "Paul is dead" case to read this website and book, which is supposed to answer all questions about it and go into detail on what happened, how it all happened, and why. It's called "The Memoirs of Billy Shears" and is supposed to be a personal account by Billy Shears, aka Faul, about why and how he impersonated Paul McCartney after 1966 and the struggles it caused the whole band.

Though it is categorized as "fiction" there are simply too many sensitive truths and facts in it which are way too deep that only an insider would know, for it to be fiction alone, and so it is likely the true story classified as fiction for legal purposes. And perhaps written by Paul's impersonator himself, to clear his conscience and explain what happened to McCartney's illegitimate children who are trying to sue him. People say it reads like a genuine confession and contains a lot of mind bending information that is too detailed to be made up, and shows you that the rabbit hole is a lot deeper than you think, and that truth indeed is stranger than fiction. @gsjackson you will love this.

http://www.billyshears.com

Details about the books.

http://www.billyshears.com/1.htm

Word stacking examples. Fascinating.

http://www.billyshears.com/ws.htm

Book description from Amazon:

Billy’s Back! shows how William Shepherd ("Billy Shears") replaced Paul McCartney in The Beatles, revealing how he went from "Billy Pepper" of Billy Pepper and the Pepper Pots to "Sgt. Pepper" of Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band.

Replacing Paul saved the Beatles, but plagued each band member. Now you can understand the secret messages and see how to verify the proven facts of Paul's death.

Besides the many song and album clues that the world has missed until now, you will also learn the hard physical evidence. Here are a few examples:

Chapter 4 reveals how and why it was proven in court, in Germany, that the current Paul does not have the same DNA as the earlier Paul McCartney.

Chapter 34 identifies the professor in Florida who was the first to publish the fact that the new and old Paul have different voiceprints, proving again that they cannot possibly be the same person (since voiceprints are as unique as fingerprints.)

Chapter 59 recounts the trouble that the current Paul got into in Japan when his fingerprints did not match those of the original Paul McCartney.

Throughout the book, you will learn to easily recognize their distinct physical differences, their personality differences, and the conspicuous differences in their singing and musical skills. You will also come to know the current Paul's inner-workings about how, even now, he deals with the identity-switch, and how he continues to work to please the Paul who has crossed over.

Billy’s Back! is the epic of our hero, Paul McCartney, who entered the underworld, and then returned to us by taking possession of the session musician, William Shepherd ("Billy Shears"). This revealing fact-filled work of historical fiction reveals from William's own point of view exactly how the Beatles replaced Paul, what the secret messages really mean, and how you can be certain that they are true.

The "Paul is Dead" story has been told before, but never so authoritatively, or with such details of how and why Paul prepared for it, how they made the switch, how and why William took over the band and the McCartney estate, and how the switch in the band improved The Beatles, but tormented them all, especially John and "Paul."

When you know what really happened and why, you will never again harbor any doubts of Paul's death and replacement by William. In addition, as you learn the background of the songs cited, you will never again hear those songs the same way. This book will forever change your perceptions of those songs and of Paul McCartney, John Lennon, The Beatles, The Rolling Stones, The Bonzo Dog Doo-Dah Band, Donovan, The Who, and Elton John--all of whom made songs about Paul's replacement.

Billy’s Back! includes the material from The Memoirs of Billy Shears that the public most wants to know of Paul's death and replacement, along with many other fascinating details from The Memoirs, without the Beatles philosophical attainments (See Beatles Enlightenment), and without their darker aspects, such as their Paulism (only available in the unabridged Memoirs).

Billy’s Back! will forever change not only your view of Paul McCartney and the Beatles, it will change your view of the world.

[Moretorque]

THE WHOLE THING WOULD NOT SURPRISE ME AT ALL, some are claiming a lot of top bands had help with their music from the elites access to a broad talent pool to help decide who was going to be a star and the narrative,style of the music put out as well as the profit potential for the ruling class. Mostly on writing the music from what I can see and many top artist have been accused of this over the last several decades including the Beatles.....

Recently I was talking to an artist who told me it was considered in the industry amongst those who know that Jim Croce was the most talented singer song writer ever. He created that music on a whim pretty much himself and it still stands as some of the best stuff ever made before he was gone in a flash........

