Oh, God...
What you guys are doing here is a true autopsy... Autopsy performed on a living body...
At least you could find similar photos - I mean with M's face turned in the same direction... when you try to compare his face turned left with his face turned rigt - that makes no sense. Also comparing faces with different glasses on - is also ridiculous.
The shape of the glasses DOES change the whole facial expression...
Just my 2 cents and I shut up. <!-- s:? -->:?<!-- s:? -->
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 .
To me he does not look like Michael
I agree, also he looks way too young. His name is Carlo Riley.
i think they are used to seeing him change that they think he can change daily, but you cant change your cleft back and fourth like the wind, and your eyes and face shape doesnt change like that either.
on the rich and famous it was said he has many many doubles
he has doubles and we all know this, why fight it. its on video, he has double that are not ecasanova and others, its how he rolls.
SOMETIMES I DONT KNOW WHO IS CRAZIER, US FOR THINKING HE HAS DOUBLES OR YOU PEOPLE WHO THINK HE DOESNT.
i FIND IT HARD TO BELEIVE THAT MICHAEL JACKSON WITH ALL HIS ISSUES DOESNT HAVE A DOUBLE THAT IS CLOSER TO HIS LOOK THEN YOU ALL EXPECT.
It's obvious that many, many people do get confused. We've all seen it on the Internet and even in some tabloids where they've posted pictures of "Michael" but in reality it was one of his doubles. One of his doubles has said there were about a dozen "elite" impersonators but many, many more that impersonated Michael but weren't among the elite. I'm sure Michael was aware of many of these people. I have never been fully convinced that 02 guy is Michael but I still struggle with it.
The lower TII pic is Michael - the eye tooth is pointed. The TII pic above that is also Michael as the angle is different.
To debunk doubles - try using a software like picasa - where it scans the pics and lets you autotag the person depending on the facial features - Michael and all those supposed double pics will all be recognized as Michael.
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.
Oh, God... What you guys are doing here is a true autopsy... Autopsy performed on a living body...
At least you could find similar photos - I mean with M's face turned in the same direction... when you try to compare his face turned left with his face turned rigt - that makes no sense. Also comparing faces with different glasses on - is also ridiculous.
The shape of the glasses DOES change the whole facial expression...
Just my 2 cents and I shut up. <!-- s:? -->:?<!-- s:? -->
The lower TII pic is Michael - the eye tooth is pointed. The TII pic above that is also Michael as the angle is different.
To debunk doubles - try using a software like picasa - where it scans the pics and lets you autotag the person depending on the facial features - Michael and all those supposed double pics will all be recognized as Michael.
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.
maybe there will be some sanity on the page now - thank you.
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.
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.
Here a nice quote from Michael on this subject.I ran into it whilst reading this interview with a sony executive, you can read the full interview in the link. Makes a great read.
CR: “So David Blaine buried himself alive in the city over by the Trump building.”
CY: Trump National Towers.
CR: “Right. When I told Michael that was going on, he was like, ‘You gotta be kidding?’ I said, I’m telling you. He didn’t even know who David Blaine was. I started like sending for like video footage and everything because we didn’t have YouTube then. I started sending for footage to explain to him who David Blaine was. He was so fascinated. We got in a van that night and we went to see David Blaine late at night. We went over there.
We jumped out the van and he like a kinda partial disguise and no one really knew it was him. He jumped out and walked right over there and we sat there and he was fascinated by it. It was funny. Then we were laughing because sometimes he said, ‘You know what? Half the time someone is going to think it’s an impersonator and not me anyway. Sometimes I can just jump out.”
The picture in the middle is made in may 2006. It looks to me that the thooth between the front-tooth and the eye-tooth is different in height. I saw that on sililar O2 pictures on mjjpictures.com . you can watch them there much larger as here. All eye-tooth are pointed.
