Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

Clark McClelland // Space UFOs // 2012


  • Please log in to reply
48 replies to this topic

#1    JimOberg

JimOberg

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,805 posts
  • Joined:03 Sep 2007

Posted 12 November 2012 - 08:18 PM

McClelland's name came up on a recent discussion of Gordon Cooper's UFO stories, but he deserves a new thread of his own.

Here's a recent interview with him on Jeff Rense's show:


http://www.stargate-...nse-radio-show/
He describes how Hitler escaped to his Antarctic base and then buzzed Washington, DC, in 1952, and then how von Braun confided to him how NASA's probe Voyager-1 was aimed by von Braun at the star Aldebraen because that's where aryan humans come from and they're trying to get back home. And he begged for money, a lot, too.

Listen to his comments, please, and then tell me why a single word of any of his stories is worthy of belief.


#2    Ashotep

Ashotep

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 7,189 posts
  • Joined:10 May 2011
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:USA

  • Courage is being scared to death but saddling up anyway-John Wayne

Posted 12 November 2012 - 08:32 PM

I don't think Hitler escaped to an Antarctic base and I don't think he buzzed Washington DC.


#3    Sweetpumper

Sweetpumper

    Heatseeker

  • Member
  • 10,270 posts
  • Joined:19 Dec 2003
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Avengers Tower

Posted 12 November 2012 - 08:46 PM

View PostJimOberg, on 12 November 2012 - 08:18 PM, said:

Listen to his comments, please, and then tell me why a single word of any of his stories is worthy of belief.

Because it's on the internet.

"At it's most basic level, science is supposed to represent the investigation of the unexplained, not the explanation of the uninvestigated."
- Hunt for the Skinwalker

"So many people forget that the first country the Nazis invaded was their own." Dr. Abraham Erskine

#4    Amerix

Amerix

    Astral Projection

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 747 posts
  • Joined:06 May 2009

Posted 12 November 2012 - 09:04 PM

Quote

He describes how Hitler escaped to his Antarctic base and then buzzed Washington, DC

LOL!  Oddly enough, I've heard stories like these before, but they were mostly white supremacists who believe BS like this, as some attempt to try to beat their chest over "Aryan technological superiority" (Some even believe there is a Nazi fleet being raised on the far side of the moon, getting ready to invade and impost the 4th Reich LOL!).  Anyone who isn't a lunatic, or rabid racist usually see these stories for what they are.  BS.

Edited by Cpl599, 12 November 2012 - 09:06 PM.


#5    bmk1245

bmk1245

    puny village idiot

  • Member
  • 3,949 posts
  • Joined:16 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Vilnius, Lithuania

Posted 12 November 2012 - 09:34 PM

Russkies found Hitlers remains (would like to hear other story, though), end of story.

Just amazing how much crap people can come up with.

In 1952 he buzzed Washington?! I'm not master of my bladder...

Arguing with fool is like playing chess with pigeon: he will scatter pieces, peck King's crown, crap on bishop, and fly away bragging how he won the game... (heard once, author unknown).
Zhoom! What was that? That was your life, Mate! Oh, that was quick. Do I get another? Sorry, Mate. That's your lot. Basil Fawlty (John Cleese).

#6    Matt Vinyl

Matt Vinyl

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 131 posts
  • Joined:29 Mar 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Kent, England

  • "And has this ever happened before, minister?" "Yes, but only ever in the past, Bryan..."

Posted 12 November 2012 - 09:42 PM

Funnily, I was lazily watching an 'Ancient Aliens' episode (yes, please slap me hard, but I was bored at the time!) about links between Hitler and 'UFOs'. Also, how a lot of the German scientists were 'pulled over' to the USA after the end of the war (Operation Paper Clip, I believe?) And, as such, most of the technology about today is just a carry-on from that started / pursued by the 3rd Reich.

Quote

He describes how Hitler escaped to his Antarctic base and then buzzed Washington, DC
Glad I wasn't supping a beverage the moment I read that; Dell would be selling another laptop! ;)

And do you ever contradict yourself? Well, yes and no...

#7    JimOberg

JimOberg

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,805 posts
  • Joined:03 Sep 2007

Posted 12 November 2012 - 10:12 PM

Can anybody go back and see who it was who posted McClelland's stuff as 'supporting evidence'? It wasn't McGuffin, was it? If so, keep it quiet. No need to open up a new war zone.


#8    bmk1245

bmk1245

    puny village idiot

  • Member
  • 3,949 posts
  • Joined:16 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Vilnius, Lithuania

Posted 12 November 2012 - 11:20 PM

View PostJimOberg, on 12 November 2012 - 10:12 PM, said:

Can anybody go back and see who it was who posted McClelland's stuff as 'supporting evidence'? It wasn't McGuffin, was it? If so, keep it quiet. No need to open up a new war zone.
Actually you started it, but without McG's pms it will vansish.