[Winston]

Check out these comparison photos of paul mccartney over the years. His height changes by 3 or 4 inches! How can that be? Thats impossible! An adult man cannot grow 3 or 4 inches in one year! This constitutes objective hard proof that they must be different people. See below.

http://plasticmacca.blogspot.com/2010/0 ... l.html?m=1

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

So overall, there are some BIG physical differences between the Paul McCartney before 1967 and after, which cannot be accounted for by aging or growth, especially in just one year!

1. His height increased about 3 inches, which is impossible in an adult male but easy to see in comparison photos and thus irrefutable and beyond dispute.
2. His face elongated into an oval shape, whereas before it was round and circular shaped, which can clearly be seen in comparison photos.
3. His nose is noticeably longer too, which can be seen in comparison photos as well.
4. His eyes changed from brown or dark hazen to light hazel.

So overall these constitute ROCK SOLID proof that these are two DIFFERENT men! It cannot be disputed and is very conclusive. No one can explain that away no matter how hard they try.

@globetrotter so WTF did you mean that this conspiracy theory was debunked before I was born? WTF? How was it debunked? Because the media declared it a hoax? That constitutes a debunking to you? Where is your proof that these two Pauls are the same person? Where???!!! You liar!

And no, sorry their voices are not the same, neither is their singing or music playing. I will show you proof of that later below.

@TruthSeeker what you think?

[Winston]

Look below at these comparison videos. Notice how the original paul mccartney moved on stage and shook his head while playing guitar, like a total natural. Then compare it with the video of the second paul on stage in color. Notice the second paul cannot move or shake his head the way the original paul could. And he looks amateurish on stage, not as comfortable as the original Paul. They definitely look like different people. Take a look below.



Also notice below that the original paul never had to look down at his fingers while playing, whereas the replacement paul constantly looked down at his fingers during the first few years after he replaced the original paul, indicating that he wasn't as confident and comfortable with the guitar as the original paul was. See these clips for proof.



Also listen to the original paul mccartney sing the song "yesterday" vs the replacement paul singing the same song. Don't the voices sound like two different people? Listen for yourself below.



I would say at this point the replacement theory is more fact than theory now.

[Winston]

Check out this interesting and bizarre story. Someone actually discovered a long lost album of the Beatles. But the wild part is that he claims he got it from a parallel universe. lol. Here is a summary of the story.



Here is the full album if you wanna hear it. It's called "Everyday Chemistry" and contains some new songs, which some say are mashups of the Beatles solo songs. This album is released to the public for free.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ty8zaBS4Bjg

No one disputes that those are the voices of the Beatles. But the story of how the guy got it is disputed of course. lol

The story makes no sense though. If he went to another universe, why didn't he get more albums from the Beatles and album covers too, and news articles about the Beatles being still together as well? lol. That would be a lot more convincing.

[Winston]

Btw, I just watched "The Last Testament of George Harrison" and listened to his 90 minute story with clips. And wow. It is very interesting and engaging. The tale will keep you hooked. Even though people say that voice is not that of George Harrison, still, it sounds like a very honest and genuine account by an insider about how Paul died and was replaced and what the whole band went through. It certainly sounds like an authentic account, regardless of whose voice was on it. I would definitely recommend watching it.

Sometimes, whistleblowers have to discredit themselves deliberately or label their account as fiction in order to avoid harsh penalties to their family and loved ones from the powers that be. That may be what happened in this case. These tapes were supposedly recorded by George Harrison after someone tried to assassinate him in 1999. He didn't want the truth to die with him in case another assassin was successful in offing him, so he made these audio tapes of the true story of the Beatles and their cover up. The tapes are played with video clips and images to accompany the narrative in this video. Here is the link to watch it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rhjtly9KTqE

[Winston]

Comparison photo sets between paul and faul. What you think? Anyone who looks at both photo sets can see that they are different people, unless they are blind or in denial or hate all conspiracies no matter how true or obvious like globetrotter does.

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

[Winston]

Check out these side by side comparison videos of paul vs faul. They show a big personality difference too, not just a facial difference. Notice how Paul on the left acts bashful, charming and innocent. But Faul on the right acts cocky, arrogant, and defensive. So not only are their faces different but their personalities are very different too! This is very revealing and says it all.