Paul Is Dead

                This theory has been going on for more than 40 years now. It states that Paul McCartney of the Beatles was killed, most version say in a car crash, and replaced by an imposter. This sound farfetched, but many are very adamant about the proof being in the pudding. They say that the Beatles have left clues through many albums and that there is physical evidence to top it off. We’ll be looking at some of this “proof” today and making our own conclusions.

Facial Comparison

                This site here: http://digilander.libero.it/jamespaul/fc1.html did some interesting comparisons of McCartney’s faces. Here is pre-conspiracy McCartneys compared to each other.

                At first I was impressed. This seems like good evidence. The two look nothing alike. Then I made one of two old pictures of me. Now I am far less impressed. I really don’t even look like the same person. A very slight angle change and change in expression makes that much of a difference.

Height

                According to the same site (has some very good theories on it, so I suggest you look at it in its entirety) Paul’s height significantly changed. I just don’t see the change as significant enough to say that it’s conclusive of anything.

Eye Color

                Same reference site again. As the site says, Paul McCartney had hazel eyes. However, the later Paul (“Faul”, as many people call him) seems to have green, gray, or brown eyes. As a guy with dark hazel eyes myself I can say that in some conditions my eyes can look brown, green and once or twice I’ve seen them look gray. Therefore I can’t give anything to this evidence.

                That’s the last of what I’ll show from that site however, as the rest I just can’t even begin to agree with. The writer mentions plastic surgery and goes on to show how that could be true. The author is very good, but I don’t agree with the evidence.

Album Covers

                People have theories for almost every single Beatle’s album cover. I’m just going to cover the interesting ones. I’ll put the link I got most of this part from in the references, so check it out for some more.

                Help!: The album cover for “Help!” shows the Beatle’s attempting to spell something out. It looks to me like it says “TYKS” to me. But some conspiracy theorists say they are spelling out “NUJV”, which stands for “New Unknown James Vocalist” (James being Paul’s real first name). This theory sucks. I don’t even see the letters “NUJV”, and even if I did why would they stand for something uncreative like that?

                Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band: This is my personal favorite album by the Beatles and also the one with the most rumors. First off, people say it looks like a grave site, which I admit it does, but that’s nothing really. Secondly, people say the yellow flowers spell out the word “Paul?”. I just don’t see it. There’s way to many theories involving this album for me to cover them all, but they are all so ridiculous. I recommend you go to the link in references and look for yourself.

                Let It Be: On the cover of this album, Paul is the only one shown with a Red Background. Also he is the only one not looking off to the left side of the album. Of course this is “conclusive evidence”! Great clue that is…

                Original Yesterday and Today cover: On the original cover of Yesterday and Today there are only two decapitated dolls in the photo, both of which are pointing towards Paul. Also, a burnt doll head is held up next to Paul’s, perhaps a reference to how his dead body looked after his car crash?

Back Masking:

                When it comes to back masking, I am very hard to convince. If you reverse something, you can pretty much hear whatever you want. In the references there is a link with many “Beatle’s Backmasking” samples. Listen to ‘em, formulate your own conclusions. I’ve made mine.

Final Word:

                Obviously I didn’t cover everything, if you have something else discuss it in the comments or become a fan on Facebook and we can discuss it there. I personally feel this theory needs to die. Paul is still Paul. He isn’t dead and he never was.

***Some Images Were Removed From This Page To Avoid Potential Lawsuits and/or Shutdowns. My apologies***

 

References:

http://homepages.tesco.net/harbfamily/opd/album.html

http://homepages.tesco.net/harbfamily/opd/backmasking.html

         

Tucson, Arizona

On January 8, 2011, a man by the name of Jared Lee Loughner opened fire in a supermarket parking lot in an attempt to kill congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords. Instead he killed six, and injured about fourteen more, Giffords being one of those not killed. A real tragedy for sure, but now everyone's playing the blame game. So who's right and who's wrong? Let's take a look.

One of the things about this that really bugs me is the way the press covers it. It makes the six people killed sound like an after-thought, with the exception of  United States District Court for the District of Arizona Chief Judge John Roll (Try saying that ten times fast) who was also killed. News reports basically give this sort of feeling: "On January 8 a gunman shot and seriously injured congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords and killed Judge John Roll. Gabrielle Giffords, a Democrat, is in the hospital in critical condition but is expected to survive. Oh yeah, and five others were killed." Gee...thanks. I want to know more about the other five! I know one was the eight year old girl, she got some coverage but those other four should receive just as much mention. They're human too aren't they? I haven't even heard their names. To top it off, Loughner is going to be charged with a number of offenses, and one of the most serious of these offenses is "Attempted Assassination of a Member of Congress". Why is this even an offense name? Shouldn't it just be "Attempted Murder"? I don't ever hear charges of "Attempted Assassination of a Construction Worker" or "Attempted Assassination of a Walmart Greeter". I hope that if, God forbid, I was ever in a mass massacare that I didn't die along with somebody famous because nobody would never know I existed. Shoot a normal person and you might face the death penalty, shoot a member of Congress and you get charged with an offense of a special sort and your name is smeared forever.

A 63-year old man by the name of Eric Fuller who survived the shooting is quoted as saying,

"It looks like Palin, Beck, Sharron Angle and the rest got their first target. Their wish for Second Amendment activism has been fulfilled."

How mature. Let's all blame the tea-party members. First of all, Loughner was a registered Independant. Second of all, he has had hatred for politics in general since before the Tea Party and stopped paying attention to going-ons completely two years ago. He didn't listen to the radio and didn't watch the news.

