He would have needed more than a moustace to diguise himself.  
i heard that he thought that the people in India woundn't know who the
Beatles were & wouldn't reconize him, but they did.  

Yea I doubt it.  

Quoted from Bobber

George grew a moustache as a disguise when he was travelling to India in late 1966. He didn't want to be recognized, but I doubt if it really worked.

You're correct. He lasted one day before a bell hop recognized him.

Both George and Paul grew their mustaches for specific reasons: George for disguise (as Ravi Shankar had suggested-- also that he cut his hair, which he did, and neither measure worked); Paul because of his moped accident. I suppose it became the trend later, but as far as George recalls, one day they all had "hair breaking out on the face". They didn't plan it as a group.

I think it may also have had something to do with being too wasted for 2 years to shave!

They're is a bit of copying of each other, even when they split up ie Paul putting Linda in his band after John put Yoko in his.

THE PEER PRESSURE!

Would I get attacked if I said Paul's moustache scared me a tad bit? And John's annoyed me?

No, ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ you wouldnt. at least not by me. i like them all WITHOUT the moustaches better, anyways.

yup, I like em better without too

If Paul chipped his tooth in December 1965 why didn't he have it capped by May 1966 (the promo video for Paperback Writer/Rain)?  In the history section of this site their is no mention of the moped spill.

It's one of the few things that The Rolling Stones didn't copy off The Beatles during that period. Though hang on, didn't Charlie Watts have a 'tache briefly?