You can't have it both ways. Point is, like I mentioned numerous times before in this thread, it is the overall picture you need to look at, not 1 characteristic. I'll repeat myself again, some people are just very badly capable of recognizing people from a photograph.
Doubles can fool you on a distance, partially masked or remote on video, but not up close. It is not possible to make a double that similar. It is surgically NOT possible. If it were, Michael would also have been able to reconstruct the plastic surgery on his nose and have the perfect face again. It is complete, and utter NONSENSE.
Even when it is clearly Michael, they do not want to believe it is and start looking with a magnifying glass for differences. As soon as they think they have 1 characteristic in a picture that does not look like on another picture, they believe it MUST be a double. But as soon as 1 characteristic is shown that is the same in both pictures, for instance a scar like theone on his cheek or the one under his lip, THEN it is explained 'ow that is surgically altered to look like MJ'.
Raven your absolutely right
BLESS your heart for saying it so well <!-- s:D -->:D<!-- s:D -->
You can't have it both ways. Point is, like I mentioned numerous times before in this thread, it is the overall picture you need to look at, not 1 characteristic. I'll repeat myself again, some people are just very badly capable of recognizing people from a photograph.
Doubles can fool you on a distance, partially masked or remote on video, but not up close. It is not possible to make a double that similar. It is surgically NOT possible. If it were, Michael would also have been able to reconstruct the plastic surgery on his nose and have the perfect face again. It is complete, and utter NONSENSE.
Even when it is clearly Michael, they do not want to believe it is and start looking with a magnifying glass for differences. As soon as they think they have 1 characteristic in a picture that does not look like on another picture, they believe it MUST be a double. But as soon as 1 characteristic is shown that is the same in both pictures, for instance a scar like the one on his cheek or the one under his lip, THEN it is explained 'ow that is surgically altered to look like MJ'.
The same way you clearly believe they are all michael, we clearly believe it isnt.
So are you going to keep trying to convince us that there isnt doubles, im not trying to convince you or anyone they used doubles, im stating my own opinions with the others in this thread that i clearly see doubles.
Its ok for you to disagree but AS I STATED BEFORE THIS IS A HOAX SITE, IF US DISCUSSING THE POSSIBILITY THAT MICHAEL USED DOUBLES IS TO FAR OUT THERE THEN WHY ARE YOU AT A HOAX SITE WHERE WE DISCUSS ALL POSSIBILITIES THAT SURROUND A HOAX AS CRAZY AS SOME THEORIES MAY SOUND.
It would be alot more respectful if you just sate your disagreement without trying to make us or our members come off as crazy.
As I have stated a thousand times, this is a HOAX site, and no idea or thought is crazy.
but surely this is a death hoax investigators site - what has unproven doubles in photo's got to do with the death hoax?
**edited by badkolo** you mean no offense yet you spew crap and make judgments. I never have banned one member on our sites forum so honestly i have no idea where you got that notion. Secondly have you seen my posts, I have said you can all speak your minds and not to judge people for having any idea or theory.
BUT im not going to have people decide how we will run this site.
We will do as we wish , we run,own and pay for this site and while you might not like threads like this one you have the option of leaving the thread or the site all together, you also have the option to disagree in a polite way, if you or other members dont like that the door is right behind you. Now if you thing thats a little tough or rude then so be it, i wont lose any sleep over it, trust me. **
Think of this site as your home when you where living with your parents. Now we dont want to be like your parents but you get my point. where you allowed to do everything you wanted and be rude to your family members without any consequences??? I DOUBT IT.
<!-- s --><!-- s --> Mike is probably having a good laugh about the official doubles thread, then checking the mirror looking at this nose, his ears, chin and his glasses - great disguise to go out and about - no one would notice him - because all the hoaxers believe he is a double <!-- s --><!-- s -->
Cridits go to: The_gloved_one
hey guys i spotted something interesting while i was watching my TII DVD. Everything red pants Michael was on the screen he seemed to be a using autocue. anyone else think thats odd? Maybe Michael just needed reminding of his lyrics. Apologies if this has already been discussed. x
Good find! For me it's odd too. I really don't think MJ needs "to have some help" with lyrics of his songs..
but surely this is a death hoax investigators site - what has unproven doubles in photo's got to do with the death hoax?
Others are clearly on a different view. If something seems unproven to you, it doesn't mean other people share your opinion.
I said it before and I will say it again: Has it ever occurred to you that Mike at one point might not have had a choice BUT to use doubles..? This can be one of the reasons for hoaxing his death, and therefor we investigate this issue.
I'm one of those who do believe there were used doubles in TII and in the hoax in general. Even i have not posted too much i'm here with you , reading everything. Speaking about doubles have you ever seen this one? His name is Micah and i think he's one of the best impersonators .
