|
Post by The Mask on Apr 21, 2011 13:18:59 GMT -5
As for the eyebrows, it looks like she had them plucked out in the last picture so how can they be the same like when she was a little girl? True about the eyebrows but I was comparing these two pics:
|
|
|
Post by artemis on Apr 21, 2011 15:19:31 GMT -5
It means that u have very good eyes, coz I dont see much difference. Again the big pic is of a very bad quality...
|
|
|
Post by beatlies on Apr 22, 2011 0:47:34 GMT -5
There were several Paul McCartney clones before 1966, as hard as that is to believe. Here's one example. Notice the voice in the first video compared to the second video. Although live he can't seem to hit the same notes as in the studio version and the voice seems 'off' in this song. Perhaps because it's a different voice? McCartney clone#1 McCartney clone#2 Comments? I have a set of general questions about human cloning. Let's say they take the real James Paul McCartney (born 1942, his mother is a hospital nurse in Liverpool). At age 10 they take a cell from him, clone him in a petri dish, implant the zygote in a woman and have her give birth to JPM-clone. It is 1952, and this is theoretically possible for MI6/military scientists to do given the technology of the time and my understanding of how apparently easy it is to successfully clone humans, much easier than cloning sheep according to current day scientists. So in 1953 we have a baby JPM-clone. Where is this child raised? The Strawberry (a plant that clone-reproduces) Field institute in Liverpool? A secret island laboratory-complex with schooling facilities? He is raised from birth to be a combination celebrity musician double/fascist state-enslaved bio-freak? What would that do to him psychologically? Or is the idea to let him burn up the stage for several years until the emotional fuse fizzles out and then replace him with the next clone or non-clone imposter filling the "Beatle Paul" role? In any case, this "Paul" would be ten years younger than than the real JPM, so when JPM would be age 24 in 1966, clone Paul would only be age 14; impossible to fake being over 17 at that age. Or do you think that clone-JPM was cloned and born only several years after the real JPM, meaning that the ability to clone humans existed, say, as early the years 1944 to 1946. In short, what I'm asking is how do you explain the mechanics of the clone-to-adult imposter assembly line process, and all the fierce logistical and practical problems thereof, the ones I've just mentioned and the many others. And Britain's technologically advanced enemies during the Cold War: the Soviet Union, China, Cuba, the East Bloc.... they are just keeping quiet through all this and not exposing any bit of it to the world? Keeping the USA/Britain/West Germany/France/Italy etc. most horrifying secrets for them? I am not trying to discount or refute the media-mass cloning theory, I am just curious as to your opinions and conclusions on these thorny issues.
|
|
|
Post by The Mask on Apr 22, 2011 17:18:27 GMT -5
It means that u have very good eyes, coz I dont see much difference. Again the big pic is of a very bad quality... Even with the bad quality you can see the left eye of the Mila clone.
|
|
|
Post by The Mask on Apr 22, 2011 17:39:26 GMT -5
I have a set of general questions about human cloning. Let's say they take the real James Paul McCartney (born 1942, his mother is a hospital nurse in Liverpool). At age 10 they take a cell from him, clone him in a petri dish, implant the zygote in a woman and have her give birth to JPM-clone. It is 1952, and this is theoretically possible for MI6/military scientists to do given the technology of the time and my understanding of how apparently easy it is to successfully clone humans, much easier than cloning sheep according to current day scientists. So in 1953 we have a baby JPM-clone. Where is this child raised? The Strawberry (a plant that clone-reproduces) Field institute in Liverpool? A secret island laboratory-complex with schooling facilities? He is raised from birth to be a combination celebrity musician double/fascist state-enslaved bio-freak? What would that do to him psychologically? Or is the idea to let him burn up the stage for several years until the emotional fuse fizzles out and then replace him with the next clone or non-clone imposter filling the "Beatle Paul" role? In any case, this "Paul" would be ten years younger than than the real JPM, so when JPM would be age 24 in 1966, clone Paul would only be age 14; impossible to fake being over 17 at that age. Or do you think that clone-JPM was cloned and born only several years after the real JPM, meaning that the ability to clone humans existed, say, as early the years 1944 to 1946. In short, what I'm asking is how do you explain the mechanics of the clone-to-adult imposter assembly line process, and all the fierce logistical and practical problems thereof, the ones I've just mentioned and the many others. And Britain's technologically advanced enemies during the Cold War: the Soviet Union, China, Cuba, the East Bloc.... they are just keeping quiet through all this and not exposing any bit of it to the world? Keeping the USA/Britain/West Germany/France/Italy etc. most horrifying secrets for them? I am not trying to discount or refute the media-mass cloning theory, I am just curious as to your opinions and conclusions on these thorny issues. Thanks for your interest beatlies. What I think is that the method of cloning that has been reported that exists does in fact exist but I think there is a far more advanced version of it being incorporated behind the scenes. It would be difficult to plan all of this cloning ahead of time wouldn't it? That is, based on the scenario you presented about JPM and just to think about it in general.... All I can say right now is that I don't know how it works but I believe people are being cloned instantanously. For instance, if you look at the doubles of Jennifer Aniston, you'll noticed that whatever double is in place for whatever time period, they always resemble most the one right before them. In the first season of Friends we have a Jennifer that looked very much the original Jennifer(see her in The Leprechuan). Then in the following seasons of Friends, we have a Jennifer who looks like the Jennifer of the first season of Friends but slightly different and with a few unique attributes that are acquired by the next Jennifer double--that took over in the 5th season of Friends, etc. This process can be observed in Tom Cruise and his doubles also and many other celebrities. So as you can see, my opinion is that there is a much more advanced system of cloning that is taking place with these celebrities where a human double can be created in a very short period of time and be functioning in a very short period of time, possibly with the life memories of the host person programmed into their brain, etc.
