Saturday, September 19, 2009

Not Fauling for it: facial features give Faul McCartney away

In Doubles & Disguises, I posted about how an out of place eyebrow could give a double away.
... As the CIA's top "master of disguise" for spies and double agents, Bob Barron was well aware of the stakes as he created hundreds of faces and new identities. One suspicious-looking eyebrow or a misplaced ear could lead to fatal results...
Claire Shipman, 'Master of Disguise' Changes Many Lives, Nov. 29, 2005,

Below is a comp of Paul from 1964 & "Paul" from 1967 ("Penny Lane" video). Notice the difference in the eyebrows.

Paul's lips were fairly full with a pointed cupid's bow. In contrast, Faul's lips are thin and have a flat cupid's bow. This comp of Paul from 1964 during the filming of "A Hard Day's Night," vs. Faul from 1968 highlights the difference:

According to forensics experts, "Paul's" lips were "suddenly stretched," which was not possible, even with surgery.
"Compared to the previous picture, that of Sgt Pepper's show clearly that the commessura lip, that is the line formed by the lips of the two, it was suddenly stretched. Which obviously is not possible and that the whiskers cannot camouflage. In other words, the phenomenon is all too frequent these days, the lips can be inflated and increased in volume, but the width of the lip commessura cannot vary that much. May be slight, but this is not the case for the photos examined: here the difference between the before and after is too strong to have been caused by any surgery.”
Andriola and Alessandra Di Fabio Gigante, “Ask Who Was the ‘Beatle,’” July 15, 2009,

Paul's ears had attached earlobes. Faul's vary quite a lot. Sometimes they appear to be unattached; sometimes they appear to be false. Please see more comparisons of Faul's false ears.
According to forensics experts, the tragus was also different.
Technically called trago [tragus]. All we have two, one by ear, but the characteristics are different for every human being. ‘In Germany, a recognition procedure craniometric, identification of the right ear is even tantamount to fingerprint, ie the collection of fingerprints,’ recalls Carlesi. But what is trago? It is the small cartilage covered with skin that overhangs the entrance to the ear and ear canal, like the whole ear, cannot be changed surgically. How then to explain the differences between the right ear of Paul McCartney in a previous snapshot to 1966 and probably a built in the late nineties? It is not only to betray trago a different conformation as well as other parts, just above the ear canal entrance, measurements and dell'antelice propeller. Things that ordinary mortals might seem irrelevant or unclear, but instead, every day, allowing the experts to locate and identify persons, bodies, photographs.
Andriola and Alessandra Di Fabio Gigante, “Ask Who Was the ‘Beatle,’” July 15, 2009,

According to forensic scientists, Faul's jawline also differed too much from Paul's to be the same person:
“The mandibular curve between the two sets of photos showed a discrepancy of over 6 percent, well beyond the threshold of error. But there was more. Changed the development of the mandibular profile: before 1966 each side of the jaw is composed of two curves Net, since 1967 appears to be a single curve. There is therefore a curve morphological different.”
Andriola and Alessandra Di Fabio Gigante, “Ask Who Was the ‘Beatle,’” July 15, 2009,

Another giveaway that Paul was replaced is that "his" eye color changed. Paul's eyes were brown/hazel, while Faul's are green. Please see Don't it make your brown eyes *green* for more comparisons.

[A]lways under the mustache of the McCartney Sgt Pepper's, maybe it was trying to hide something else: what the experts call it the nose-spinal or sottonasale [nasal spine]. This is the point between the two nostrils where the nose begins to fall off the face: "This is also in this case a distinctive feature that medicine cannot alter surgery. It can change the shape of the nose but not the nose-cord," says Gabriella Carlesi. "And McCartney from the first group of photos and the second point that clearly varies.”
Andriola and Alessandra Di Fabio Gigante, “Ask Who Was the ‘Beatle,’” July 15, 2009,

Paul's nose was slightly upturned, whereas Faul's was not:

Looks like Faul has been "sculpted" into Paul, but his nose is bent. It is the little details that sometimes give the double away.

[Please support this blog by clicking on our sponsors' ads ~ Thanks!]

As mentioned in Doubles & Disguises, the tip of Faul's nose is a different color form the rest of his skin. It appears that the nose-tip is intended to give the end of Faul's nose that slightly up-turned look that Paul's had. Faul wouldn't pass inspection by an observant border guard, but he has managed to fool a majority of the masses that he is the original Paul McCartney.

Teeth are considered unique to the individual, and dental records are used to establish identity. These are not the same sets of teeth.

The head shape is also different, which was revealed in this comp by "Anonymous." Using the basses as a scale (10.5" width), he showed that Faul's head is "taller" than Paul's was.

Paul had "singer's chin" - see how the throat is different below. Paul is at the top; Faul is on the bottom:


The Luciferian Deception

Reptilians, Cetaceans and Frequency Wars on Planet Earth


  1. Thanks again! This is great!

    I suggest the comps of heads with the brown suit should be done here Faul's head is made to be exactly the height of Paul. Sometimes comps done are not exact and this one is not: if one is to compare the features. Yes, yes, I see he's different, but because in early days there were times when his youth and rough likeness were close to McCartney when McCartney made certain movements, he was not a bad fool-job.

