48 replies to this topic

[psyche101]

synchronomy, on 14 November 2012 - 01:12 AM, said:

Boyd Bushman, gives me the feeling he's just having a bit of fun.  He seems to find it amusing that people are so intrigued by his claims.  Jesse Marcel and Walter Haut, I honestly don't know enough about their personality.  Edgar Mitchell gives me the feeling he is embellishing somewhat, but I think he's completely sane, and same with Bushman.
This video really sums up MacClelland for me:
On youtube:
Disclosure Series 1 Clark McClelland - About Clark and about 8 to 9 foot tall entity

I will forward the link and have a look a bit later, thanks. That sounds like a reasonable evaluation, Bushman could well be having some fun, the common denominator of age catches my eye though. I would have said that Gordon Coopers claims were the result of age, but he started making claims early in the piece, so I am not sure what is going on there. I just figured Ed Mitchell is happy to be noticed again. And that is not a bad thing. Everyone enjoys the limelight, and the paper's just use him as an appeal to authority, but again, considering his telepathy experiments on the Apollo mission, one has to take into account that Dr Mitchell has an element of credulous belief in him. McClelland is obviously just a snake oil salesman. This thread cannot show anything positive about him at all. And the fact that he teamed up with Goldwater for a bit does not surprise me in the least. These CTers have the Government stuff back to front.
One other common denominator I see is that all of these men appear to be men of faith. Good God fearing men. I wonder if that belief tends to allow other beliefs to creep in? Could some of these people see themselves as intellectual believers?

I once asked you if your belief is based upon one thing, or if a series of things have led you to the other side of the fence. I have seen you do some very good evaluations, but not one that is positive to ET. Can I ask if your belief as based on something, a whole bunch of things, or do you prefer not to discuss your personal view?

[booNyzarC]

psyche101, on 14 November 2012 - 05:07 AM, said:

I once asked you if your belief is based upon one thing, or if a series of things have led you to the other side of the fence. I have seen you do some very good evaluations, but not one that is positive to ET. Can I ask if your belief as based on something, a whole bunch of things, or do you prefer not to discuss your personal view?

You might find this line of discussion helpful regarding your question.  It could be further expanded upon, but at least it is a start.


Token 'on topic' bit...

Clark McClelland is batshit crazy.  (edit) In my humble opinion... (/edit)

Edited by booNyzarC, 14 November 2012 - 05:37 AM.

[psyche101]

booNyzarC, on 14 November 2012 - 05:36 AM, said:

You might find this line of discussion helpful regarding your question.  It could be further expanded upon, but at least it is a start.

Hi Boon

Thanks mate. I had not followed that thread based on the title of it. I thought Synchronomy was keeping his inspiration to himself.


I have no comment. But I think I am more bewildered than I was before I knew

booNyzarC, on 14 November 2012 - 05:36 AM, said:

Token 'on topic' bit...

Clark McClelland is batshit crazy.  (edit) In my humble opinion... (/edit)

We have consensus

Edited by psyche101, 14 November 2012 - 06:13 AM.

[JimOberg]

Further regarding stories from McClelland, which a number of posters have claimed constitute reliable evidence, here's somethnig I found over the weekend on "Clark McClelland's Channel"

http://www.youtube.c...re=results_main
in part 3,

He begs for money again, then relates story of his theory of the 'Onion Drive' to revolutionaize spaceflight. But that only comes after this absolutely unbelievable story:

"I studied astronomy when I was very young, from the 8^th year of my life to the 21^st year. And while at the major university of Allegheny Observatory, in Riverview Park, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, a part of the University of Pittsburgh. I observed there on Mars, in 1954 I believe it was now– not 1952 as I said earlier, an explosion on Mars. I had 58 seconds of that explosion. There was one other people on Earth who observed the explosion with me, he was a Japanese astronomer, we both observed it in the same area of Mars. What it was I don't know, but it was an explosion. Why I have no idea. I honestly wonder whether Martians exist yet on the planet Mars."

