Paul McCartney as a rigorous intuition subject.

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: Paul McCartney as a rigorous intuition subject.

Postby identity » Tue Sep 26, 2017 5:40 pm

You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
We should never forget Galileo being put before the Inquisition.
It would be even worse if we allowed scientific orthodoxy to become the Inquisition.

Richard Smith, Editor in Chief of the British Medical Journal 1991-2004,
in a published letter to Nature
identity
 
Posts: 707
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2015 5:00 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Paul McCartney as a rigorous intuition subject.

Postby elfismiles » Fri Apr 27, 2018 11:53 am

YouTube Algorhythms just reunited me with a "Paul is Dead" conspiracy "documentary" that I had been enjoying and recently was remembering that I'd wanted to finish.

I probably came across it here in this thread or another on RI. I really liked the non serious relaxed style / approach...

Who Is This Now? (A Paul Is Dead documentary)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_BNldAM_8fo

Meanwhile... another article probably found at RI ...

Paul McCartney, Conspiracy Theorist
The Pessimist, 11/07/13
Image
https://thepessimist.kinja.com/paul-mcc ... 1459181521

Paul is dead
Post by marykmusic » 13 Mar 2006 17:20
viewtopic.php?f=24&t=6978
User avatar
elfismiles
 
Posts: 8511
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:46 pm
Blog: View Blog (4)

Re: Paul McCartney as a rigorous intuition subject.

Postby Belligerent Savant » Fri Apr 27, 2018 12:17 pm

.

Belligerent Savant » Sat Nov 23, 2013 5:10 pm wrote:.

http://thepessimist.kinja.com/paul-mcca ... 1459181521

The comments section below the above-linked article are worth perusing...

Image

Paul McCartney. So much has been written about the man who casts one of the largest shadows over 20th-century pop culture that it might seem there's nothing left to discover or say about the man. He was/is The Cute Beatle. The Most Successful Musician of All Time. The Tireless Animal Rights Activist. The Walrus, too.

And now, according to former New York state legislator, civil rights activist, and early Warren Commission critic Mark Lane, you can add yet another title to the already overloaded Sir Paul: JFK Conspiracy Theorist.

I happened upon the surprising account of the young McCartney's interest in JFK's murder quite unexpectedly, while doing research for a satirical Choose Your Own Adventure parody our company was creating. (Free ebook for Gawker readers here.)
Paul McCartney. So much has been written about the man who casts one of the largest shadows over 20th-century pop culture that it might seem there's nothing left to discover or say about the man. He was/is The Cute Beatle. The Most Successful Musician of All Time. The Tireless Animal Rights Activist. The Walrus, too.

And now, according to former New York state legislator, civil rights activist, and early Warren Commission critic Mark Lane, you can add yet another title to the already overloaded Sir Paul: JFK Conspiracy Theorist.

I happened upon the surprising account of the young McCartney's interest in JFK's murder quite unexpectedly, while doing research for a satirical Choose Your Own Adventure parody our company was creating. (Free ebook for Gawker readers here.)
Given Mark Lane's considerable contributions to the historic record of the Kennedy assassination, I felt duty-bound to also read his recently-released autobiography. And it was there, amidst his recollections of his early works with the heroic Freedom Riders, and his controversial later involvement with the Peoples Temple, that I learned something I'd never known about Paul McCartney. That the Cute Beatle, at the height of his popularity and creative powers, did not believe Oswald killed President Kennedy.

MEET THE BEATLE

Lane recounts his first encounter with the then 24-year-old McCartney at a small, private party in London in 1966.

While living in London during that time I attended a small party of about a dozen people. One of the was Paul McCartney. He walked up to me, offered his hand, and told me his name. The introduction was hardly necessary as he was one of the most famous people in the world...

He said, "I understand you have written a book about Kennedy's assassination. I would like to read it."
When Lane explained to McCartney that his was still in manuscript form, and that he had only two mimeographed copies, McCartney replied, "If I could just borrow your copy I would keep it safe and get it back to you in a few days."

Lane obliged his request. A few days later, McCartney returned the manuscript without comment, much to Lane's disappointment. But that night, as he was editing it, his phone rang, and a voice began, "Well he could'na done it, could he?"
Lane, not recognizing the voice and annoyed at the interruption, brusquely replied, "Who is this? And who couldn't have done what?"