    That's why we need a few exact head-height comps; even though the comps at PID forum of Sgt Pepper's are good, they are not exact head size, and they should be ... AS WELL as showing the fact Bill (?) [Faul] has a larger head, but at least some should be exact compsize.

    Best wishes.

  2. I first suspected something was not the same when I heard Hey Jude. I thought Paul's voice was not the same,not even close. After reading your blogs,and many hours of research,It's clear that Faul is not Paul. You guys are really alert!!! Great Job!!!!!! Frank

  3. Thanks, Frank! This post talks about how there were 3 different sonagrams for Yesterday, Penny Lane, & Hey Jude.

  4. One thing that stands out like a sore thumb is the drastic change in Paul's personality after 1966. Two different people!!!

  5. If you look at videos done of him on You Tube it's even more apparent that Faul has had plastic surgery. For fans who only looked at stills and record covers it's alot easier to deceive; but his interviews and closeups on videos give him away. In one video if you look at the skin around the eyes on the sides of his face it looks really fake, as do some other videos. More telling is the fact that no one can understand why Paul McCartney would marry the women he has and he always lets his fans down on this. The reason is because it's a different person. Paul McCartney would be English well earned royalty...Faul McCartney did a great job too, but again you get back to his marriages...and PM wouldn't marry the same types.

    Even so, the question is how do you get so much talent to replace so much talent? Must have been meant to be to have two such talented musicians end up in the same role.

    Also, I read or heard in a documentary somewhere that they think there's a 3rd double and that seems possible as well. Again this is most apparent in videos, one of which I saw that not only wasn't Paul McCartney, but he didn't even seem like his double, in fact something was definitely off about him or perhaps it was a closer look at the full body of the double; not the same body at all and PM wouldn't dress like that either.

    Interesting stuff, but you have to admire the fact that he wanted to work so much and still wants to work today...obviously deserving of such a job.

  6. If my comments get posted I wanted to add that I was also a photographer before the digital age and I was really good at it, so I'm somewhat artistic myself and I do believe that the original PM is not who we saw in later years. Some of his photos and videos are really telling of plastic surgery; excellent job in one sense but telling in another. Alot of early death and tragedy in the Beatles story, but what a story.

  7. Great site! I'd like to add that Faul always wears very obvious wigs. His hair looks too thick and bristly, and the hairline is always jacked up.

  8. I was a Paul fan and when the Beatles came to the USA I was 16. I was a fan until Sgt. Pepper came out. I took one look at the album cover and knew something was amiss. He was no longer cute. He looked totally different. I never liked him again, without knowing why. I think I sensed something different about his basic persona. I don't even count the so called "clues" in songs. To this day, I cannot stand to watch him. The way he holds his mouth is also vey weird. I wish someone would do an age progression on the real Paul to see what he would have looked like though the years. This guy is an imposter.

    1. I could have written this as I agree completely with everything you said. (I must be the same age as you are.)

    2. I agree with you both on this, and I think I am about your age as well--I fell hard for the original Paul, who was cute sweet, and downright lovable to a young teen aged girl such as myself--once 1967 rolled around, there was no way I could even stand looking at the 'new' Paul--it wasn't just the music, which I thought was horrific, and drug-induced, it was Paul himself--something was so strangely different about him, that it made me wonder what in the world I ever saw him in the first place--physical changes on the outside made him resemble the genuine Paul McCartney to the untrained eye, but you can't change a person's insides--when I look at old pictures of Paul, it's in his eyes, where I can see the gentleness, kindness and sweetness--that was completely gone once Faul took over--the question I have now is--WHY?!--I don't believe for one minute that Paul was killed in some car accident, either--so, why did the switch take place at all?! It appeared to literally haunt John half to death, and he seemed bent on exposing it all somehow--but, I think it may have cost him everything in the end.

  9. 60 yr old Beatle fan here again:

    If you really want to go gangbusters here, all you have to do is look at Faul's son, James. Place a vintage picture of Paul next to James, and even toss in Linda if you like, and compare. NO WAY did Paul sire that individual. Faul should have thought ahead about what his son was going to portray if he wanted to retain the illusion. But now he is at the winter of his life, Faul does not care anymore about using brown contact lenses, using his right hand, or caring that his offspring give away the illusion. The slight of hand was done long ago, money was made, and he is still treated as royalty. After Ringo dies, then maybe the truth will come out.

  10. Wow................Now I know why I stopped loving Paul? I was 13 when I heard the Beatles were splitting and moving on to do their own thing...........There was much talk and many changes to all of them...........I hated the India thing which was totally controlled by those in the know........And then all the mockery got to everyone and all of us lot in the UK were fed up with the Fab four.........Now I know why Paul sounded different and totally looked odd!

    But having said this I took a look at a Mr Holiday who used to take people round Paul's house in Liverpool and low and behold.............I found Paul again!! Or is it??

    Another thing is that Paul made a girl pregnant in Germany and though paid her a heavy sum to bring up the child...........The grown teen brought a case against her "father" who had to have a DNA test done and what-jer-know like...........He failed it!!!! Though the mother knew she had slept with the original Paul McCartney!!! Truth is Stranger than Fiction!!

  11. Hi, Tina. All one needs is the craniometric data from Wired Italia 2009. That's it. Done. All other data are supportive or for entertainment purposes. Cheers.

  12. Fabulous post. Thanks, Tina!


Thank you for your comments. They will appear once they have been approved.

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.