Dear Friends, This is all so impossible to unravel. Of course there are doubles, trying to catch this ones tooth or chin here and there is truly is trying to catch the wind! me thinks fans need to brush up on cosmetic dinistry(joke) and cosmetic fille (aka Arnie Klien's speciality) Amazing changes can happen in the blink of an eye! meow 4 now
Firstly MJJPictures has many photoshopped pictures so I would not believe all that is there.
Secondly Orange Pants is the King HIMSELF. Here are my reasons why.
1) The first glimpse of Michael in the movie would have to be the original - you can't have the first frame with a double.
2) Only Michael can prance up and down on stage - have you seen him run by jumping up in the air - that is his trademark and I am awe everytime he does that to get to the other side of the stage fast.
3) Someone said he did not have the ear monitor equipment on but you can clearly see it here.
I NEW LONG AGO THAT THEY USED DOUBLES IN THIS IS IT. JOE ALSO STATED THAT THEY USED BODY DOUBLES IN THIS IS IT........ IT IS HARD TO SAY WHICH IS REAL MJ. LU 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'.
I totally agree!
I am (and I have always been) seriously opened to change my mind as many times as necessary through this investigation. I can assure you I'm not interested on "be right", say "I told you so", change your minds or such.
It’s fine to me if you believe there were doubles in TII/ Arena O2 PC, but every new thread on this issue, and new post in this thread just show me how much (unintentionally) blind & sticked to your beliefs/wishes for this man not being Michael Jackson are some of you, that make you defend your points with arguments and proofs barely believables and less solid every time. Sometimes your statements sounds kind of desperate (“Michael has a clone”, “in TII has been used 4 doubles” and so on ... Geez). Come on, let’s be unbiased. Don’t make things fit into your theories: make a theory of things.
The problem is that some of you are comparing pictures that can not/should not be compared.
Similar conditions in both pictures are needed in order to have a valid conclusion, I mean come on, how can you compare ears when one of the pics you posted has a big ear piece in it?.
You need similar positions, “age” of the pic, lightening, angles, facial expressions: I've seen comparations of his chins cleft and of the space from the nose to the upper lip using one pic of him smiling vs. a "serious face" pic, that is not right, those features change when you, me, or anyone smiles, simple.
Also variations of the weight, the shape of the sunglasses, hairstyle and clothes makes a person look way too different from pic to pic, that is a fact.
Plus he had surgeries, so we cannot pretend he still looks like in 80’s or in 1994, no way.
As you can see, there are too many factors to have in mind at the time to compare pictures or make a conclusion.
Now, these are the ones I know (and always knew) as MJ’s eyes at pic 3 in the OP: some of you said that the man in green is Michael because you “saw Michael’s eyes through that outfit”, you saw that “it’s his “body structure”, come on, this person has not even the height of an adult, but “he was Michael, no doubts about it”, and the man in the third pic is not him? Give me a break...
Regarding Michael’s cleft on his chin, yes it does look different than before, it has become “deep” through the years, no by itself but because his whole face has changed with the age (like everyone does), and with the weight loss (look at the pics from 80’s to 2009, and you’ll see it pretty clear).
I know this is a hoax site, and I agree it’s good to think outside the box, but this is real world too. Anything is possible, but the "reality" is the limit. Yes, even for Michael Jackson. JMHO though, I hope you get what I mean.
Peace guys! <!-- s:D -->:D<!-- s:D -->
PS: I wanted to attach some pics, but it says "Sorry, the board attachment quota has been reached" when I try to do it.
Edit** to add the pics
Ok, I know is annoying go back to the same topics over and over again, but I just wanted to share this. I didn’t want to do this at all and I’m sure you will find some differences, but here I go.
