The Paul Is Dead article describes the urban legend that McCartney died in 1966 and was replaced by a look-alike and sound-alike. A paragraph in the article describes an analysis of pre- and post-1966 photographs. The analysis was poorly done in my opinion, but that's not the funny part. The article says the people who did the analysis "concluded that it was possible that the photographs were not of the same person." (Yeah, right!) Then we read this:
“
They noted however, that they had not had direct access to McCartney, and that they were less certain of their conclusion than might have been the case had they been dealing with a corpse, where a more rigorous analysis would have been possible.
”
So, let me get this straight... the researchers want to kill McCartney in order to prove whether or not he's dead?
