Do you think Michael Jackson uses this forum?

[Le Papillon Bleu]

Re: the clip above, totally off topic, I could look at his mouth form a smile all day... it's something about how it moves and kinda curves in the corners....

That is exactly what O2 dude doesn't have, while it's kind of a trademark of MJ. To me that was a dead giveaway that O2 dude is not MJ.

THANK YOU!!!!! I KNOW!!!!   I'm so happy you understand me!  :lol:

I do not know what kind of smile you see in o2 Michael but I see the SAME beautiful smile and teeth. He has very unique features like his curved fingers and his face features that ANY of the impersonators have. Can that be an impersonator that we have never ever seen before? I say NO again. Not every single feature can be the same with Michael. So IMO that was definitely Michael at 02. I'm not going to get into an argument about this but I dislike reading posts like "the 02 guy was like this, 02 guy was like that... he was looking terrible, his smile was not good etc." You guys are so sure that he wasn't Michael but you need to think that what if he was? He would be hurt by the things you are saying about him. Don't you think? Don't get me wrong, I'm not judging your opinion about 02 Michael but I just think that we need to be more careful what we're saying about him as he could be really him, and to me it was definitely Michael himself. I never hesitated about it.

Here are some pictures to make the comparison. When we look at Michael's recent pictures, I see no difference than Michael at 02 except the wig.



His beautiful long and curved fingers.



Finally I'm going to say that nobody looks like his/her 20s at 50s. I'm not saying that he looks old, no way, he looks amazing but we couldn't expect him to look the same when he was at his 20s or 30s. And again, we shouldn't forget that nobody looks exactly the same in every single picture or footage. The lighting, the angle, the mood of the person and many more things effect the shooting. For better comparison check out these pictures and how the lighting can create a difference btw two same shots. The nose, the smile looks different in each of them.


This video is a good one to make the comparison btw Michael and 02 Michael. Blessings to all.
[youtube:6aowdxwm]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-e7vizNWEM&feature=channel_video_title[/youtube:6aowdxwm]

I'm with you PureLove..and i hope that if Michael will come back he will clear the thing about "o2"

[PureLove]

Michael is a big boy, I think he can handle it and if he has a problem with my opinion, he can fax me. But let's look at it from the other perspective. Many many many people said since March 5, 2009 that it was NOT MJ. So I am not the only one who saw it. What if it's not MJ? And some of his true fans don't even see it's not him? Wouldn't THAT be painful? Again, he did it all on purpose and he's a big boy, so I don't think he will lose any sleep over it, but think about it.

I have said since March 5, 2009 that the guy on stage at O2 was not MJ and I still have that same opinion. I might have another Michael Jackson in mind though, because this guy does not resemble the Michael Jackson I know in any way.

Anyways, this is going in circles. No one will be able to convince me O2 dude was Michael, for many many reasons I am not going to repeat again. Do a search on the forum if you're interested.

He doesn't need to fax you for every wrong thing you say or assume Souza. He wouldn't bother to do that. He doesn't owe us to explain every single thing in this hoax whether we find the right one or the wrong one. I'm not against any different opinions but using insulting words to describe him is rude and disrespectful and all I'm saying is, it doesn't matter what we believe but the ones who believe that it wasn't him at 02 should be careful in chosing the words when describing 02 Michael. Well, I just stated my opinion as I saw that you made a comment about 02 Michael. I made several posts about this issue before and do not need to make any search on the forum about it no more. I'm convinced enough to believe that it was Michael at 02.

[PureLove]

Souza this is the picture you are talking about two different MJs. People said that this one was at the backstage and the double was at the stage and showed this picture as a proof. But I do not see the one at the stage and this one behind the stage in a picture. Where is the picture we see both of them at the same time? If there's, I'd love to see.

Please don't tell me you think this picture resembles the one ON stage... I don't need a picture of both of them (and there is none) to see that these are two different persons. The fact that you knew what picture I meant tells me you DO think he looks different in this picture.

Okay, need to go now. I will see if I can find strength to show AGAIN why I am sure O2 dude is not Mike when I coma back, but I doubt it. Anyways, it's off topic so please continue this discussion in the O2 subforum.

Yes, it is the same Michael. I explained it by giving a picture example in my first post. I'm pretty sure that people would doubt if these two are the same if I showed these pictures separately. It's just becoz of the lighting.

[PureLove]

Mee too. Especially the "freaky clown smile" part.

This is exactly what I'm talking about.

Anyways, I'm done with this issue. I stated my opinion about it and asked from people not to be rude against MJ at 02 whether you think he is MJ ot not MJ. Nothing can change my mind about this. I'm sure that it was Michael himself. And I'm not going to argue about this issue. I just want people to be polite. I hope I made my point. Now back to topic.

[PureLove]

I can understand those who WANT to believe that he is still alive, I can understand those who are doubting, and I can understand those who say: he is gone, life goes on .....

There is one other group which include me and some others: those who know he's alive. I don't want it to be true, I'm not doubting and I don't think he's dead. I KNOW he's alive after 2 years of research. There is not a single trace of doubt in my mind about that.

I'm in that group too.  Have been since the O2 announcement, even before the "death", I knew that wasn't Michael.  I FEEL it.  Even w/o clues I'd know, they just reaffirm what I feel.  Even with so called "proof" that he is really dead if that day comes, it will be manufactured proof, because my heart and head feel otherwise.

I'm a KNOWER too. I was a non-believer for a month but then I started to find the inconsistencies and became a believer. I had many ups and downs for a couple of months. I find hope and lose faith but 3 or 4 months later, I realized that I'm a Knower and as I say always, even if Michael comes to me and says that he's passed, I wouldn't believe him! I'm that sure he is alive which makes me a Knower.