|
|
|
Post by The Mask on Apr 22, 2011 17:51:44 GMT -5
Having worked for a while as a singer I detect that the Faul in the second vid is working hard technically to emulate some of what is done on the album but doesn't have the same voice to make the same sounds. Yes, I noticed this too. Yes, very intersting. You hear what I am hearing plus much more. Thank you for that input goro. Let's take another look at this. People, are you sure Paul was always the same Paul? Paul in Things We Said TodayPaul in We Can Work It OutAnybody hear the difference?
|
|
|
Post by artemis on Apr 24, 2011 6:39:29 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by artemis on Apr 26, 2011 3:47:19 GMT -5
"The “Twin-Explosion” In Hollywood: It's NO Happy Accident! A lot more than divine intervention is knocking up celebs with two babies rather than one.
The birth of twins used to be a rare occurrence, but these days in Hollywood it would appear as though every starlet and her hubby/boyfriend/ live-in lover has had or is preggers with two babies instead of the traditional one. Celine Dion, Marcia Cross, Julia Roberts, Rebecca Romjin, Jennifer Lopez, Mariah Carey, Mary Stuart Masterson … the list goes on. Happy accidents? Well, according to splashy headlines and "in-depth" birth stories, the public is lead to believe that these twin births are divine will. And I'm here to tell you, that is likely not the case. In fact a lot more than divine intervention is what likely had these ladies knocked up with two rather than one babe.
Why do I care? Why do I question, or seem mean spirited about the miraculous births of these babies? Because as someone who struggled with secondary infertility and spent countless months, hours, minutes trying to conceive, I know that these twin births are not just miracles of g-d. They're more so the end result of endless doctor visits, risky and expensive procedures, a load of fertility drugs, artificial inseminations, painful egg retrievals and oh-so-pricey in vitro fertilization.
I know what you're gong to say -- there have been Hollywood actresses who've been vocal about their infertility struggles, but they're just a handful and definitely not in the majority. The process of trying to conceive – something that as a woman, you feel should be this natural process – when it just isn't happening, can feel akin to someone stripping you of your inalienable rights. And in our baby bump-obsessed culture, where we're constantly bombarded by these over 40-year-old actresses popping out twins one after the other … as a fertility-challenged woman it can make you go kind of batty.
For anyone who has never had fertility challenges: the cost of just one round of IVF can be as expensive as $10,000. Oftentimes it is not covered by insurance, and even more often it is unsuccessful. Usually it will take several rounds of IVF to actually get pregnant, and many times it is IVF, or other fertility drugs, causing these “spontaneous” twin pregnancies. In other words, these celebrity twins are usually not spontaneous miracles at all, but rather they're the end results of very costly, physically grueling painful procedures, which are often cost-prohibitive to the regular over 35-year-old woman who wants to bear a child.
I remember when I was experiencing secondary infertility after my first child. We tried for two years to get pregnant and after two intrauterine inseminations and endless rounds of shots, drugs and procedures (we were one step from IVF), I finally did get pregnant ... with twins. At 11 weeks, one of the twins, whose heartbeat was never quite as strong as the other's, passed away.
And it was a bittersweet blow -- I still had that one remaining baby in my womb, and was so lucky to have been able to carry that fetus to term. That baby is now my 6-year-old son.
Still, there are so many women for whom these procedures fail; they miscarry one or both fetuses, and the process of infertility and the struggle to conceive become an overwhelming mission and journey that is not as successful as Mariah Carey's, Jennifer Lopez', Marcia Cross’, Marcia Gay Harden's ... so why aren't these actresses talking about it? Why is there this veil of secrecy around this twin-explosion?
