Dr. Phil – can you also quack in your falsetto voice?

[Note: See “Freddie Mercury Revisited” and Dr. Phil Revisited for an update on all of the research done here.]

_______________________________________________

[Note: See addendum at very end, added 10/1/16.]

I think that we need to explain our work here a little better, as people might assume we just slap some photographs together and call it good. We are far more systematic and rigorous.

For one, I am learning this art as I go, and so know that a side angle on a person makes the eyes appear closer, and so produces a larger head when I set the pupil distance at one inch. So, for instance, in the Freddy Mercury/Dr. Phil McGraw comparison above, there are two images in which they both  assume a gazing-down-and-to-the-left posture that match perfectly. But the head appears much bigger than in other comparisons I did. The angle caused that distortion.

Did I forget to mention that Freddie Mercury did not die? Our first clue is that he supposedly died of a disease that doesn’t even exist, AIDS. This is something else I have learned – do not slap people in the face with new concepts. I will go into the AIDS matter down the road, or another writer here might. For the time being, understand that it was important to our overlords that some big-time names, like Rock Hudson and Freddie Mercury fake their death and blame AIDS. That helped sell it.

dr-phil-7Then there is the matter of twins – I know now always to look for twins in doing comparisons. With these two guys I found inconsistencies, but no real evidence of twins. For instance, the photo to the left is said to be Dr. Phil, but it does not match up with any other of his photos that I worked with. It stands alone. And note the crow’s feet – this guy has had some surgery about the eyes. But it stands alone as an anomaly. If there are more than one Dr. Phil, I did not find strong evidence.

dr-phil-9Then there is the photo to the right. It is the only photo I found of Dr. Phil before he became the fully formed television quack he is today. It looks like a yearbook photo, but odd, as I have found with other fake people, that  yearbooks photos are stripped of context – no name underneath, no year. And anyway, this one lone photo is not Dr. Phil. It is someone else. Eye color might be a giveaway, but that can be faked. (They can even make dark brown eyes blue – I did not know this! Check out this video. (2:30 and 4:07 are the magic moments when brown becomes blue.)

After someone famous fakes his/her death, they often do cosmetic changes so that they will not appear at a glance to be the old person. With Freddie Mercury, there is the absence of hair, of course. The reincarnated version affects an accent that sounds a bit southern to me, probably affected after months of practice. He is a British citizen, born Farrokh Bulsara in what is now Tanzania, then a British protectorate.The American drawl is fake, but he is a decent actor.

mercury-overbiteBut the biggest ‘fix’ is the teeth. Mercury always smiled with his mouth closed, I assume because he had an overbite. I remember that from his Queen days. Look at the photo to the right – I had a friend with an overbite like that growing up, and he went through childhood hell. We called them “buck teeth” in those days. But the Dr. Phil incarnation of Mercury, blue-eyed and bald, has good teeth.

Finally, by way of explanation, is the rigor we put into our photo comparisons. I won’t say exhaustive, but it is exhausting. Straight approached me with this Zombie on September 1st, while we were still in Europe. I laughed then as I am laughing now, not in disbelief, but rather at how little respect they have for our intelligence.

But I had to be sure. Yesterday and in the days before, in addition to regular work and stuff, I was looking at photos, doing the twin search, and then yesterday spent three hours doing facial match-ups. I ended up doing 90 of them, and the results were 13 that were dead-on, 44 that were very close. The remaining 33 included ten with the mystery man above with the crow’s feet. 23 failed,  usually due to distortion caused by facial angles. That convinced me that Straight was right again. The guy is getting better at this every day. I cannot wait until he is putting up his own writing.

I will do more photo analysis down below. First, I want to talk about the television character “Dr. Phil McGraw.” We know now he is no doctor. But he has been assigned to that role by Intelligence. Why?

