Are there flaws in the Italian Wired article in which forensic scientists used biometrics to determine whether or not Paul McCartney had been replaced?
For starters, the forensics team, Carlessi & Gavazenni, used a stretched image from the 1967 Sgt. Pepper's album gatefold for their head size comparisons.
Which they obtained from the Digilander PID site run by SunKing.
snippet from Wired article
image used by Wired
They got their ear comparisons from the same PID site.
Teeth comparisons? Got them from the same PID site.
And for their 'same Paul' comparison, they used this grainy, poorly-lit photo on the left.
The scientists say the jawlines of these two Pauls match, but did they notice the glaringly different eyebrows?
Even the noses, mouths, ears and chin clefts aren't quite the same.
It's also important to note that these works of Carlessi & Gavazzeni were not peer reviewed.
Sure, the Wired article does an alright job of showing us that there were two Pauls, but that is just one small part of the much bigger picture. It certainly doesn't prove that anybody died. Which they say it does.
I would like to see them analyze several photos from the Beatlemania era, comparing them all with each other. And likewise with post-66 photos.
I'd also like to see them explain the uncanny resemblances between them all.
Even the Wired organization doesn't seem convinced that Paul died. They're continuing to write articles about him, referring to him as Paul McCartney, not "the replacement".
It's interesting to note that this article came out the day in 2009 that McCartney made his notorious appearance on the Dave Letterman show.
Which happens to be held in Ed Sullivan's former studio.