Now, there was such an explosion, and it was reported as "Science: Explosion on Mars", TIME magazine, Monday, Feb. 06, 1950
http://www.time.com/...,811835,00.html

"For the last ten years, Astronomer Tsuneo Saeki of the Osaka observatory (90 miles from Hiroshima) has been keeping an eye on Mars. About 4 a.m. on Jan. 16, he saw a great grey cloud on the face of the red planet. It rose some 60 miles into the air, he estimated, and covered a roughly circular area about 900 miles in diameter. He watched it tensely for 30 minutes; then clouds in the earth's atmosphere cut off the view. When the weather finally cleared, the clouded side of Mars had turned away. "

It is also noted on
http://www.theliving..._Explosion.html

which quoted an additional paragraph:

"Since Mars revolves only a little more slowly than the earth does (its day is about 24½ hours long), a specific spot on its surface cannot be observed on the same night in both Japan and the U.S. By the time night comes in one earthly hemisphere, the Martian region visible from the other earthly hemisphere has turned away. So U.S. astronomers could not check up on Saeki immediately. "

I used heavens-above.com to verify that Mars was high in the southern sky from Osaka at 4 AM local time on that date.

But then I ran into problems. Mars didn't rise, as viewed from Pittsburgh, for another ten hours. And when it did, as the article mentioned, the site of the explosion would have rotated halfway around the planet and be on the far side, invisible to viewers in the US.

I suggest two conclusions:

1. It was physically impossible for McClelland to have observed that event. His claim to have done so is totally unworthy of belief.

2. Anybody with the most basic knowledge of astronomy would have realized that an observer in Pittsburgh cannot see a planet at the same moment that is directly 'over' Japan. Anybody who believes THAT cannot have any significant astronomical understanding.

But this is the guy we are told is worthy of belief because he's such a space expert, eh?

[TheMacGuffin]

psyche101, on 14 November 2012 - 06:11 AM, said:

Hi Boon

Thanks mate. I had not followed that thread based on the title of it. I thought Synchronomy was keeping his inspiration to himself.

We have consensus

You have a "consensus" among yourselves, of course, which is like Coke arguing with Pepsi or Exxon with Texaco, but never try to include me in it.  LOL

[psyche101]

TheMacGuffin, on 19 November 2012 - 04:56 AM, said:

You have a "consensus" among yourselves, of course, which is like Coke arguing with Pepsi or Exxon with Texaco, but never try to include me in it.  LOL

That is fair enough, without yourself keeping a vigilant eye on that which so many of us become complacent with, no doubt something is bound to eventually slip by.

However, I am not so sure that is the case in this thread. There is some very damming evidence against McClelland on the last couple of pages, and looking at his website, Boons description looks pretty spot on, from the claims of Aliens right through to the overpriced memorabilia. Not only Boon, but Synchronomy, which I think you might find a bit more the sort of poster you take more seriously also had to come to the same conclusion. Is there any way that you see to counter the last couple of pages exposing his less endearing qualities and his garish website? There seems little doubt he has lied, how can that be forgiven? And the way he tries to continually fleece the public with the ridiculously priced memorabilia?
You seem to be the only one to date in this thread that sees him in anything other than a dim light?
But hey, that's me, I think Hellyer is batshit crazy too. I do not think he is playing with people, hoaxing or making stuff up, I think he is just outright loopy. If I was to take the word of people in this game I do not think it would be anyone military yet cited on these boards. If someone like Professor Hawking, Brian Greene or Professor Kaku were to say something like this, I'd have to take a second look.

Coke wins everytime anyway

No Texaco down here, it's all BP, Shell Oil, Mobil and Caltex. No doubt owned by the above, but I do not really know them as individuals, Just American Oil Companies. Woolworths Food chain seems to be in charge of quite a few these days.

Edited by psyche101, 19 November 2012 - 07:10 AM.

[JimOberg]

Another inquiry of mine re McClelland's stories has just come back.

McClelland has endorsed the Gordon cooper Mercury-9 UFO story [the story even Cooper denies], and has explicitly claimed to have been a direct witness to the radio traffic that disclosed it during the flight. He claims to have heard NBC News reporting it.

Jay Barbree, currently NBC's space reporter emeritus, tells me:

"For all of the MA-9 reporting for NBC radio, I did it, with John Chancellor. At no time while he was up there do I recall any talk of a UFO, or any reports from Cooper about a UFO." He added that nobody at NBC made any such broadcast, confirming a written response to me from the NBC archivist many years ago saying they had no record of any such broadcast.