Because ultimately it's a matter of affordability -- and regular people simply cannot afford the procedures that these Hollywood celebs can?"
|
|
|
Post by goro on Apr 26, 2011 10:40:46 GMT -5
Having worked for a while as a singer I detect that the Faul in the second vid is working hard technically to emulate some of what is done on the album but doesn't have the same voice to make the same sounds. Yes, I noticed this too. Yes, very intersting. You hear what I am hearing plus much more. Thank you for that input goro. Let's take another look at this. People, are you sure Paul was always the same Paul? Paul in Things We Said TodayPaul in We Can Work It OutAnybody hear the difference? Hi Mask - Been busy here this week and haven't had much time to thoroughly respond to posts - just listened to these and I suddenly remembered how Things We Said Today is another Faul song that has NEVER seemed like Paul's voice to me - and contrasted with We Can Work It Out, it's even more obvious to me. For most of my young adulthood I had the most difficult time differentiating between the different Beatles when I'd hear their music. Everybody else would be all, "That's John" or "That's George" or whatever and I now realize part of my confusion wasn't just because there were four men to parse but MORE than four. I would let myself get distracted or lulled by the catchiness of the tunes but could never shake this almost subconscious feeling that there were more Beatles/Featles than I realized. It's neat to see it all making sense now. Another one I always had problems distinguishing was George/Feorge? He'd only sing a couple of songs per album and he was never considered one of the "cute" leads in the band, but even so, he did have some nice hits. I remember one of my earliest memories was sitting in my parent's apartment hearing "Something"on the radio and taking great spiritual comfort somehow in that song - I literally had the thought "It's okay to be here" and I was about two years old - I guess looking for evidence that there was some beauty on this crazy planet! But was that really George? Feorge? Somebody else? PS We Can Work It Out almost sounds like one of those guys from The Monkees is singing!
|
|
|
Post by goro on Apr 26, 2011 10:43:18 GMT -5
Re: Lindsay/Findsay: the one with the lighter eyes in that mugshot and the upturned nose has clearly had most of her nose decay through heavy cocaine use and has had reconstructive surgery to give her a bit of nose back.
|
|
|
Post by artemis on Apr 30, 2011 15:37:13 GMT -5
"Mariah Carey & Nick Cannon Welcome Twins!
Mariah Carey and Nick Cannon celebrated their fourth wedding anniversary with two very special people - their newborn twins!
The 41-year-old entertainer gave birth on Saturday (April 30) - their wedding date - to a boy and girl at a Los Angeles hospital at 12:07 p.m. EST, her rep told the AP.
The girl was born first, weighing 5 lbs., 3 oz., and 18 inches, while her brother weighed in at 5 lbs., 6 oz., and 19 inches.
“My wife just gave me the most incredible anniversary gift ever in life! I won’t ever be able to top this!” Nick, 30, tweeted.
Mariah’s rep, who said the couple hasn’t named the twins just yet, also revealed they listened to Mariah’s hit song, “We Belong Together,” after the children were born. "
Im sorry but it sounds like a programmed birth to me...
|
|
|
Post by artemis on May 3, 2011 3:55:25 GMT -5
The newest FRISTEN FTEWART (clone). More and more looking nothing like the original...
|
|
|
Post by The Mask on May 3, 2011 9:05:47 GMT -5
For most of my young adulthood I had the most difficult time differentiating between the different Beatles when I'd hear their music. Everybody else would be all, "That's John" or "That's George" or whatever and I now realize part of my confusion wasn't just because there were four men to parse but MORE than four. I would let myself get distracted or lulled by the catchiness of the tunes but could never shake this almost subconscious feeling that there were more Beatles/Featles than I realized..... ....Another one I always had problems distinguishing was George/Feorge? He'd only sing a couple of songs per album and he was never considered one of the "cute" leads in the band, but even so, he did have some nice hits. I remember one of my earliest memories was sitting in my parent's apartment hearing "Something"on the radio and taking great spiritual comfort somehow in that song - I literally had the thought "It's okay to be here" and I was about two years old - I guess looking for evidence that there was some beauty on this crazy planet! I've had a lot of people tell me that throughout the years. Many Feorges. I never thought of it but the resemblance to Micky Dolenz is not far off in that song.
|
|
|
Post by The Mask on May 3, 2011 9:09:25 GMT -5
The newest FRISTEN FTEWART (clone). More and more looking nothing like the original... I also think that in addition to just being clones, that when these clones are being created there is some type of computer program that allows the scientist the opportunity to modify the looks/personality of the clone from the dna of the original subject...as crazy as that sounds. For instance, larger eyes, or a squarer jaw or smaller ears, etc.
|
|
|
Post by artemis on May 3, 2011 9:27:58 GMT -5
It doesnt sound crazy at all, on the contrary. Its as usual as it comes.
|
|