argument top image

Is Paul McCartney dead?
Back to question

Fifty years on and the rumour has not been disproved

If the story is untrue, why has it persisted and more people believe it now than ever?
< (4 of 4) Next argument >

The Argument

The story’s persistence has been sustained by ongoing media interest. For one American radio special, a song was commissioned entitled “Brother Paul” that was credited to Billy Shears & the All Americans. In 1969, a TV court room procedural called ‘Paul McCartney: The Complete Story, Told for the First and Last Time’ provided ‘witnesses and evidence’ and encouraged people to make up their own minds. In 1979, a special called ‘Is Paul Dead? Turn me on dead man’ introduced more clues and rekindled interest in Paul’s death. Another documentary was called The Winged Beatle. As recently as 2009, a Wired Italia magazine article featured an biometric analysis by two scientists of the skull in photographs of McCartney taken before and after November 1966 and claimed these were two different people. At Beatles conventions, true believers still insist the “real” Paul is dead.[1]

Counter arguments

Ongoing media can be refuted individually. For example, a movie based on tapes ‘discovered’ after George Harrison’s death was released called ‘Paul McCartney Really is Dead: The Last Testament of George Harrison.’ This was soon revealed as a mockumentary.


[P1] There has been sustained interest in the 'Paul is dead' theory. [P2] This demonstrates that there's something to the story.

Rejecting the premises

[Rejecting P2] This does not mean the story is reputable - all of the media coverage can be refuted.

Further Reading

Andru J. Reeve’s Turn Me On, Dead Man: The Complete Story of the Paul McCartney Death Hoax (Popular Culture, Ink., 1994)


This page was last edited on Tuesday, 10 Mar 2020 at 11:30 UTC

Explore related arguments