The alternate theory is that McClelland read about the story, or heard the Frank Edwards radio feature about it, and then later just imagined he had been directly involved. Just as he claimed, on his youtube posting earlier this year, to have personally seen the 'explosion on Mars' reported by a Japanese astronomer -- even though his viewing of the event was physically impossible.

Are there any other explanations that preserve any credibility for McClelland?

[JimOberg]

McGuff asked me to provide a link to McClelland describing the secret post-WW2 Nazi UFO base in Antarctica, and I had recalled it was during his Rense interview. But when I called up that Rense show on youtube, and listened to it, the Antarctic story wasn't there.

Uh-oh. It looked like my memory had hiccupped and I was going to have to correct some incorrect information I had posted.

Well, it happens.

But then I remembered this thread with the link to that very show, posted on McClelland's home page [see first post].

At around 04m30s the conversation turns to Nazis, and Clark goes right into the Hitler-escaped-to-secret-base story, just as I had recalled.

McGuff can go listen to it, it's there, just as I had recalled.

But WAIT.

The Rense show posted their OWN version of that interview, on youtube,
at

The conversation begins just the same way, at the same time hack.

Listen carefully. At 04m58s there is a brief hiss, then McClelland goes on talking about the 1952 DC flyover by Nazi UFOs --

BUT THE ENTIRE ANTARCTIC BASE SEQUENCE HAS BEEN EXCISED BY RENSE'S STAFF.

Major, MAJOR ROTFLOL time.

McClelland ahcieved what I think may be a night talk radio first -- he made a claim so preposterous that even RENSE couldn't swallow it, and so excised it from the 'official upload' so as not to harm his own credibility.

Now, we gotta check -- does the program on Rense's own website still include it? I'm not a subscriber so I can't access it, I think -- but maybe it was only done to the youtube version.

McClelland is the guy that McGuff still defends as a credible 'space expert'.

[TheMacGuffin]

JimOberg, on 31 December 2012 - 06:02 AM, said:

McGuff asked me to provide a link to McClelland describing the secret post-WW2 Nazi UFO base in Antarctica, and I had recalled it was during his Rense interview. But when I called up that Rense show on youtube, and listened to it, the Antarctic story wasn't there.

I never asked you to provide anything.  That's not true.  I merely pointed out that there was no such story on the links you were posting--over and over again.

Evidently you thought I wouldn't bother to check that, but I did.  So now you just brush that off and dig up some other link.

I also pointed out that you distorted and omitted a great deal of what McClelland actually did say.

[TheOtherSide1945]

DingoLingo, on 31 December 2012 - 11:41 PM, said:

Wow miners can use computers like that? Im just a dumb gas plant mechanic and i cant even figure out how to post images in forums, none the less make a cheeky image reply.

[DingoLingo]

TheOtherSide1945, on 01 January 2013 - 01:26 AM, said:

Wow miners can use computers like that? Im just a dumb gas plant mechanic and i cant even figure out how to post images in forums, none the less make a cheeky image reply.

its a skill mate..

[kmt_sesh]

Posters are reminded not to issue personal remarks or attack. Discuss the subject matter only.

Thank you.

[badeskov]

kmt_sesh, on 01 January 2013 - 04:47 AM, said:

Posters are reminded not to issue personal remarks or attack. Discuss the subject matter only.

Thank you.

Oh my! I know I normally shouldn't comment on a mod's posts, but you actually ventured into this part of the forum - I am flabbergasted

Cheers,
Badeskov

[kmt_sesh]

badeskov, on 01 January 2013 - 06:47 AM, said:

Oh my! I know I normally shouldn't comment on a mod's posts, but you actually ventured into this part of the forum - I am flabbergasted

Cheers,
Badeskov

I know, it's rare, and it will continue to be rare. The material being discussed is not of interest to me personally (you know where I normally hang out), but the conduct of posters is of interest to me.

[psyche101]

kmt_sesh, on 01 January 2013 - 07:05 AM, said:

I know, it's rare, and it will continue to be rare. The material being discussed is not of interest to me personally (you know where I normally hang out), but the conduct of posters is of interest to me.

It would be an honour to have your experienced input regarding building techniques of the Pyramids in response to the claims made in the Ancient Aliens thread should you be able to find the time.

All the best for the new year.

Edited by psyche101, 04 January 2013 - 03:44 AM.