Jump to content
The Education Forum

Paul McCartney

Jon Pickering

Recommended Posts

There are two accredited scientific studies that were conducted - in accordance with the wishes of a multitude of McCartney and Beatle fans - to determine if McCartney had been replaced with an imposter/stand-in near the end of 1966. The first one was a study of recordings claimed by the record company to be of Paul, but in fact revealed three different voices, instead, doing the singing.

This study was performed by the head of the University of Miami's language and linquistics department, Dr. Henry Truby, in 1969. Following the announcement of his findings, he later clammed up citing that's all he could say on the issue.

The second time science was applied to the 'was paul replaced' mystery was when 'Wired' magazine on-line commissioned a study from accredited computer and biometrics forensics experts Galvazenni and Carlesi. The Italian team, contrary to what 'Wired' had assumed would be confirmation that McCartney was the same person before and after 1966, found an 83% likelihood that an imposter was in fact playing the role of the Beatle after 1966.

Nothing besides unproven rhetoric has ever been offered in refutation of these two studies. The only applied science around this issue found a switch had been made. Where is the countervailing evidence to these accredited reports.




Edited by Jon Pickering
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in

Sign In Now
  • Create New...