"Sorry. Paul, Paul McCartney, we met the other night. And I meant that Oswald could not have killed President Kennedy."

Lane soon learned that his as-yet-unpublished book had profoundly moved McCartney, who wished to discuss it further over dinner. When their dinner at an obscure Polish restaurant was interrupted by a nonagenarian fan seeking an autograph for her granddaughter, McCartney signed her menu, "Happy dinner, Paul McCartney, friend of Mark Lane." Their conversation about Kennedy's murder, and Oswald's possible innocence, continued past closing hours. Yet inevitably, word of McCartney's presence in the restaurant spread quickly, and soon, a crowd of 200 people waited out front for their chance to mob him.

The two escaped by the back door, rushed to McCartney's car, and parted ways at Lane's London apartment. Yet Paul McCartney was not yet done with Mark Lane.

PAPERBACK WRITER

Lane's book Rush to Judgment was published in August 13, 1966, only one week after of The Beatles released their groundbreaking Revolver, and quickly became the #1 bestselling nonfiction book in the country. To say it was controversial is a fantastic understatement. It was an outright declaration of war on the trustworthiness of both government and establishment media.

Some praised the work. Norman Mailer, reviewing the book for The New York Times, noted:

"...Mark Lane has come up with 400 pages of facts on the Warren Commission's inquiry into the murders of President John F. Kennedy, Officer J.D. Tippit, and Lee Harvey Oswald, and they are somewhat staggering. If one-tenth of them should prove to be significant, then the work of the Warren Commission will be judged by history to be a scandal worse than the Teapot Dome."
Yet much of the establishment media, particularly conservative establishment media, was fiercely critical of the book. Though his publication, the National Review, praised the book, founder William F. Buckley didn't even bother to conceal his outright contempt for it and Lane's "left liberal" political work with "possibly Communist-infiltrated" civil rights groups, on a December 1966 episode of public affair program "Firing Line":



Lane was, by his account, more than used to right-wing criticisms and attacks. He was less prepared for the new and steady stream of death threats that followed him throughout his Rush to Judgment book tour. He recounts keeping those mailed to him in a file folder called "Death Threats", which he stopped supplementing after it had swollen to 250.

THE TRAGICAL HISTORY TOUR

Yet Lane was undeterred, and decided to double down by hiring a director and film crew, so they could interview key assassination witnesses in Dallas while memories were still fresh. Many refused to speak with him, citing warnings from FBI agents and Dallas police not to say anything in contradiction of the official report. Yet others, like Acquilla Clemons, whose eyewitness account of the Tippit shooting is at total variance with the official account, obliged his request, despite the threats. And the fear in her eyes is palpable:



It was while editing the film version of Rush to Judgment in London that Lane once again crossed paths with Paul McCartney. McCartney had learned of the upcoming documentary, and, as Lane recounts:

(McCartney) asked if there was going to be any music, and I said that the director and I had not even thought about that yet.

"Well," he said, "I would like to write a musical score for the film, as a present for you."

I was astonished by that generous offer and speechless for a moment, but then I cautioned him that the subject matter was very controversial in the United States and that he might be jeopardizing his future.

He added, "One day my children are going to ask me what I did with my life, and I can't just answer that I was a Beatle."

The generosity of McCartney's offer can hardly be overstated. Here was perhaps the world's most popular entertainer, at the very peak of his creative powers, offering to lend his talent and star power (and risk his own standing with many fans) to help infuse Lane's deeply troubling documentary with his trademark emotional songcraft.

LET IT NOT BE.

Unfortunately, despite McCartney's insistence, it was not to be. Lane's director, Emile de Antonio, ultimately vetoed the Cute Beatle's involvement. De Antonio believed a score by Paul McCartney wouldn't likely boost its popularity, and would prevent it from being "stark and didactic."

In June of 1967, the documentary version of Rush to Judgment opened in select theaters to only modest box office success. That same month, McCartney fared slightly better with his band's release of Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band. Nearly 50 years later, we can only wonder what might have ultimately been created had the skeptical McCartney been allowed to lend his talents to a film about the possible conspiracy behind the Kennedy assassination.

(That is, if it really was Paul McCartney...)

This post was written by Despair, Inc. founder Justin Sewell. You can download a free PDF of his Lose Your Own Adventure book here.
User avatar
Belligerent Savant
 
Posts: 5217
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:58 pm
Location: North Atlantic.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Paul McCartney as a rigorous intuition subject.