[Guest]

To Know is with reference to some ascertained fact; as ‘I know that the earth moves around the sun.’

To believe implies faith, trust or confidence in some person or thing in the absence of certain proof; as ‘i believe in the goodness of God.’

To think means to consider, to be of opinion – ‘I think it will rain’.

To suppose means to assume or presume with or without good reason – ‘You will soon be going to the hills, I suppose.’

To trust means to hope. You will soon be better I trust.

To hope means to anticipate an event as pleasurable. I hope he will recover from his illness.

To expect means merely to anticipate an event without reference to whether it is painful od pleasurable.

These verbs are often confused with one another by non-native students.

From: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

So...what is your verb in this hoax?

[PureLove]

To Know is with reference to some ascertained fact; as ‘I know that the earth moves around the sun.’

To believe implies faith, trust or confidence in some person or thing in the absence of certain proof; as ‘i believe in the goodness of God.’

To think means to consider, to be of opinion – ‘I think it will rain’.

To suppose means to assume or presume with or without good reason – ‘You will soon be going to the hills, I suppose.’

To trust means to hope. You will soon be better I trust.

To hope means to anticipate an event as pleasurable. I hope he will recover from his illness.

To expect means merely to anticipate an event without reference to whether it is painful od pleasurable.

These verbs are often confused with one another by non-native students.

From: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

So...what is your verb in this hoax?

There is not a non-native student here. We all know <<=== what KNOW means. So my verb is===>>To Know is with reference to some ascertained fact; as ‘I know that Michael Joe Jackson is Alive.’

[Guest]

Ok purelove, i really like your determination. The part with "non-native student" was implied in the copied text, not adressed to you of course. I just thought that to believe means to assume having some puzzle gathered after rethinking some facts, while knowing means in this case have this information certain 100% from a direct source like Michael himself (or being in on hoax). In my point of view you are not a knower, otherwise you and everyone else here wouldn't be still here investigating. If you were a knower, you were Michael himself, and i don't think you or anyone here is and if you were in on hoax you wouldn't be a member posting information because he wouldn't involve unreiable traitors in such a serious business.

[~Souza~]

Ok purelove, i really like your determination. The part with "non-native student" was implied in the copied text, not adressed to you of course. I just thought that to believe means to assume having some puzzle gathered after rethinking some facts, while knowing means in this case have this information certain 100% from a direct source like Michael himself (or being in on hoax). In my point of view you are not a knower, otherwise you and everyone else here wouldn't be still here investigating. If you were a knower, you were Michael himself, and i don't think you or anyone here is and if you were in on hoax you wouldn't be a member posting information because he wouldn't involve unreiable traitors in such a serious business.

I KNOW the earth is round, even though I have never been in a spaceship high enough to see it with my own eyes. Does that mean I only believe that it is round? No, because there are other factors that are telling me that the earth is round, I don't need to be in a spaceship for that. Get my point?

[eternalflame]

You wanna know what my word is?

I DOUBT.

For me doubting is an active process which keeps me being as objective as possible. To doubt means for me: for every point or fact there could be an opposite. Can I find it?
To doubt helps me seeing both sides of the medal. As long as I don´t KNOW I will DOUBT, that´s my way of handling the hoax.

Love & Peace!

[Guest]

I understand your point Souza. But Michael being alive is not a general truth scientifically proved and accepted. It's just a supposition. So, in this case (just in this case) , you cannot be knowers. At least not yet. If this word makes you feel better, ok then - you're a knower. But if you say this to believers expects some questions you might not be able to answer. Because you are not a knower:)

[Guest]

"I DOUBT.

For me doubting is an active process which keeps me being as objective as possible. To doubt means for me: for every point or fact there could be an opposite. Can I find it?
To doubt helps me seeing both sides of the medal. As long as I don´t KNOW I will DOUBT, that´s my way of handling the hoax."

with this attitude eternalflame, you have more chance to be listened by non-believers than any knower around. what's blocking the communication is "we know better", when in fact both sides understand that none can handle the truth in this secret delicate situation called "hoax".

[PureLove]

Ok purelove, i really like your determination. The part with "non-native student" was implied in the copied text, not adressed to you of course. I just thought that to believe means to assume having some puzzle gathered after rethinking some facts, while knowing means in this case have this information certain 100% from a direct source like Michael himself (or being in on hoax). In my point of view you are not a knower, otherwise you and everyone else here wouldn't be still here investigating. If you were a knower, you were Michael himself, and i don't think you or anyone here is and if you were in on hoax you wouldn't be a member posting information because he wouldn't involve unreiable traitors in such a serious business.

We're all here still because we're getting new clues almost every single day. Michael didn't give a couple of clues and then stopped. The clues are still coming. And there's a show part of this hoax which is the Greatest Show On Earth and we will be missed it if we stop following it. And with more than thousands of clues and facts we have found till today, they make us KNOWERS. It doesn't matter with what aspect you get it but I KNOW that he is alive. You have no idea about what we have found and still finding to make us Knowers or Believers, so no need to discuss about it. I'm 1500% SURE that he is alive! I'm that certain about it. I do not need to see him in flesh and bone to know that he is alive. he has done enough and showed us enough to make us know that he is alive. Seeing is not believing. Believing is seeing.

[GINAFELICIA]

This is so funny.....first time I heard these words you guys are telling now here was from my 9 years old son who told me after Michael died "mom, I don't believe Michael is alive, I KNOW Michael is alive!!"  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:

 He was so cute and funny saying it so determined...

[Guest]

"We're all here still because we're getting new clues almost every single day."

Why? You are a knower.