For one thing, he browbeats people, makes them feel inadequate. There is another quack psychologist (actually a fake sociologist), Dr. Laura Schlesinger, who does that too. She is a radio personality, or was. What I noticed about her was that her listeners seemed to gravitate towards her because she made them feel bad. It was like ritual beating – “Thank you Dr. Laura, I’ll have another!” So too with Phil – he is smarmy, and a huge hypocrite, but all these sad and lonely people seek him out.

Or so it seems. It could all be fake. What on television is ever real?

Below is a video of Dr. Phil working with Megyn Kelly, another person of interest, an actress, and no journalist. (But then, none of these TV personalities, and I mean none, are journalists.)

This dovetails with earlier work we did exposing the JonBenét Ramsey hoax. They are using Dr. Phil in this video to sell it some more, this time by abusing the supposed older brother, Burke. Dr. Phil corners him, and they surely cherry picked footage that made him look guilty. Maybe Burke is a player too, but if not, Dr. Phil did expose one thing about him – he is not a good actor, like Phil and Megyn are. He may be a real human being.

The hypocrisy in this video is sickening. It is steeped in bullshit and acting. These two are poseurs, nothing more. After they shot this footage, I would bet they sat down with their bosses and reviewed their performance, maybe even did some retakes.

Dr. Phil McGraw, television psychologist, is a complete fake. The following are some photos of him and Freddie Mercury, and then face splits. I am 99.9% behind this one, my only lingering doubt that I possibly missed a twin hidden in there somewhere. But I can do no more, I can look at these face no more. Dr. Phil makes me gag.

Where it was impossible to find a photo of Mercury smiling and showing his teeth, it was almost impossible to find one of Dr. Phil with his mouth closed. He is basking in the sunlight of dental [crowns and] implants.

Here are four (in addition to the one above) of the thirteen face splits that I regarded as dead-on hits:

We welcome Freddy Mercury/Dr. Phil McGraw to the Honor Roll of Zombies! May you learn how to quack in falsetto!

___________________

PS: Another member of Queen, Brian May, is also an astrophysicist who worked on NASA’s New Horizons Pluto mission. I need to put that on the list of possible public hoaxes, since NASA is involved in so much fakery anyway.

Addendum 10/1/16: Miles W. Mathis wrote a nice paper on the fake death of Karen Carpenter which I highly recommend. He goes far afield of the Carpenter matter, but does it justice too.  I wanted to link to it here and quote a full paragraph that, to me, explains Dr. Phil’s job on TV:

I suppose I brought up the anti-depressant thing because I have been thinking about that a lot regarding newer music. I was listening to Elliott Smith recently, for instance, and his whole career seemed to me to be calculated to sell anti-depressants, from the songs themselves to his tragic (and probably faked) end. The same could be said of Kurt Cobain and hundreds of others. How about Morrissey? The Cure? What is the cure to such music? That’s right: anti-depressants. Nine Inch Nails? Marilyn Manson? Where did all these new sub-genres of angst and darkness come from, especially after 1980? They didn’t exist in previous decades. Do you really think the world went dark in 1980? No, living in the US post-80s was actually much easier than in previous decades and centuries, so where did all the darkness come from? It was manufactured. Intelligence had two big upswings in the 20th century, one being in 1946 and the other being in about 1976, post Watergate. As I showed in my paper on that, the success of Watergate simply told Intelligence the sky was the limit. They could do anything and get away with it. Well, the drug companies were also in a period of exponential growth, and it looks like they paid some wing of Intel to keep that growth coming. The largest growth has been in anti-depressants and similar drugs, and to sell anti-depressants you need depressed people, right? If they don’t exist, you can create them. That is what has happened.

This, to me, helps to explain Dr. Phil’s role on TV, to sell antidepressants. He brings people down, humiliates them, makes them feel bad about themselves. Maybe his guests are just actors, but the audience is meant to be deeply affected.

About Mark Tokarski

Just a man who likes to read, argue, and occasionally be surprised.
This entry was posted in Zombies and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

42 Responses to Dr. Phil – can you also quack in your falsetto voice?

  1. Makes you wonder, was Freddie Mercury straight? Or is Dr. Phil gay?

    Like

  2. daddie_o says:

    This is one of those things that makes me feel like I’m taking crazy pills. But am I right in thinking that their ears don’t quite line up? It’s a bit hard to make out from these photos, but it seems like Dr. Phil’s ears sit a bit higher up on his head.