Now, take a look at the following pics, please. (These will be the last ones, I promise!)
a) Look at this one carefully. Same position, same lightening. Look at the whole picture, then look his face from his cheek to his chin. Look at his smile, lips and cleft. You can tell it is almost the same picture, don’t you?
c) What about this one? Please, look at the same features I posted above. Almost the same picture again…
d) Ok, here you go some more. My conclusions on this? Or a man is living Michael’s life, or it was Michael at O2. Guess wich one I did choose…
Are you able to keep disrespecting Michael at O2, calling “ass” to his chin, and other things I’ve seen through this thread? Even if it was not Michael, that is not good at all, don’t you think?
JMO. Peace, and thanks for reading! <!-- s:D -->:D<!-- s:D -->
All of them Michael jackson to me .....nothing more nothing less.....
And what the hell?
Are ye all certified dentists?
The teeth are just fine they are all the same.....They look different coz of the extra collagen that MJ had inserted into his lips to make them look thicker...or plumpier or whatever the word you wanna use...thats it. <!-- s:roll: -->:roll:<!-- s:roll: -->
No it was one taken quite a way away from the stage and you could see 'MJ' on stage with the dancers and also a silhouette of MJ (from behind) watching the stage. I'm trying to find it but not having any luck. I can't remember which thread it was in.
Well it took a while but I found that pic I was talking about but only because someone just posted it on Twitter!! (thanks TugbaMJackson!!)
In TII, where Michael is speaking with Kenny (was it the green screen scene?) where Michael says, "yeah, that's a cool move..." I thought there was something about his face that looked different. It made his face look really wide...can't put my finger on exactly what it was. Did anybody else catch that?
Comments
i just like looking at all these pictures of michael....
What you guys are doing here is a true autopsy... Autopsy performed on a living body...
At least you could find similar photos - I mean with M's face turned in the same direction... when you try to compare his face turned left with his face turned rigt - that makes no sense. Also comparing faces with different glasses on - is also ridiculous.
The shape of the glasses DOES change the whole facial expression...
Just my 2 cents and I shut up. <!-- s:? -->:?<!-- s:? -->
I agree, also he looks way too young. His name is Carlo Riley.
It's obvious that many, many people do get confused. We've all seen it on the Internet and even in some tabloids where they've posted pictures of "Michael" but in reality it was one of his doubles. One of his doubles has said there were about a dozen "elite" impersonators but many, many more that impersonated Michael but weren't among the elite. I'm sure Michael was aware of many of these people. I have never been fully convinced that 02 guy is Michael but I still struggle with it.
The lower TII pic is Michael - the eye tooth is pointed. The TII pic above that is also Michael as the angle is different.
To debunk doubles - try using a software like picasa - where it scans the pics and lets you autotag the person depending on the facial features - Michael and all those supposed double pics will all be recognized as Michael.
true - it is disgusting
maybe there will be some sanity on the page now - thank you.
All mike
Exactly.
It is not correct IMO to compare pictures with 25 years in between.
<!-- m -->http://thesportsinterview.com/mjackson.htm<!-- m -->
CR: “So David Blaine buried himself alive in the city over by the Trump building.”
CY: Trump National Towers.
CR: “Right. When I told Michael that was going on, he was like, ‘You gotta be kidding?’ I said, I’m telling you. He didn’t even know who David Blaine was. I started like sending for like video footage and everything because we didn’t have YouTube then. I started sending for footage to explain to him who David Blaine was. He was so fascinated. We got in a van that night and we went to see David Blaine late at night. We went over there.
We jumped out the van and he like a kinda partial disguise and no one really knew it was him. He jumped out and walked right over there and we sat there and he was fascinated by it. It was funny. Then we were laughing because sometimes he said, ‘You know what? Half the time someone is going to think it’s an impersonator and not me anyway. Sometimes I can just jump out.”
Secondly Orange Pants is the King HIMSELF. Here are my reasons why.
1) The first glimpse of Michael in the movie would have to be the original - you can't have the first frame with a double.
2) Only Michael can prance up and down on stage - have you seen him run by jumping up in the air - that is his trademark and I am awe everytime he does that to get to the other side of the stage fast.