Postby Belligerent Savant » Mon Aug 23, 2021 10:25 pm




Hello! Today I decided to make this video in which I got a little out of the channel's theme. We will talk about the controversial "Paul is Dead" rumor. The purpose of this video is not to impose one or another position but simply to pour out the information that is not here, since there are those who have approached the subject seriously, only that for some reason they have never stood out on YouTube. This video is nothing more than paraphrases of the articles of a researcher on the subject. The Spanish Lady Ruth, and with this I just open the door for more people to read her articles, follow her on Facebook, and if she convinces them, buy her book "The Great Mystery of the Beatles: Did Paul McCartney die in 1966?"

Carlessi and Gavazzeni forensic report:
(Written) https://blog.ladyruth.es/informe-carl...
(Video) https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x3l...
More scientific evidence (Henry Truby, Daniele Gullá and Elena Marchetti):
(Written) https://blog.ladyruth.es/mas-pruebas-...
(Daniele Gullá video) https://drive.google.com/drive/folder...
Height Analysis: https://blog.ladyruth.es/asombroso-ho...
Left-Handed Analysis: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1PWNY...
Analysis of 60if: https://blog.ladyruth.es/la-conspirac...
Lady Ruth's book: https://www.amazon.com.mx/gran-mister...

This famous rumor that so much refuses to die was born back in 1969 with an anonymous call to DJ Russ Gibb of the Detroit radio station MKNR. The anonymous who identified himself as Tom and said that Paul died in 1966 and was replaced by an impersonator. He then asked her to play the track Revolution 9 so that the phrase "Turn me on dead man" would be heard. That strange call was the first time such a thing was said, although the rumor became world-class by Roby Yonge, a WABC announcer who has since dedicated his show to talking about just that. He was promptly fired but did not give up and went to Henry Truby, director of the University of Miami's linguistic research laboratory and an expert in spectrometer speech recognition. He asked him to do a study of Paul's voice and Truby concluded that they were different people plus he couldn't say anything on television. Everything remained a mere rumor until it regained strength again in 2009 with the publication of anthropometric studies by forensics Gariella Carlessi and Francesco Gavazzeni under the protection of their mentor Giovanni Pierucci. In their craniometric study, they found interesting discrepancies between Paul McCartney from one date to another, in addition to the discovery of photographic manipulation to make one Paul look like another. Then, in 2012, an anthropometric expert named Daniele Gullá carried out a new study in addition to the previous one, in addition to a new voice analysis and the 3D reconstruction of both languages, concluding in an 80% probability that Paul had been replaced. That same year, the expert graphologist Elena Marchetti also analyzed several of Paul's writings, concluding that they were different spellings and that after a certain year he notably changed his signature. But in addition to all this there are other more reflective than scientific analyzes made by Lady Ruth herself where she addresses issues such as Paul's height, photographic manipulation and left-handedness. Analysis that leads us to think “Even though all this is true, how is it possible that an impostor has remained for so many years? It would not be enough to have an incredible resemblance. After all, he has given multiple interviews. He has spoken of his life. You should also know Paul's story, right? But it turns out that no, apparently Paul McCartney does not know his own story.
Finally we address the issue of George Harrison's alleged will, which is obviously false, as it has blunders, wrong dates, manipulated interviews, but above all that it says that a fortuitous accident that supposedly killed Paul was put together a whole campaign to hide it arguing which was to prevent suicides from fans in love. The reality is that before the film was released on the internet, a page called 60if had appeared with similar statements, but according to those close to it, it was altered at least twice, leaving it mixed with terrible English and implausible data. Then it was censored and suddenly a movie appears that is given all the publicity. Very suspicious. From this we inquire into the true reason for Paul's death and impersonation.

#PaulIsDead #PaulEstaMuerto #PaulMcCartney

00:00 Introduction
00:36 Origin of Rumor
01:41 Henry Truby
03:00 Forensic Analysis
10:33 Other Scientific Evidence
11:53 Height, photo manipulation and left-handedness
15:05 Paul McCartney doesn't know his own story
17:49 The book
18:19 George's Testament and the 60if
24:47 Why?
29:54 Final

User avatar
Belligerent Savant
 
Posts: 5217
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:58 pm
Location: North Atlantic.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Previous

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 44 guests