    Like

    • Yes, you are right, and this troubles me greatly – however, I found the same discrepancy between the various photos of Freddie. I just wasn’t convinced he was twins, as if it is only ears, people can always argue (maybe rightly) that it is parallax distortion. Honestly, the Dr. Phil up above that matched up with no one troubled me too. I found the same thing with Anderson Cooper – a third twin that looked like them but did not match up in any way. It means something, I just don’t know what.

      freddy-freddyfreddy-freddy-2

      Everything aligns except the ears!

      Like

    • When it comes to reassignments, we’re not quite sure if they do surgery on the ears or not. Since ears are a foolproof way to identify someone, logic says that it would be one of the most important things for the plastic surgeons to work on. The counter-argument is that plastic surgery on the ear cartridges is known to be tricky. But with what we are seeing with twins and IVF/embryonic twinning, they may have some technology not released to the public.

      So at this point we see ear alignment as a great way to identify identical twins, but it’s muddy on reassignments.

      Like

      • daddieuhoh says:

        Well, I could see tucking or un-tucking an ear or maybe even reshaping in some more drastic way. But I don’t think you can change the position of the ear canal.

        I was trying out the parallax distortion in the mirror, moving my head up and down to see how much it changes the apparent height of my ear (canal). The apparent height seemed pretty sensitive to slight changes but I did not spend a lot of time with it. I guess a camera at a slightly different angle could shift things around. So that might explain the differences we’re seeing here. It would be good if we could get a handle on the parallax, quantify it somehow.

        Like

        • I’ve working on a guest post for exactly that. I’m going to take pictures of people’s heads at different angle degrees and measure the change in ear alignment. Then I compare the change to the overall length of the head and get a percentage.

          This way we can compare the expected percentage to the percentage we see in photographs. We have been getting lots of critiques about it. Some from real people, some from disinfo, so it needs to be done. I’ll try to have it done on Sunday.

          Like

          • Also, they don’t have to change the position of the ear canal. They can keep the ear canal the same and add larger or smaller ear cartilage. The same way nose jobs are done. They don’t mess with the sinus cavity, just the cartilage.

            Like

          • daddieuhoh says:

            Yes, but what I was getting at was that in the split picture of Freddie where the ears don’t match, it’s not just the cartilage that appears off, it’s the ear canal that looks higher (as in, the actual location of the holes in his head). But Kozman 123 says below that it’s possible to adjust the ear canal. So I looked into it a bit. Here’s what I found:

            It seems the most common form of plastic surgery on the ears (otoplasty) is to tuck them in closer to the head or get rid of ‘cauliflower’ ears. Other reshaping procedures can also be done. From what I can tell, the surgery Kozman is talking about is about the internal ear canal structure, and it’s a procedure they now do to treat glaucoma. I found a page of questions about whether ears can be moved vertically with otoplasty. And while the upper part of the ears (the cartilage) can in some cases be raised 1-1.5 cm, one of the doctors there wrote “Some degree of vertical movement can be achieved by placing setback sutures in more vertical orientation. There is only so much movement possible, as the ear canal is a fixed structure within the bone.” That makes a lot of sense. Here is the link to that page:

            https://www.realself.com/question/otoplasty-ear-surgery-ears-raised-vertically

            It’s the 6th answer down.

            Here is a page about general otoplasty: http://www.docshop.com/education/cosmetic/face/ear-surgery

            Here are some before-and-after pics of common otoplasty procedures:
            http://www.chaselaymd.com/before-after-gallery-san-jose/ear-surgery/

            Like

          • From my viewpoint, given the number of irregular ears we have seen, I do not think that there has been otoplasty. I don’t think these are monsters, at least to their own people, and that sounds like painful surgery with very little benefit versus cost.