3) Someone said he did not have the ear monitor equipment on but you can clearly see it here.
4) Speechless sung by a double???
I totally agree!
I am (and I have always been) seriously opened to change my mind as many times as necessary through this investigation. I can assure you I'm not interested on "be right", say "I told you so", change your minds or such.
It’s fine to me if you believe there were doubles in TII/ Arena O2 PC, but every new thread on this issue, and new post in this thread just show me how much (unintentionally) blind & sticked to your beliefs/wishes for this man not being Michael Jackson are some of you, that make you defend your points with arguments and proofs barely believables and less solid every time. Sometimes your statements sounds kind of desperate (“Michael has a clone”, “in TII has been used 4 doubles” and so on ... Geez). Come on, let’s be unbiased. Don’t make things fit into your theories: make a theory of things.
The problem is that some of you are comparing pictures that can not/should not be compared.
Similar conditions in both pictures are needed in order to have a valid conclusion, I mean come on, how can you compare ears when one of the pics you posted has a big ear piece in it?.
You need similar positions, “age” of the pic, lightening, angles, facial expressions: I've seen comparations of his chins cleft and of the space from the nose to the upper lip using one pic of him smiling vs. a "serious face" pic, that is not right, those features change when you, me, or anyone smiles, simple.
Also variations of the weight, the shape of the sunglasses, hairstyle and clothes makes a person look way too different from pic to pic, that is a fact.
Plus he had surgeries, so we cannot pretend he still looks like in 80’s or in 1994, no way.
As you can see, there are too many factors to have in mind at the time to compare pictures or make a conclusion.
Now, these are the ones I know (and always knew) as MJ’s eyes at pic 3 in the OP: some of you said that the man in green is Michael because you “saw Michael’s eyes through that outfit”, you saw that “it’s his “body structure”, come on, this person has not even the height of an adult, but “he was Michael, no doubts about it”, and the man in the third pic is not him? Give me a break...
Regarding Michael’s cleft on his chin, yes it does look different than before, it has become “deep” through the years, no by itself but because his whole face has changed with the age (like everyone does), and with the weight loss (look at the pics from 80’s to 2009, and you’ll see it pretty clear).
I know this is a hoax site, and I agree it’s good to think outside the box, but this is real world too. Anything is possible, but the "reality" is the limit. Yes, even for Michael Jackson. JMHO though, I hope you get what I mean.
Peace guys! <!-- s:D -->:D<!-- s:D -->
PS: I wanted to attach some pics, but it says "Sorry, the board attachment quota has been reached" when I try to do it.
Edit** to add the pics
Ok, I know is annoying go back to the same topics over and over again, but I just wanted to share this. I didn’t want to do this at all and I’m sure you will find some differences, but here I go.
Now, take a look at the following pics, please. (These will be the last ones, I promise!)
a) Look at this one carefully. Same position, same lightening. Look at the whole picture, then look his face from his cheek to his chin. Look at his smile, lips and cleft. You can tell it is almost the same picture, don’t you?
c) What about this one? Please, look at the same features I posted above. Almost the same picture again…
d) Ok, here you go some more. My conclusions on this? Or a man is living Michael’s life, or it was Michael at O2. Guess wich one I did choose…
Are you able to keep disrespecting Michael at O2, calling “ass” to his chin, and other things I’ve seen through this thread? Even if it was not Michael, that is not good at all, don’t you think?
JMO. Peace, and thanks for reading! <!-- s:D -->:D<!-- s:D -->
And what the hell?
Are ye all certified dentists?
The teeth are just fine they are all the same.....They look different coz of the extra collagen that MJ had inserted into his lips to make them look thicker...or plumpier or whatever the word you wanna use...thats it. <!-- s:roll: -->:roll:<!-- s:roll: -->
Well it took a while but I found that pic I was talking about but only because someone just posted it on Twitter!! (thanks TugbaMJackson!!)
Here it is: