87 replies to this topic

[DingoLingo]

again.. reports.. not facts.. theories.. not facts..

dont get my wrong Guff.. when it comes to the majority of the 'ufo's are here crowd' that post here.. I actually enjoy reading what you post.. even though I see the proof your trying to put across.. I still do enjoy it..

forgot to put this in..

Dingo's dont bark btw

Edited by DingoLingo, 29 December 2012 - 04:49 AM.

[TheMacGuffin]

DingoLingo, on 29 December 2012 - 04:48 AM, said:

again.. reports.. not facts.. theories.. not facts..

dont get my wrong Guff.. when it comes to the majority of the 'ufo's are here crowd' that post here.. I actually enjoy reading what you post.. even though I see the proof your trying to put across.. I still do enjoy it..

forgot to put this in..

Dingo's dont bark btw

They're not only here, Dingo, but some of them are downright dangerous and not to be toyed with or made light of, and whether you believe me or not, I know whereof I speak.

[TheMacGuffin]

DingoLingo, on 29 December 2012 - 04:48 AM, said:

again.. reports.. not facts.. theories.. not facts..

Dingo's dont bark btw

That I didn't know.  I always thought that they must make some kind of dog-like noises.

[White Unicorn]

TheMacGuffin, on 29 December 2012 - 04:54 AM, said:

That I didn't know.  I always thought that they must make some kind of dog-like noises.

And Mac Guffin does admit to what he doesn't know

[DingoLingo]

TheMacGuffin, on 29 December 2012 - 04:51 AM, said:

They're not only here, Dingo, but some of them are downright dangerous and not to be toyed with or made light of, and whether you believe me or not, I know whereof I speak.

I am sure you know what your speaking of..

now me.. I would say you need to lay off the magic mushrooms.. but hey.. each to their own..

[DingoLingo]

TheMacGuffin, on 29 December 2012 - 04:54 AM, said:

That I didn't know.  I always thought that they must make some kind of dog-like noises.

they yap at one time it was illegal to own a heavy crossbred dingo.. you were not allowed to have one as a pet.. the only way the wild life authorities could tell straight away.. is if it barked.. not yapped.. if it barked you were fine..

if it yapped.. hello hefty fine

[TheMacGuffin]

DingoLingo, on 29 December 2012 - 04:59 AM, said:

now me.. I would say you need to lay off the magic mushrooms.. but hey.. each to their own..

Would that it were that easily brushed off.

I could also tell you some things about the LSD experiments, MK NAOMI and many things along those lines, but that's another story.

[JimOberg]

TheMacGuffin, on 29 December 2012 - 04:36 AM, said:

Why don't you tell them everything for once?

As if you'd notice, since I have posted many, many investigation results and background reports on my home page, and you have proudly proclaimed you will NEVER bother your head with reading them. But for those genuinely curious about this baffling phenomenon, I hope the suggestions from somebody who has actually worked in Mission Control, who has talked with many astronauts about many subjects including UFO legends, will be considered valuable additions to the facts surrounding these stories. And help assess their credibility.

And one fact that McG keeps dodging is Clark McClelland's claim that the German scientists let him know that the UFOs were coming from a Nazi base in Antarctica staffed by escaped SS scientists. Or that McClelland claims to have been an eyewitness to an explosion on Mars, via telescope, when he was actually on the opposite side of the Earth from where it had been visible.

If McG really thought McClelland were a credible source, I hope he would have helped him out by sending him money, as he has been begging for, for years. But has he? I doubt it. Talk -- especially bluster -- is cheap.

[TheMacGuffin]

JimOberg, on 29 December 2012 - 05:09 AM, said:

And help assess their credibility.

I don't think that's your true purpose--not in any way, shape or form.

As for poor Clark, he says you guys screwed him out of his pension because he talked too much, and that I can believe.

[JimOberg]

TheMacGuffin, on 29 December 2012 - 05:19 AM, said:

I don't think that's your true purpose--not in any way, shape or form.

As for poor Clark, he says you guys screwed him out of his pension because he talked too much, and that I can believe.

This supposedly happened in 1992 or so, when he failed his background check for the 'Secret' clearance he needed to get the Orbiter processing facility job [the one he later printed up a bogus 'business card' for]. Can you locate any officially-offensive public comments he made before that date, that might have triggered such a vindictive reaction? Any press interviews? Any postings on dial-up UFO chat rooms? If it was cause and effect, it has to be in chronological order -- so find the 'causes', and describe them to us.

How many years of his work at Cape Canaveral do you suppose were as a NASA employee? Most guys there, and here in Houston too, were contractor employees [some for NASA, others for the US Air Force or even the Navy], and pension vesting and funding was always a hit-or-miss proposition that few people really paid sufficient attention to.