            I think with Freddie Mercury we were seeing twins, but just based on ears alone, I was not willing to take that leap, as it would be leading with my chin. And that is where I decided to leave it pending more and better evidence. I do think that there is only one Dr. Phil, so only one of the Mercury twins (iff) was reassigned.

            Like

          • daddieuhoh says:

            Great!

            Like

        • kozman123 says:

          They can adjust the ear canal. My wife had the surgery to correct for a restricted canal. It’s called Canalplasty. was incredibly effective and super easy and minimal pain. I can see many people opting for this type of “fix”.

          Like

      • Twins, you think? Noses don’t quite line up either. Crap! Now I am going to think about this until I resolve it. Did I mention that I can be obsessive? Me? A CPA? Obsessive? Puts little numbers in little boxes?

        Like

        • daddieuhoh says:

          LOL. They seem to have very different jaw lines — one wider, the other narrower.

          Like

          • He did look puffy in that photo, not healthy at all. I spent so much time with photos, and what I found was that A=B, B=C, ergo A=C, times ten perhaps. I finally concluded it was facial alignment, and gave up on the idea of twins. Happily, I might add.

            Like

          • John in Texas says:

            As a guitar player myself I always thought the story of Brian May was quite odd. Astrophysicist turned guitar god. Never any mention of how he acquired his playing skills. And his famous guitar, nicknamed the “Red Special” was made entirely from household items pilfered from around the house by Brian and his dad. Because they were too poor to buy a proper guitar. But poor Brian had the funds to go to astrophysicist school. Search the web for Brian’s Red Special guitar and tell me if you think it was built from junk from around the house. I believe the wood for the body/neck was from the family fireplace mantle. Just ridiculous. I have owned about 30 guitars. Most high end. Brian’s original guitar was constructed by a pro luthier.

            Like

          • You’re smelling what I do … Another fake? Queen was a more modern Badfinger?

            Like

          • John in Texas says:

            Yes, anything is possible. Would not surprise me in the least.

            Like

  3. Tyrone McCloskey says:

    I recall Queen was the first band that got called out for using pre-recorded tapes to augment their performances- Farrouk admitted they used overdubbed voices to get that operatic sound, but that may have been the limited hangout to hide the fact that May and the rest weren’t playing either-

    I went to arena shows as a young’n, all of them indoors, and it was quite an ordeal that seems now to have been designed to make the crowd pliant and accepting of whatever was going on up on stage, no questions asked- First there was the hours upon hours of waiting in the parking lot, sitting on blankets and eating breakfast, lunch and sometimes dinner before they’d open the doors- This was fatiguing, even to teenagers- Then there was the slow moving line as everyone was frisked- Then the arena would have nose bleed seats or you were standing on the floor, which was also debilitating- The VIP’s got the good seats- (I never used drugs, but for those audience members tripping on them, their musical discernment was probably non-existent at that point- They’d cheer anything)- Then there was an opening act, often local, with one hit, maybe, then another 45 minutes wait for a second act with a current chart topper, often never to be heard from again and by then having to weather playing the villains as the audience wanted them off the stage ASAP to finally get to the big boys- Then another hour plus wait until the headliners came out- The only thing to look at were the groupies in the crowd and the roadies packing up or setting up- And very loud PA music would blare between acts- By the time ELO or Jethro Tull or even Wings came on, we were broken slaves taking every cue from the lead singer to cheer, no matter how bad they may have actually sounded- Those band leaders like Jeff Lynne and whichever Paul was presiding during the Band on the Run tour, they could have shouted “Sieg Heil” and we would have followed right along in response- Then we would go home and listen to the records the next day and assume that that cacophony that had made us temporarily deaf at the show was just a live version of the albums- What we would have never guessed was that we had probably heard alternate backing tracks from the studio piped in at such high decibels, after being tortured by boredom, that we believed everything was on the level because the only energy we had left was reserved for getting home and going to bed-