So, I will post another comparisation. O2 dude and soft faced Mike:
So I will stick to my question that if O2 dude (ON stage) was Mike, then who are these 3 dudes?
And I really don't want to go "OMG <!-- s:o -->:o<!-- s:o --> MMS FR/MS Mikaeel me angel maree me" here, but Mike is way better looking than O2 dude... Give the guy some credit!
The guy from the O2 arena is an imposter. Just look at the real Michael's lower lip...the smile is a little different from the left guy's. This difference is one of Michael's distinctive marks.
It looks as if the O2 man's lips are thinner and not as wide. Surely, there must be a way of measuring these things. I think the photos of him coming out of his family home are of him and also at the Christian Audigier party. He had such an angelic way about him, slightly startled it seems. The 02 man is completely different.
I'm one of those who do believe there were used doubles in TII and in the hoax in general. Even i have not posted too much i'm here with you , reading everything. Speaking about doubles have you ever seen this one? His name is Micah and i think he's one of the best impersonators .
This guy, to me, looks so much like an impersonator. I would know it immediately when seeing him. Have to say he is kinda cute though.....but not gorgeous like MJ.
You can't have it both ways. Point is, like I mentioned numerous times before in this thread, it is the overall picture you need to look at, not 1 characteristic. I'll repeat myself again, some people are just very badly capable of recognizing people from a photograph.
Doubles can fool you on a distance, partially masked or remote on video, but not up close. It is not possible to make a double that similar. It is surgically NOT possible. If it were, Michael would also have been able to reconstruct the plastic surgery on his nose and have the perfect face again. It is complete, and utter NONSENSE.
Even when it is clearly Michael, they do not want to believe it is and start looking with a magnifying glass for differences. As soon as they think they have 1 characteristic in a picture that does not look like on another picture, they believe it MUST be a double. But as soon as 1 characteristic is shown that is the same in both pictures, for instance a scar like theone on his cheek or the one under his lip, THEN it is explained 'ow that is surgically altered to look like MJ'.
Raven your absolutely right
BLESS your heart for saying it so well <!-- s:D -->:D<!-- s:D -->
You can't have it both ways. Point is, like I mentioned numerous times before in this thread, it is the overall picture you need to look at, not 1 characteristic. I'll repeat myself again, some people are just very badly capable of recognizing people from a photograph.
Doubles can fool you on a distance, partially masked or remote on video, but not up close. It is not possible to make a double that similar. It is surgically NOT possible. If it were, Michael would also have been able to reconstruct the plastic surgery on his nose and have the perfect face again. It is complete, and utter NONSENSE.
Even when it is clearly Michael, they do not want to believe it is and start looking with a magnifying glass for differences. As soon as they think they have 1 characteristic in a picture that does not look like on another picture, they believe it MUST be a double. But as soon as 1 characteristic is shown that is the same in both pictures, for instance a scar like theone on his cheek or the one under his lip, THEN it is explained 'ow that is surgically altered to look like MJ'.
Raven your absolutely right
BLESS your heart for saying it so well <!-- s:D -->:D<!-- s:D -->
i agree with bec. michaels body language should be the tell tell sign that its obviously doubles in tii. as bec mentioned in i just cant stop loving you i saw a person being very aggressive not gentle like the michael we all love. i personally have never seen michael be agressive towards a woman.
i agree with bec. michaels body language should be the tell tell sign that its obviously doubles in tii. as bec mentioned in i just cant stop loving you i saw a person being very aggressive not gentle like the michael we all love. i personally have never seen michael be agressive towards a woman.
And he fluffed up the first verse of that song in TII and looked kind of awkward when he did. Would Michael REALLY fluff up like that? I know it was only rehearsals BUT to fluff up the first verse of a song you have sung a zillion times??? <!-- s:? -->:?<!-- s:? --> Just my opinion.
i agree with bec. michaels body language should be the tell tell sign that its obviously doubles in tii. as bec mentioned in i just cant stop loving you i saw a person being very aggressive not gentle like the michael we all love. i personally have never seen michael be agressive towards a woman.
And he fluffed up the first verse of that song in TII and looked kind of awkward when he did. Would Michael REALLY fluff up like that? I know it was only rehearsals BUT to fluff up the first verse of a song you have sung a zillion times??? <!-- s:? -->:?<!-- s:? --> Just my opinion.
But how do you explain the voice? No double can sing like MJ, nowhere near.
You can't have it both ways. Point is, like I mentioned numerous times before in this thread, it is the overall picture you need to look at, not 1 characteristic. I'll repeat myself again, some people are just very badly capable of recognizing people from a photograph.
Doubles can fool you on a distance, partially masked or remote on video, but not up close. It is not possible to make a double that similar. It is surgically NOT possible. If it were, Michael would also have been able to reconstruct the plastic surgery on his nose and have the perfect face again. It is complete, and utter NONSENSE.
