#1 - Beatles HEIGHT Discrepancies

        I'll begin by showing height comparisons which are specifically focused on Paul. This all by itself should provide enough evidence of fraud and deceit. How they did this is not completely known. We have words such as "simulacra", "cloning", "synthetic humans", "robotoids", and so on, but exactly what was happening here is still a bit of a mystery. What we can clearly see, though, is they are too similar each time to be explainable as human doubles (even with surgery because that doesn't account for the other nuances), yet too different to be the exact same person. Human replication of whatever form usually yields a 95-97% identical copy, and that is what we are seeing here.

        Not only are the heights different, but as I'll show on subsequent pages, so are the shapes and lengths of his eyebrows, the different types of earlobes, and the size and angles of his teeth. But that will be for later. For now, let's concentrate on the height differentiations, and focus on Paul.

Here is a comparison of two different heights for Paul in 1963. What can account for this?
Some say "shoe lifts", but those don't cause his arms, legs and torso to be longer, too.

Are your eyes playing tricks on you, or was it "them"?

Now compare the short height on the left once again in 1963 with the taller height in the middle and on the right in 1964.
Did he have a sudden growth spurt of several inches in less than a year?
If you think it's possible, wait until I show what happens later.
His heights fluctuate like a yo-yo all through Beatlemania, as they did through Wings, and as they are continuing to do in the Macca era.

Paul can't be more than about 5' 6" here.
The girls aren't wearing heels, but he is.

Now compare his short height in 1963 again, with how much taller he is in 1965.
Taller even than in some pictures of 1964.

Here is a comparison of them on stage in 1963, 1964 and 1965.
I never find the very short Paul performing on stage.
He was only involved in this mess for a few months in the Spring of 1963, apparently only for photos.

This is a comparison of the short 1963 Paul,
then taller in 1964, and taller yet in 1965.

Another concern is the way he flip-flopped as to whether he had rhythm and could dance and sway to the beat of the music.
Notice how un-rhythmic he is in this video from 1964:

Now notice how rhythmic he is in this 1965 performance of Ticket To Ride -- as well as his height proximity to the others.

And also this performance of Help! -- Notice a difference in his face?

They look much older here to me.
It was either very unflattering lighting, or we were being tested.
I'm from this generation, and I have to say we flunked miserably.

In 1966, he isn't as tall anymore.... most of the time.
His stage presence fluctuates from rhythmic to non-rhythmic or semi-rhythmic.

He begins to wear dark glass in some of the performances.
Sometimes he's sitting during a performance, instead of standing.
Is it to hide the fact that he's shorter than he was the year before?

Many will say it's obvious it is no longer Paul because he's smoking right-handed at the L.A. Interview:

But they apparently either don't notice or just don't mention he does the same during the Memphis Interview, and those same people usually believe this is the 'real' Paul.:

     Appearing in the 1967 Hello, Goodbye performance,
he is once again very non-rhythmic, with a stiff, uncoordinated style.

And why did they keep blurring his face?
Could it be because we had never seen this particular Paul from the early 60s perform on television,
and was he only in photo shoots before this?

From here on to the current era of 2010+, he fluctuates as to his ability to dance, be coordinated, and sway to the beat in synch with the music, as well as showing up short one day and tall the next. In all the eras, he also fluctuated in his ability to sing well, to sing high or low, and to be hyper-active, flirtatious or subdued. This seems to have more to do with something besides being in different "moods"


"Different Eyebrows"