    Liked by 2 people

    • I have only ever been to one rock concert, and hated it – Iron Butterfly and Smith. I did not know at the time that you had to be high to enjoy a drum solo. I wasn’t. In a gadda di vida was like having nails pounded in my forehead, slowly. The guys I was with all thought it was great, but looking back I think it was more small town kids thinking that it should have been great, because IB was big time. I remember someone in the band yelling out “how are you, Billings?” and not getting the proper crowd response expressing disappointment, to which a few in the crowd tried to make up for the rest of us by doing that high-pitched “yeow!” that is so common now. Billings was not being cool enough! (Billings, Montana is a hot dusty cow town, and not cool at all, but it was all I knew.)

      This, if it plays below, is Badfinger and Bill Maher – Pete Ham. Don’t play it if you don’t like ear worms, but Maher does a credible job of projecting his voice. He reminds me of Pierce Brosnon singing in Mamma Mia, more like he is in labor and about to give birth. The lead guitar is not even in tune. I don’t want to monkey with the original post but wish I had included this along side the vinyl version of the song which is clearly McCartney’s voice. It is as TM says, that concert goers are hearing recordings, and not the live performance.

      Like

      • daddieuhoh says:

        I’ve been to many, many concerts, and probably about 75% of the time I enjoy it much more than listening to an album. There is usually more (apparent) spontaneity, (apparent) displays of musicianship, the sound is usually richer, fuller and more enveloping. I am sometimes disappointed, but I will always prefer to hear a band live than a recording. There is one band I have heard live that sucked big time: Red Hot Chili Peppers. But that’s just live performances I’ve seen on TV. Their lead singer has trouble staying in tune.

        I suppose it could all be faked, but I think in most cases it’s not. When somebody rips into a really long guitar solo and you’re standing there watching his fingers move, it’s hard to imagine that is all just make believe. I’m not saying it’s not faked at all, but I can say with confidence that the vast majority of concerts I’ve been to it was not faked.

        One of my favorite bands to see live are the Allman Brothers Band, now officially defunct. I was so shocked by the notion that Duane Allman faked his death and came back as Lemmy. I have never heard Lemmy pay or listened to a single Motorhead song. But Duane had such a rare and special talent on the guitar that is widely appreciated. His sound was also very distinct. I have not heard Lemmy’s name listed among the top 10 or whatever guitar players in the world, which you might still expect if he was playing a different style under a different guise. The switch is possible, for sure. Just being a fan of Duane made it that much harder to swallow.

        Anyway, Duane is an example of many famous musicians I could point to where I see real and genuine talent. I’m not saying they don’t have connections. For sure they do. But that doesn’t mean they’re all talentless or even that the most talented ones are kept out of the business. But that doesn’t make the ones who do make it talentless hacks.

        Speaking of talentless hacks, have you guys heard about this movie Florence Foster Jenkins starring Meryl Streep?

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florence_Foster_Jenkins_(film)

        It’s based on the true story of a wealthy socialite, Florence Jenkins, who is a horrible singer who thinks she’s amazing? She is nevertheless unable to overcome her lack of talent. (Note the name Foster as it has come up in several of MM’s recent papers.) I guess part of the misdirection with the movie is that you can’t successfully promote talentless hacks, no matter how well connected they are, which implies that all the people who do make it have genuine talent. Also she does all the promotion herself, implying perhaps that there isn’t an army of promoters waiting around to help wealthy, well-connected people become superstars. But maybe there is, after all, a limit to just how talentless you can be and still be a hit.

        Like

        • The Oscar people have a requirement in place that Streep actually has to appear in a movie before they can nominate her for best actress.

          Regarding talent, there is lots and lots of it out there. I met a guy at our gym who was in the music business in LA, retired now. He said that he had promoted some equipment for rent so that young and broke kids could do demos, back in the day when good sound recording equipment was too spendy for most people. I said something like “you must have spent a lot of time listening to bad playing,” and he said no, not at all. Talent, real talent, was there, but making it in music required as much luck as talent.