Even when it is clearly Michael, they do not want to believe it is and start looking with a magnifying glass for differences. As soon as they think they have 1 characteristic in a picture that does not look like on another picture, they believe it MUST be a double. But as soon as 1 characteristic is shown that is the same in both pictures, for instance a scar like theone on his cheek or the one under his lip, THEN it is explained 'ow that is surgically altered to look like MJ'.
Raven your absolutely right
BLESS your heart for saying it so well <!-- s:D -->:D<!-- s:D -->
I agree!!! <!-- s:D -->:D<!-- s:D -->
Thx
So do I agree, thx for making that perspective clear!
i agree with bec. michaels body language should be the tell tell sign that its obviously doubles in tii. as bec mentioned in i just cant stop loving you i saw a person being very aggressive not gentle like the michael we all love. i personally have never seen michael be agressive towards a woman.
And he fluffed up the first verse of that song in TII and looked kind of awkward when he did. Would Michael REALLY fluff up like that? I know it was only rehearsals BUT to fluff up the first verse of a song you have sung a zillion times??? <!-- s:? -->:?<!-- s:? --> Just my opinion.
But how do you explain the voice? No double can sing like MJ, nowhere near.
people do sound like sound like other artist. jamie foxx sounds exactly like ray charles. so imo people having voices like someone else is not unusual.
This looks like MJ from a vid that I saw of him at the Virgin record store cd signing. It's the one where he was flirting with some women including Joanna Thome. He was acting a little "off" during the signing. There was a lot of head bobbing, odd comments and strange looks toward his security guards as he signed autographs.
I'm one of those who do believe there were used doubles in TII and in the hoax in general. Even i have not posted too much i'm here with you , reading everything. Speaking about doubles have you ever seen this one? His name is Micah and i think he's one of the best impersonators .
i agree with bec. michaels body language should be the tell tell sign that its obviously doubles in tii. as bec mentioned in i just cant stop loving you i saw a person being very aggressive not gentle like the michael we all love. i personally have never seen michael be agressive towards a woman.
And he fluffed up the first verse of that song in TII and looked kind of awkward when he did. Would Michael REALLY fluff up like that? I know it was only rehearsals BUT to fluff up the first verse of a song you have sung a zillion times??? <!-- s:? -->:?<!-- s:? --> Just my opinion.
But how do you explain the voice? No double can sing like MJ, nowhere near.
people do sound like sound like other artist. jamie foxx sounds exactly like ray charles. so imo people having voices like someone else is not unusual.
Still people were confused about Nick Jonas in WATW 2010. But a harmonizer can do the job, and with recorded footage you can let them lipsync. It's really not that impossible.
"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."
i agree with bec. michaels body language should be the tell tell sign that its obviously doubles in tii. as bec mentioned in i just cant stop loving you i saw a person being very aggressive not gentle like the michael we all love. i personally have never seen michael be agressive towards a woman.
And he fluffed up the first verse of that song in TII and looked kind of awkward when he did. Would Michael REALLY fluff up like that? I know it was only rehearsals BUT to fluff up the first verse of a song you have sung a zillion times??? <!-- s:? -->:?<!-- s:? --> Just my opinion.
But how do you explain the voice? No double can sing like MJ, nowhere near.
people do sound like sound like other artist. jamie foxx sounds exactly like ray charles. so imo people having voices like someone else is not unusual.
Still people were confused about Nick Jonas in WATW 2010. But a harmonizer can do the job, and with recorded footage you can let them lipsync. It's really not that impossible.
Did I miss something? What happened with Nick Jonas at WATW? Sorry for asking.. <!-- s:? -->:?<!-- s:? -->
Using Harmonizers
Define your signature vocal sound and more
The harmonizer is one of the less understood studio processors. They are less likely to show up in a typical home studio rack. I think that is an oversight, though it's easy to see why. Harmonizers are expensive, at least the really good ones, like the famous Eventides, certainly are. Nowadays, like with other gear, you can get great sound under a grand. With harmonizers, unlike other effects, you have to go the hardware route. While there are some pseudo-harmonizers in expensive software bundles these do not hold a candle to the real thing. So to play the game you have to ante up for hardware.
What is a Harmonizer?
A Harmonizer is a device that samples incoming audio material and automatically creates several time stretched versions at different pitches and combines them all to an audio output. All of this happens on the fly in real time. You hear this device all the time on the radio. Whenever you hear ultra tight vocal harmonies that sound "too perfect" you are listening to a harmonizer at work. There's also a lot of times where it is at work where it's not obvious. Harmonizers can be used to thicken, detune and add effects to instruments and can, for the creative, make very strange effects out of any audio material. You can hear some audio before/after demos at the TCHelicon site.