On the opposite end of that entire spectrum we have Rush Limbaugh saying that:

"What Mr. Loughner knows is that he has the full support of a major political party in this country. He's sitting there in jail. He knows what's going on, he knows that...the Democrat party is attempting to find anybody but him to blame. He knows if he plays his cards right, he's just a victim. He's the latest in a never-ending parade of victims brought about by the unfairness of America...this guy clearly understands he's getting all the attention and he understands he's got a political party doing everything it can, plus a local sheriff doing everything that they can to make sure he's not convicted of murder - but something lesser."

This took me a long time to make sense of. But what Limbaugh is basically saying is that the Democrats are going to make it into a larger conspiracy...which some are already. Blaming the Tea Party is an example of this. However, this is unfair to think that they're going to obstruct justice and in no way at all will anybody be trying to lessen the conviction. I will be utterly shocked if Loughner doesn't get executed, if not killed by an inmate.

Sarah Palin gave a few words about the shooting. You can read them or listen to her say them here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/12/sarah-palin-arizona-shooting-statement_n_807833.html. She does make a good point with her counter to people saying "Political Debates have gotten more heated in recent years, causing increased violence". She says,

"But when was it less heated? Back in those "calm days" when political figures literally settled their  differences with dueling pistols? In an ideal world all discourse would be civil and all disagreements cordial. But our Founding Fathers knew they weren't designing a system for perfect men and women. If men and women were angels, there would be no need for government.”

            After her small speech, can you guess what people did? Did everyone become friends? Did people understand each other? Did they compliment her speech? Of course not. Instead everybody went up in flames over her use of the term “Blood Libel”, which people say is a derogatory term to Jewish people as it brings back memories of a harsher time. Some people really take this stuff too intensely. I’ll admit it wasn’t the best word choice, as it means a religious group murdering children for their blood. But, though it is admitted usually used with Jewish people, it is not specifically targeted at them. Can’t we just listen to people for once and let words be words?

***Some Images Were Removed From This Page To Avoid Potential Lawsuits and/or Shutdowns. My apologies***

            So here’s what I think, nobody is to blame for this except for Loughner. This was not a Tea Party attempt at gaining power, this was not a Democratic scandal. This wasn’t even an Anarchy movement. This was one guy who believed the Government was lying to him and in his own mentally disturbed mind he brought “Justice”.

References:

http://www.democracynow.org/seo/2011/1/14/tucson_shooting_survivor_it_looks_like

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Tucson_shooting

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/11/rush-limbaugh-jared-loughner-full-support-democrat_n_807543.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jared_Lee_Loughner

http://www.necn.com/01/14/11/Police-make-major-find-in-Tucson-shootin/landing_nation.html?blockID=391183&feedID=4207



Flat Earth?

          Right off the bat you are all thinking I'm crazy for even talking about this. Christopher Columbus already proved the earth was round, right? Well, according to some people the answer is NO.
         
          First off let me say that to believe any of this theory you must believe every Apollo mission and satellite image has been hoaxed by NASA. Some people do believe this, I'm not one of them. In the Summer of 1838 a man by the name of Samuel Rowbotham waded out into a straight, six mile stretch of the Old Bedford River. With a telescope he watched a boat sail down the river. According to Rowbotham, he was able to watch the boat for the entire six miles, despite the fact that it should have fallen about ten feet below his line of vision had the earth been spherical. This experiment has been repeated many times, and the results never seem to stay conclusive. Sometimes the boat disappears, sometimes it doesn't. In 1904 Lady Elizabeth Anne Blount did a similar experiment with a white sheet and a camera. From six miles away, the camera was able to photograph the white sheet. Sounds like some good evidence right? Well, honestly I can't write it off. But I don't call these things an "experiment" as they don;'t exactly follow the scientific method.

           A notable Flat-Earthian was William Carpenter, who wrote Theoretical Astronomy Examined and Exposed - Proving the Earth not a Globe. Sounds like a real page-turner...and it comes in eight parts. Whoop-dee-doo. One of his arguments is:

"There are rivers that flow for hundreds of miles towards the level of the sea without falling more than a few feet — notably, the Nile, which, in a thousand miles, falls but a foot. A level expanse of this extent is quite incompatible with the idea of the Earth's convexity. It is, therefore, a reasonable proof that Earth is not a globe."

          O.o Really? Because the rivers can flow for miles without falling much, this is proof the earth is flat? Honestly what kind of nutcase is this guy? First of all, if you put a ball on even the slightest slope, if the surface is smooth the ball will roll. Slopes don't need to be that much and the Nile is not exactly a fast moving river. Second of all, how does this even prove the Earth is flat? Doesn't this actually prove the earth is round? Think about it, if it's on a flat surface and it moves either A. Your surface is not flat or B. It's alive. Maybe I don't understand this, I don't know.

          Your homework for today is to go here http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?board=10.0 and read some of these people's posts and arguments. They're good for a laugh if nothing else. This project features flawed math, rejection of evidence, failed science, tossing of the scientific method, ignorance of history, and frequent denial. If somebody can give me some real evidence I'll listen, but until then I think this theory should be squished flatter than...well, flatter than a Flat Earth.

***Some Images Were Removed From This Page To Avoid Potential Lawsuits and/or Shutdowns. My apologies***

References:

Wikipedia

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Experimental+Evidence

http://heritage-key.com/blogs/prad/flat-earth-theory-ancient-greeks-debunk-modern-myth

No more

 I will no longer be doing posts on Wednesday. It's just too hard to maintain and frankly, I don't feel my following is strong enough for me to take time out of my schedule to update it. Saturday posts will continue. I may bring these back in the Summer, depending on various factors.

Happy New Year!

Happy New Year to everyone! I'm not going to write a full article because it would need to appropriately be New Years theamed and frankly, I got nothing. Instead, here is a link to a Snopes article about all the things you should do on New Years day to ensure good luck befalls your household (yeah right):

http://www.snopes.com/holidays/newyears/beliefs.asp