          So I don’t doubt that you have seen it in display in concerts – I have seen it in coffee shops and churches and county fairs. But the people promoted on a high level are not the ones “discovered” … no one discovered the Byrds or Marilyn Manson … that is assembled and promoted mediocrity. It is all about us. I think I was deeply immersed in mediocrity when I was studying Katy Perry.

          They can make a star by power of suggestion alone. Have you ever noticed that Dylan, Bono, Sting, David Crosby, Brittney Spears … can’t sing? I mean, they can project, like Bill Maher as Pete Ham, but the quality of the voice is grating. They are famous because they were suggested to us as talented, and had access to us via heavy promotion, perhaps backed by a songwriting committee somewhere in the bowels of Langley, maybe the same building where they write Bill O’Reilly’s books.

          Liked by 1 person

          • daddieuhoh says:

            Agree 100%. BTW Mark I submitted a post. It is pending review. I sent you an e-mail about it but you might not have seen it yet.

            Like

  4. VonCrowne says:

    Dr Phil comes in @ about 6’4″. Freddie @ 5’9″. Aside from the height difference, nose jobs are always crappy; how do you explain building Phil’s honker out of Freddie’s Michael Jackson nose? C’mon guys…

    Like

    • I deleted this comment, since you are a spook. Then on second thought I left it here because it demonstrates a couple of things:

      One, it took you guys three days to get here, meaning you are behind the eight ball, right now anyway.

      Two, the relative height approach, which is bullshit, means you are just a guy sitting at a desk and poring over blogs and comments, and only chiming in when you think there has been a real security breach. Then you make up numbers. You have chimed in here before when we exposed Bill O’Reilly.

      That tells me we nailed this one.

      Now, fuck off.

      Liked by 1 person

    • daddieuhoh says:

      VonCrowne, I saw a new comment of yours in my inbox but not here. Mark may have deleted it. He runs a tight ship here and the comments section is all the better for it, even if innocent people end up walking the plank. Your first comment really fits the spook MO, so it’s no wonder you fell under suspicion, as you acknowledged in your other comment. Anyway I will address your two questions, as I think they are reasonable questions to ask, although you did not apparently put much thought into answering them yourself before you asked. Again, spook MO — asking damning questions that have an easy answer.

      If you’ve read Miles’s work, then you have seen many examples of where we’ve been lied to about famous people’s height, and where their height is manipulated in many photos. Elvis is but one example. Have you ever seen either of these celebrity figures in real life? I can’t seem to find an image of him on the internet standing up next to anything or anyone to get a sense of his height. He’s almost always sitting down or standing in front of a blank background. How do you know how tall he really is? Or Freddie for that matter?

      As for building a honker out of Freddie’s nose, just google nose reconstruction and you’ll find many, many examples of noses being built out of almost literally nothing. If they can do that to two holes in the head, they can add flesh to Freddie’s nose.

      Having said that, I’m not totally convinced myself about Freddie/Phil. In particular, I have seen 3 different pictures of Phil as a younger person (two others in addition to the one in this post) and they look pretty much like a young Dr. Phil. I don’t really know how to explain that. But on the other hand I am surprised by the match-up in the facial splits between Freddie and Phil, especially the third one. Just remarkable. How do you explain that? Is it just a million-in-one shot? Are the odds better than that to get a false positive? Worse? I don’t know. Mark has run the numbers in a previous post and it seems exceedingly unlikely. But his calculations are based on an assumption about the likelihood that we will have a match on any given feature (from which you can calculate the conditional the likelihood of matching on all of those features). I don’t know if that assumption about the likelihood of a match on a given feature is correct. Could be better, could be worse.

      Anyway, if you are genuine and would like to join the conversation here, I’m sure Mark will not delete future posts that are thoughtful and do not follow the typical shill model.