Types of effects
The main effect, naturally, is the harmonies. The typical use is to record your chorus tracks through the harmonizer and lay this track under the main vocal.
One cool ability of my unit, the TC VoiceWorks, is "gender shifting" as well as pitch shifting. I can make my voice really low or really high. Of course it can do Darth Vader and munchkins effects, but that's all old hat. With the gender features you can add more maleness or femaleness to your voice. Ever wanted to sound like a chick, you macho dudes? Sure you have. Ok forget that then, turn yourself into a 12 foot 600 lb blues singer with a really deep voice. Basso Profundo!
Another effect easily achieved is thickening, doubling (or tripling and quadrupling), detuning. This not only sounds good on vocals, but one other instruments too.
Many harmonizers have effects like delay and reverb. If you wanted to you could just use the box for these and bypass all the rest, so if you are working live there won't be any reverb hiccup as a preset changes and you can hit a footswitch and go from harmonies to straight vocals.
And now imagine what kind of high-tec harmonizer Mike could buy...
"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."
The teeth from the first 3 Michaels are the same and very regular. The theeth from the O2 Michael are a little bit different. Look at the thooth between the front-tooth and the eye-tooth.
front-tooth and tooth next to it are the same height, eye- tooth is lower than front-tooth
His teeth are not so regular
front tooth does not have the same height as tooth next to it. Eye-tooth is not lower than front-tooth.
I have always thought 02 Michael was Michael but looking again i think the teeth are not the same. i am getting confused again..It seems to be about the eye tooth.
This looks like MJ from a vid that I saw of him at the Virgin record store cd signing. It's the one where he was flirting with some women including Joanna Thome. He was acting a little "off" during the signing. There was a lot of head bobbing, odd comments and strange looks toward his security guards as he signed autographs.
I'm one of those who do believe there were used doubles in TII and in the hoax in general. Even i have not posted too much i'm here with you , reading everything. Speaking about doubles have you ever seen this one? His name is Micah and i think he's one of the best impersonators .
Comments
Raven your absolutely right
BLESS your heart for saying it so well <!-- s:D -->:D<!-- s:D -->
but surely this is a death hoax investigators site - what has unproven doubles in photo's got to do with the death hoax?
**edited by badkolo** you mean no offense yet you spew crap and make judgments. I never have banned one member on our sites forum so honestly i have no idea where you got that notion. Secondly have you seen my posts, I have said you can all speak your minds and not to judge people for having any idea or theory.
BUT im not going to have people decide how we will run this site.
We will do as we wish , we run,own and pay for this site and while you might not like threads like this one you have the option of leaving the thread or the site all together, you also have the option to disagree in a polite way, if you or other members dont like that the door is right behind you. Now if you thing thats a little tough or rude then so be it, i wont lose any sleep over it, trust me. **
Think of this site as your home when you where living with your parents. Now we dont want to be like your parents but you get my point. where you allowed to do everything you wanted and be rude to your family members without any consequences??? I DOUBT IT.
Good find!
Others are clearly on a different view. If something seems unproven to you, it doesn't mean other people share your opinion.
I said it before and I will say it again: Has it ever occurred to you that Mike at one point might not have had a choice BUT to use doubles..? This can be one of the reasons for hoaxing his death, and therefor we investigate this issue.
The guy from the O2 arena is an imposter. Just look at the real Michael's lower lip...the smile is a little different from the left guy's. This difference is one of Michael's distinctive marks.
This guy, to me, looks so much like an impersonator. I would know it immediately when seeing him. Have to say he is kinda cute though.....but not gorgeous like MJ.
I agree!!! <!-- s:D -->:D<!-- s:D -->
And he fluffed up the first verse of that song in TII and looked kind of awkward when he did. Would Michael REALLY fluff up like that? I know it was only rehearsals BUT to fluff up the first verse of a song you have sung a zillion times??? <!-- s:? -->:?<!-- s:? --> Just my opinion.
But how do you explain the voice? No double can sing like MJ, nowhere near.
So do I agree, thx for making that perspective clear!
people do sound like sound like other artist. jamie foxx sounds exactly like ray charles. so imo people having voices like someone else is not unusual.
But his lip looks a little bit numb I think
Still people were confused about Nick Jonas in WATW 2010. But a harmonizer can do the job, and with recorded footage you can let them lipsync. It's really not that impossible.
"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."Did I miss something? What happened with Nick Jonas at WATW? Sorry for asking.. <!-- s:? -->:?<!-- s:? -->
And now imagine what kind of high-tec harmonizer Mike could buy...
"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."front-tooth and tooth next to it are the same height, eye- tooth is lower than front-tooth
His teeth are not so regular
front tooth does not have the same height as tooth next to it. Eye-tooth is not lower than front-tooth.