Ask McClelland for the periods of NASA service he claims, in order to earn a NASA pension. It should be easy enough to determine. What's your initial guess?

And since he does seem to be financially strapped, you HAVE sent him some money, haven't you? If you believe he really was screwed over, where's your compassion?

[Chrlzs]

1963, on 29 December 2012 - 02:21 AM, said:

A very splendid example of deliberate obtuseness,  I hereby grant you...

Seriously, you think that sort of childish waste of bandwidth is helping your cred?  How about you just address the issues?

Quote

I will paste the main crux of the post from the link that was previously provided for your perusal... "More importantly, Oberg did not post the other LIFE Trent farm images

Say what?  You're complaining because he didn't post more images?  How do you know he had access to them?  If you knew about all the others, how come it was *me* that posted them...?

Quote

He had to have known that there was a series of Trent farm photos

Why did he have to have known?  Please outline your reasoning, step by step.

Quote

but he chose to selectively post only the one that would immediately suggest a hoax.

Having seen the others, which ones were more interesting, and why?

Quote

Oberg’s “mistake” was apparently repeated..A long-time, respected poster there had reproduced the ladder boy image, adding the statement:“from the same roll of film as the UFO photos.”

So let me get this straight, SOMEONE ELSE also claimed it was from Trent, and somehow that is Oberg repeating an error?  Give me strength.  The whole thing is a non-issue - you haven't yet made any sort of point, and the image is real and unfalsified.  Bye.

Edited by Chrlzs, 29 December 2012 - 06:43 AM.

[Chrlzs]

TheMacGuffin, on 29 December 2012 - 02:30 AM, said:

And as I pointed out on that thread.. blah blah...

Readers will note that AGAIN, MacGuffin has refused to acknowledge he posted false information.  So I will repeat it - here's MacGuffin's false information again:
HERE MacGuffin said that, in July 2008:

Quote

As I told you, I checked and none of them {the planets} would have been visible in the Northern Hemisphere at that time

That was completely and utterly false. His own link even showed that!  On the night in question an hour or so before dawn, JUPITER was quite close to the Moon, exactly as was described by the 'ufo' witness.  Here's a Stellarium screenshot for that time and location proving that MacGuffin posted FALSE information.  It can be verified with any planetarium software.



Given he did not (and will not) admit he was wrong, what is the obvious implication?

[TheMacGuffin]

Chrlzs, on 29 December 2012 - 06:37 AM, said:

Readers will note that AGAIN, MacGuffin has refused to acknowledge he posted false information.  So I will repeat it - here's MacGuffin's false information again:
HERE MacGuffin said that, in July 2008:

That was completely and utterly false. His own link even showed that!  On the night in question an hour or so before dawn, JUPITER was quite close to the Moon, exactly as was described by the 'ufo' witness.  Here's a Stellarium screenshot for that time and location proving that MacGuffin posted FALSE information.  It can be verified with any planetarium software.


Given he did not (and will not) admit he was wrong, what is the obvious implication?

I think it says a lot more about you than me, since you refuse to acknowledge to I was the first one who even thought to look for those things in the thread, and you are not being honest about the many posts I made on that subject.

[Chrlzs]

TheMacGuffin, on 29 December 2012 - 08:08 AM, said:

I think it says a lot more about you than me, since you refuse to acknowledge to I was the first one who even thought to look for those things in the thread, and you are not being honest about the many posts I made on that subject.

Why would that be of any importance, other than for your ego or to show you have nothing better to do than hang around these forums constantly and pounce on anything you think might support your UFO=alienz mantra?

And wouldn't it be a bit more important to provide CORRECT INFORMATION?  Your information was WRONG.

But if it makes you happy, you were .. the SECOND to look up information about the sky that night.  Imaginarynumber1 was the first, not you.

And perhaps you should have thought before bringing this aspect up...  Here's where you leapt onto the thread, saying:

Quote

The moon phase on July 17, 2012 was crescent moon, not full moon.

Problem was.. the sighting happened in 2008, not 2012...  As you would have realised if you had actually looked at the report properly.

So even your very first attempt to 'help' was also WRONG.  Twice in one thread, and in both cases, you were 'wrong' in a way that supported your bias...  And then, in a display of hypocrisy that is astonishing, you later had the hide to criticise others for typos...

OK, now I've acknowledged you looked up information about 'those things' quite early in the thread (but posted incorrect information).. it's your turn.

Acknowledge (and explain why) you posted incorrect information on that thread.

[JimOberg]

And so this all is supposed to make us believe that when McClelland says there are secret Nazi bases in Antarctica, launching UFOs, because German rocket scientists winked at him in code when he asked them, he deserves our trust? Watch his recent videos on youtube and try not to spray coffee over the keyboard.

But how much money have YOU actually sent him to help him out?