      Like

      • I went ahead and restored his comment [below], but this is his third time through here under various names, always with the height comparisons. And it is interesting he is following Miles, as he did not just stumble in here after seeing my name in the Karen Carpenter post. That means that he is a watcher, keeping an eye on us, and when we do stumble on something they would rather keep stuffed, he springs into action. The object is to sow doubt, so he comes in with authoritative sounding numbers on height (he did this as well with O’Reilly and Lemmy, if I remember). It is one of many things we cannot verify, so stepping in as he does with bullshit numbers has a ring of authenticity.

        Regarding Freddie, it has been troubling me and I am tired of looking at both he and the smarmy and fake Dr. Phil, but I think now I have to revisit. I am not troubled by anything other than the ears, not Phil’s, but Freddie’s. I wanted to avoid another twin scenario, especially on ears alone, but those photos consistently exhibit differences. I have to go back.

        Anyway, humor this guy if you want, but don’t expect to make progress or learn anything, as his object is to 1) create doubt, and 2) like a juggler, keep the doubt balls in the air.

        Like

        • daddieuhoh says:

          Very interesting. I thought the height comment deserved a substantive reply, but he is not really my intended audience — other people who come across the comment might think it’s a reasonable argument. It’s not.

          I wouldn’t torture yourself over Freddie.

          Like

          • Well, if I am wrong I’ll feel bad for manhandling the guy, but I don’t think I am. Before he went by the name “Hamilton.” These guys who drop in with a non-traceable name and non-linked email at just the time when something good happens here are suspect. I should not have f-bombed him. I do regret that.

            Liked by 1 person

          • daddieuhoh says:

            Don’t feel bad Mark. The fact that he showed up twice under different aliases to make the same stupid comment tells us all we need to know.

            Like

          • VonCrowne says:

            This is the only name that I have logged into this site under. I am guessing that someone else had an issue with the height?

            Like

          • daddieuhoh says:

            Yes, some weeks ago somebody came crashing in to make the same point, in almost the same exact manner, but about a different zombie. Mark says it happened twice before, but I only remember the one. I don’t remember which zombie it was but you can find it in the comments if you go through the honor roll of zombies.

            But again, we know from Miles’s work that they mess around with heights in photographs and can lie about such things all day long. So unless you can bring some compelling evidence about their actual height to the discussion, the argument about height differences is really no better than hearsay.

            Like

          • Your name, VonCrowne, or von Crowne, is not one that turns up in any genealogy database. It does not exist. OK, fine. People don’t use their real names in email addresses. They make them up, but that’s an odd one. But then you are Gmail, the common email address for every spook – must have something to do with Google being an Intel front. Your timing is propitious, showing up right at a time we made what we regard as a major discovery, and only to cast doubt on that discovery. This was also the case with Hamilton, and height, for which he never referenced his source of information. He, like you, just showed up out of the blue knowing the exact height of the players. Care to source us?

            We accept criticism, skepticism, doubt, counter-ideas, someone doing better or more thorough work. That is not what you are doing. You are sowing seeds of doubt, but not doing so in a constructive manner, but rather in an underhanded manner, as if you have a goal and a method to achieve that goal. You offer no basis for your assertions, but state them with utter certainty. If we continue to discuss the matter with you, you will continue to cast doubt on our findings, and you will have achieved your goal. So I am done with you, but if daddieuhoh wants to carry on the exchange, fine. I will leave your comments alone.

            Like

          • VonCrowne says:

            It’s an honest question from my own observations, which to me are empirical. Maybe for all the fine details, you have missed the glaring one; it happens. It is really that hard to believe that more than one person has noticed the discrepancy in height?

            Like

          • VonCrowne says:

            *Is it… sorry for the typo.

            Like

          • With what we saw with the McCartney twins, we can’t trust the heights that they give us. If you look closely at the Bobby Fuller pics, they’re trying to hide how tall he is. It’s too easy to manipulate.

            Most people add an inch or two to their dating profile and nobody ever notices. People just know tall or short, they can’t tell how tall someone is just by looking at them. Most height websites go off of comparisons. So they’ll see a guy they think is 5’10, and they’ll compare him to another guy who looks 3 inches taller and say he’s 6’2.

