Has there been 2 this whole time??
misha86
Posts: 508
I posted these pictures on the other last year and no one cared <!-- s
--><!-- s --> but since i have came back and i see more people are looking into the double/twin theory I decided to post these pictures again.
While looking though his site to see how far back the multiple mjs go back i came across these pictures and IMO they look like 2 different lil boys...I will note what i see different and i would love for you to do the same.
on the top picture, notice the scar on his cheek, that is still visible today, and on the second picture it is not there
a his eyebrows seem to be thinner and the fuller bottom lip on the top picture
the bottom picture has fuller browsn and fuller top lip
but all and all it doesnt look like the same boy to me, the first picture looks like the michael we have always seem and the 2nd picture just doesnt "feel" familiar to me
edit: the way that the afros lay are different also
--><!-- s --> but since i have came back and i see more people are looking into the double/twin theory I decided to post these pictures again.While looking though his site to see how far back the multiple mjs go back i came across these pictures and IMO they look like 2 different lil boys...I will note what i see different and i would love for you to do the same.
on the top picture, notice the scar on his cheek, that is still visible today, and on the second picture it is not there
a his eyebrows seem to be thinner and the fuller bottom lip on the top picture
the bottom picture has fuller browsn and fuller top lip
but all and all it doesnt look like the same boy to me, the first picture looks like the michael we have always seem and the 2nd picture just doesnt "feel" familiar to me
edit: the way that the afros lay are different also
Comments
^^^ where did the scar go???????
20 to 30 years later and you can still see the scar.....
<!-- s:? -->:?<!-- s:? --> <!-- s:? -->:?<!-- s:? -->
The other differences you mentioned can be attributed to any or all of the following:
Change in the position of Michael's head
Change in the the position of Michael's mouth
Change in the lighting
Change in the position of the camera being used
Changing in the position of the photographer
Photoshopping
I myself don't buy into the doubles/twin theory. I have nothing against anyone who does, but it would take a LOT, LOT more in the way of proof to convince me otherwise.
We kind of let go of the original "biological twin" idea, but rational thinking leads us to tending to believe that there might be a blood connection. These two faces are extremely similar, and back in those days plastic surgery wasn't as advanced as it is now. Anyway, as long as all birth certificates pertaining the Jacksons are sealed or unless Mike himself will one day tell us what really happened, we will never know for sure.
Please just read what I wrote PinkTopaz, I was very clear:
"Anyway, as long as all birth certificates pertaining the Jacksons are sealed or unless Mike himself will one day tell us what really happened, we will never know for sure."
Same beautiful boy.
It is hard to see since his head is turned around, but if you look well enough it is there. Just because it is not on the picture does not mean they are not there. You can NOT use a picture like that were the head is turned to 'proof' there is no scar and even more, not that they are 2 persons.
It would really be appreciated if you would only mention that there is a twin or a double if you have concrete, hard evidence because this is becoming very annoying.
There are not 2 persons.
The intention of this website is to INVESTIGATE this hoax, and to share thoughts and ideas. You can't expect people ONLY to post their ideas when they have concrete, hard evidence, and that's certainly not a requirement when people want to share their ideas. If talking about doubles is becoming very annoying for you then you better skip these threads, instead of posting comments like "There are not 2 persons", "there's only one Michael" and "there are no doubles" in each and every thread that appears about doubles. You're only annoying yourself this way.
Ofcourse it's the intention to debate and share opinions, but stating that Michael Jackson is not Michael Jackson is of a different matter, it's an attack at his identity.
Well, we are talking about DOUBLES... isn't it?
And we are sharing OUR opinion about it... right?
Compare photos and share opinions are attacks at his identity? I don't think so...
Some of us can see ( crystal clear ) that there are more than one Michael Jackson, but if you don't like this idea please just skip those threads.