Different teeth, chin scar in a different location, a mark on his left cheek in the picture on the left which isn't in the picture on the right, etc. (Thanks to Carlos Santillan at FFD for this pic)
This photo comparison is on the plasticmacca blog, on a page along with a "whistle blower's" letter about internet shills who are paid to join or create forums for the purposes of spewing out disinformation on certain key topics.
Where are his eyebrows in the picture on the left?
Which one does Paul in the middle look more like?
So who is Paul on the left then? Is he one of the many multiple Paul McCartneys that were around since the beginning?
Do they look familiar?
Notice facial differences in all these Beatle Pauls, and a difference in which ear is lower. Notice that sometimes the eyebrows, noses and chins are much different, too.
What can even be said about comparing these 2 from 1963 and 1965?
And since we had a visitor at FFD who commented Paul may have been standing further down on the roof incline than John, there is this comparison, too:
Or else he must have grown 8 or 9 inches in 2 years. PID claims he wasn't wearing his lifts in the first picture. It's plain to see he's barefoot in the second, so that means no lifts there, either.
Pictures are admissible in a court of law as proof and verification of someone's identity or lack thereof. What would the verdict be here? Is Paul in the first picture the same man as Paul in the second picture?
Here's a couple more sets of non-matching Pauls, and the reasons I see for saying this.
Different hair, noses, lips, and angle of jawline, and size of chin and face. Also different eyebrows. Ear placement not a match.
Neither of these two seem to match each other or either of the above two, imo. Again with different hair for each, and he has a much longer, thicker nose and fuller lips on the right, plus thicker eyebrows as well. Earlobes are not a match here.
Another non-matching Paul duo. Some just have a thicker nose and brows than others.
In this video of all 4 versions of We Can Work It Out, I see two different Pauls and Johns. I haven't looked very closely yet at Ringo or George, but look at these differences:
I would say the far left and far right are the same Paul, but not the one in the middle. I occasionally seem to see this one; he has a thicker, longer nose, and usually wears his hair parted in the middle, or just combed straight forward. He also seems to have a different size and shape of head, and his hair is much different than the other two.
In that one's version of the video, there are no good close-ups, and he never shows his teeth very much when he sings or smiles. From far away, his body appears thicker, too, than the other Paul's. Notice the difference in their faces. On the right he has more fat padding.
He looks like this Paul from the Fake Ear Alert thread:
First two versions seem to both have the inward-angled upper left molars.
He's finger-plucking the strings here, so that's supposed to mean it's "Faul".
But in the other two versions, he seems to be using a guitar pick.
This is the 'other' John (imo), with the different Paul.
Here's a great example of how identical they can seem when viewed separately, yet it becomes more obvious when viewed together that they aren't 100% the same.
Not only are their ears at different angles, the one on the right has a larger Adam's Apple (PID says Paul had an undetectable Adam's Apple), and his neck is visibly larger. Notice how his collar is tighter around his neck than the Paul on the left? As well as the different freckle patterns on their faces and necks? It also looks possible the one on the left has detached earlobes, while on the right his are attached. There's a mark a ways down on his face under his eye on the left that isn't there in the picture on the right.
The infamous Italian Wired article purporting to show these two were the same Paul, completely misses noticing the glaringly-different eyebrows! Are those even the same mouths, noses, ears and chin clefts?
Why would they choose to use the picture on the left which is partly shaded, and difficult to decipher? Were they hoping to slip all this past us, and that we just wouldn't take the trouble to look into it further?