            The problem is, they photoshop those pics if they want to hide the height. They’ll put someone in the foreground, or have someone bend their knees, etc. If you research Tupac’s height, like I did, you’ll find situations where A is taller than B, B is taller than C, but C is taller than A. How is that possible?

            If you take that funkiness, minus or subtract another 2 inches because nobody can tell the difference, and then add heels in your shoes to make you taller, we easily get a difference of 5-6 inches. That’s why confidently stating you know their heights, without providing a source, is extremely foolish.

            We’re talking about people faking their death, getting plastic surgery, and assuming a new identity as a different famous person. That is an intense level of deceit. If you have gone that far, then monkeying with photographs to make the heights look different is a piece of cake.

            Like

          • I’ll give you one more chance to source your information regarding height, or you are done.

            Like

          • VonCrowne says:

            Again, it was personal observation. I have found a site which discusses celeb heights. Make of it what you will.
            http://www.celebheights.com/s/Freddie-Mercury-687.html
            http://www.celebheights.com/s/Phil-McGraw-49460.html
            If we go by their stats, a difference of 5 (or more) inches, more if you include peak height.

            Like

          • All those height websites base their work off of photographs. Read my post above about estimating height from photographs. In an honest world you could, but not in this world.

            Like

          • The site admits it is a guessing site. “A site visitor pointed out that Freddie gave his height as “5ft 9.75”. Phil stated on Twitter in such and such a year … and then down below they weigh the guesses to come up with a projected height.

            Not credible, in my view.

            Like

  5. VonCrowne says:

    I understand your circumspection, I do. I have arrived here from Miles Mathis’ paper on Karen Carpenter where he dropped your name. Having great interest in Mathis’ work, I decided to sort through some of your findings. Upon noting the participation of Daddy O (and having read his work on Ghandi and his new paper on Dreyfus), I had high expectations for the research done here. My apologies for chiming-in, perhaps, without introducing myself. Now, if you would cater to my ignorance, do explain how the difference in height is accomplished.

    Like

  6. tyronemccloskey says:

    I should clarify my thoughts- I suspect ELO and Tull, both of whom I saw live, enhanced their sound with prerecorded rhythm tracks and vocals- There was some live playing, but not completely-Ian Anderson so adlibbed some of his songs he was probably singing most of the set- He seemed winded at times- Jeff Lynne and ELO sounded too much like a studio recording, but a violin (check that) fiddle solo during a short break in the middle by Mik Kaminski sounded horrible, complete with this idiot doing some version of a morris dance- That may have been a con to suggest they were all playing live (I recall Lynne tuning his guitar between songs- He did a little banter as he fiddled with the keys like he was making a show of his guitar taking a beating that night)
    Back then I was just disappointed at the perfunctory way ELO went through the motions- I had no clue they may have been faking some of it, but lately, recalling clearly so many details, I now think they fudged, sometimes quite a bit*-
    Tull was also workmanlike but Anderson was a true cynic and my teenage angst ate that up- Faul and Wings sounded close to the records but they still seemed live, save for Linda- Paul’s banter was almost pleading or scolding depending on the level of cheering- Mid way, Paul did an acoustic set of Beatles stuff and his voice was pitch perfect but his guitar playing sounded like he had just started learning the instrument a week prior-
    I never saw Queen so I can’t say for certain, but what live stuff I have heard, there’s a lot of sing-a-long for the audience which is another way to induce pliancy-
    Like Lennon, I’m a records guy- Live performance is too much for my tin ears- The punk stuff I saw in small clubs in North Beach while in college was definitely live- Horrible, but genuinely horrible- And that scene brought back the mini-skirt so I didn’t care about what anything sounded like-

    *Just now a veteran musician I work with who has a real career behind him affirms that ELO used tapes to create the orchestral sound live- He claimed the string sections at their live shows were muted, just simple pantomime- I buy that-

    Like

  7. Pingback: Freddie Fil lala land  | Saved Threaded Fakeologist Chat

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s