DM's Beatles forums
A part of DM's Beatles site
Meet people from all over the World
Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Pages: 1 2 [3]

Author Topic: The Beatles Birthdays  (Read 5298 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Bobber

  • Guest
Re: The Beatles Birthdays
« Reply #40 on: June 20, 2007, 01:41:11 PM »
The official numbers say that John, Paul and George are all 5'11. So how come that Paul is much taller on the cover of Sgt Pepper? Did John and George shrink?
Logged

raxo

  • Sun King
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10680
Re: The Beatles Birthdays
« Reply #41 on: June 20, 2007, 02:01:16 PM »
I've never believe in those official numbers ... because how can be the official numbers correct when Ringo was never as taller as those numbers say?
Logged

Bobber

  • Guest
Re: The Beatles Birthdays
« Reply #42 on: June 20, 2007, 02:23:46 PM »
Because he didn't grow after his 21st birthday.
Logged

harihead

  • A Thousand Pages
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Female
  • Posts: 2339
  • Keep spreading the love
Re: The Beatles Birthdays
« Reply #43 on: June 20, 2007, 04:50:56 PM »
George's response to his height, over the years:
 
1963: 5' 11"
1974: 5' 9"
2000: 3' 7"


If this doesn't prove age shrinkage, I don't know what does!  ;D
Logged
All you've got to do is choose love.  That's how I live it now.  I learned a long time ago, I can feed the birds in my garden.  I can't feed them all. -- Ringo Starr, Rolling Stone magazine, May 2007<br />

raxo

  • Sun King
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10680
Re: The Beatles Birthdays
« Reply #44 on: June 20, 2007, 04:55:12 PM »
Quote from: 551
George's response to his height, over the years:
 
1963: 5' 11"
1974: 5' 9"
2000: 3' 7"


If this doesn't prove age shrinkage, I don't know what does!  ;D

Umm ... the three of them 5'11 in the sixties? Markeating! ::)

5' 9'', uh?  8) ... that sounds more realistic to me ...
Logged

Flaming Pie in the Sky

  • A Thousand Pages
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Female
  • Posts: 2023
    • Gone Troppo
Re: The Beatles Birthdays
« Reply #45 on: June 20, 2007, 04:56:14 PM »
3' 7" is the most realistic.......
Logged

Andy Smith

  • A Thousand Pages
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4597
Re: The Beatles Birthdays
« Reply #46 on: June 20, 2007, 08:32:54 PM »
Quote from: 63
The official numbers say that John, Paul and George are all 5'11. So how come that Paul is much taller on the cover of Sgt Pepper? Did John and George shrink?

That was one of the Paul is Dead theroys  which claimed that his replacement was
much taller when he joined them  :-/ :P

Logged


          Turn off your mind, Relax and float downstream. It is not dying

harihead

  • A Thousand Pages
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Female
  • Posts: 2339
  • Keep spreading the love
Re: The Beatles Birthdays
« Reply #47 on: June 20, 2007, 09:36:20 PM »
It's not that Paul was that much taller; he probably got those inserts in his shoes!  :o

Like Raxo, I believe the 5'9" claim. George was not part of the marketing machine when he said that, so had no reason to fudge his height (and the Beatle boots had long gone).

Although 3' 7" would have made Ringo happy. For once, he wouldn't be the short one.  ;D


NEW:  Astonishing proof that George really was 3.7 inches tall!

Logged
All you've got to do is choose love.  That's how I live it now.  I learned a long time ago, I can feed the birds in my garden.  I can't feed them all. -- Ringo Starr, Rolling Stone magazine, May 2007<br />

DarkSweetLady

  • A Thousand Pages
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Female
  • Posts: 1326
Re: The Beatles Birthdays
« Reply #48 on: June 20, 2007, 11:03:24 PM »
maybe his boots were bigger... or they were slouching!
Logged

~the guiding light in all your love shines on~

DarkSweetLady

  • A Thousand Pages
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Female
  • Posts: 1326
Re: The Beatles Birthdays
« Reply #49 on: June 20, 2007, 11:03:31 PM »
maybe his boots were bigger... or they were slouching!
Logged

~the guiding light in all your love shines on~

Kaleidoscope_Eyes

  • A Thousand Pages
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Female
  • Posts: 4126
  • Alles Goed!
    • BananaSpeel
Re: The Beatles Birthdays
« Reply #50 on: June 20, 2007, 11:15:21 PM »
Quote from: 551
It's not that Paul was that much taller;

It's the rest that were much smaller ;)
Logged

Arsenal is forever England and England is forever Arsenal

Octie

  • A Thousand Pages
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Female
  • Posts: 1779
  • It's sunshine life for me...
Re: The Beatles Birthdays
« Reply #51 on: June 21, 2007, 01:20:35 AM »
Quote from: 551
So my theory is (ahem) the Beatles looked taller when they were younger because they were, both absolutely and relatively. Then, as age came along and the new younger generation grew up, they experienced both actual and relative height diminishment. To quote Ringo, "Why are they always taller than me?"

*reads last part and tries very hard not to say "awww"*
*attempt fails*
... can I just ask, harihead... where did he say that? It's just that it's such a sweet little quote... ^___^

And I like your "new proof", with that orange duck! A pocket-sized George... heehee  ;D
Keep those thoeries coming! (thumbsup)
Logged
I'd ask my friends to come and see... an Octopus's Garden with me ^___^

raxo

  • Sun King
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10680
Re: The Beatles Birthdays
« Reply #52 on: June 21, 2007, 01:33:14 AM »
Quote from: 610
[...]And I like your "new proof", with that orange duck! A pocket-sized George... heehee  ;D
Keep those thoeries coming! (thumbsup)
My words too!  :)
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3]
« previous next »
 

Page created in 0.295 seconds with 70 queries.