Nextian Chat : www.jasperfforde.com
General Information
Beatle??
Posted by: OB (---.range81-132.btcentralplus.com)
Date: September 22, 2012 03:15PM
Once there was a man who read in the paper, today, the phrase"Paul Mcartney, former Beatle".
"Surely that's wrong" cried the man. "He is a Beatle"
"Don't think so " said his wife, "the Beatles don't exist any more"
Discuss!
"Surely that's wrong" cried the man. "He is a Beatle"
"Don't think so " said his wife, "the Beatles don't exist any more"
Discuss!
Re: Beatle??
Posted by: geg (---.15-2.cable.virginmedia.com)
Date: September 23, 2012 09:11AM
Since the Beatles broke up and is therefore no longer a single entity,that makes him a bit of Beatles.
A bit of Beatles might be, but is not necessarily, a Beatle.
A bit of Beatles might be, but is not necessarily, a Beatle.
Re: Beatle??
Posted by: SkidMarks (---.10-3.cable.virginmedia.com)
Date: September 23, 2012 09:58AM
That particular Beatle had Wings.
Re: Beatle??
Posted by: OB (---.range86-178.btcentralplus.com)
Date: September 23, 2012 06:29PM
Oh dear, does this mean that we're now looking for a band on the run which may or may not exist?
Re: Beatle??
Posted by: CannibalRabbit (---.dyn.iinet.net.au)
Date: September 26, 2012 01:48PM
It's a shame that there wasn't a chance for a reunion over the Pipes of Peace, or a harmonious co-existence like Ebony and Ivory, side by side on the piano keyboard. Just Imagine what that could have been like, before half of them reached The End of the Line.
Still I guess this thread is going to keep bubbling along like a fFrogs Chorus, spawning earworms!
Still I guess this thread is going to keep bubbling along like a fFrogs Chorus, spawning earworms!
Re: Beatle??
Posted by: SkidMarks (62.6.182.---)
Date: September 26, 2012 04:48PM
CR, you are just tyrying to Ram home the message, aren't you?
Re: Beatle??
Posted by: CannibalRabbit (---.dyn.iinet.net.au)
Date: September 27, 2012 12:23PM
Just trying to Help!
Re: Beatle??
Posted by: SkidMarks (62.6.182.---)
Date: September 27, 2012 01:37PM
McCartney album "Ram"??
Re: Beatle??
Posted by: bunyip (---.tafe.sa.edu.au)
Date: October 03, 2012 08:03AM
I disagree!
They were "The Beatles" a plural.
Thus more than one Beatle.
However it does not mean that all four of them were Beatles, or that there were no non-Beatles in the group.
So Sir Paul McC may be anywhere from a 100% Beatle, to a smaller percentage of Beatle.
Down to a 'Quantum Beatle' then to being a non-Beatle.
They were "The Beatles" a plural.
Thus more than one Beatle.
However it does not mean that all four of them were Beatles, or that there were no non-Beatles in the group.
So Sir Paul McC may be anywhere from a 100% Beatle, to a smaller percentage of Beatle.
Down to a 'Quantum Beatle' then to being a non-Beatle.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.