Arguing with fool is like playing chess with pigeon: he will scatter pieces, peck King's crown, crap on bishop, and fly away bragging how he won the game... (heard once, author unknown).
Zhoom! What was that? That was your life, Mate! Oh, that was quick. Do I get another? Sorry, Mate. That's your lot. Basil Fawlty (John Cleese).

#9    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 30,259 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 13 November 2012 - 12:00 AM

Well, his own website certainly puts his information in perspective.

To say the least.

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo 'If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants.' - Sir Isaac Newton. "Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit." Ed Stewart. Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs. Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Sir Wearer of Hats.


#10    synchronomy

synchronomy

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,124 posts
  • Joined:05 Mar 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ontario Canada

  • Facinating

Posted 13 November 2012 - 02:29 AM

Clark McClelland has no credibility as far as I'm concerned.  His "accounts" are from his imagination.
If he knows his stories are BS, then he is simply a liar.
If he believes his stories are true, then I would think he has some sort of psychosis.
I get the feeling it's the latter.
Unfortunately guys like Rense make a living promoting such rubbish.

At the heart of science is an essential balance between two seemingly contradictory attitudes--an openness to new ideas, no matter how bizarre or counterintuitive they may be, and the most ruthless skeptical scrutiny of all ideas, old and new.
This is how deep truths are winnowed from deep nonsense. -- Carl Sagan

#11    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 30,259 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 13 November 2012 - 02:47 AM

View Postsynchronomy, on 13 November 2012 - 02:29 AM, said:

Clark McClelland has no credibility as far as I'm concerned.  His "accounts" are from his imagination.
If he knows his stories are BS, then he is simply a liar.
If he believes his stories are true, then I would think he has some sort of psychosis.
I get the feeling it's the latter.
Unfortunately guys like Rense make a living promoting such rubbish.

You have to wonder though, "what is his inspiration"? The man had a career that most of us would be envious of, got to meet the most amazing people and was at the forefront of technology. His wackiness seems to precede the Challenger accident, so perhaps that is not something that affected him mentally, so one tends to wonder, what gives?
And surely this claim is to be considered when other "whistleblowers" tend to emerge?

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo 'If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants.' - Sir Isaac Newton. "Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit." Ed Stewart. Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs. Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Sir Wearer of Hats.


#12    DONTEATUS

DONTEATUS

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 16,821 posts
  • Joined:15 Feb 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Planet TEXAS

Posted 13 November 2012 - 03:31 AM

psyche101 ITs clear that it was simple professional mental break down ! Clark was afterall known for streaching the story ! :tu:
ITs TIme to B.B.Q !

This is a Work in Progress!

#13    JimOberg

JimOberg

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,805 posts
  • Joined:03 Sep 2007

Posted 13 November 2012 - 04:42 AM

View Postpsyche101, on 13 November 2012 - 02:47 AM, said:

You have to wonder though, "what is his inspiration"? The man had a career that most of us would be envious of, got to meet the most amazing people and was at the forefront of technology....

You cross paths with lots of top people at a rocket base, and sometimes get to be photographed with them -- but in at least several cases [von Braun, for example, or his claim of direct contact with Story Musgrave], I've concluded McClelland's claim of a personal friendship with them, and secret revelations from them, is imaginary.

The challenge is to see what sort of self-styled 'whistle blower' is really just a self-promoting 'smoke blower'. Some may be, some others may not be. That uncertainty makes case-by-case validation critically important, because you do NOT want to reject or overlook those with authentic information.

McClelland is maybe at one end of the spectrum, Jacobs and his missile shootdown at the other [I think he reported his personal observations quite accurately, just misinterpreted them]. Donna Hare-Tietze may be somewhere in the middle -- reporting stories people told HER, with significant exaggeration and garble. Gordon Cooper's dramatized 'improvement' of his own experiences and of rumors he heard at the Officers Club places him towards the McClelland end, in my view.


#14    TheMacGuffin

TheMacGuffin

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 4,159 posts
  • Joined:30 Jun 2012

Posted 13 November 2012 - 04:47 AM

View PostJimOberg, on 12 November 2012 - 10:12 PM, said:

Can anybody go back and see who it was who posted McClelland's stuff as 'supporting evidence'? It wasn't McGuffin, was it? If so, keep it quiet. No need to open up a new war zone.

No need to mention me, since I'm no longer going to take part in any more discussions like these.


#15    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 30,259 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 13 November 2012 - 06:26 AM

View PostJimOberg, on 13 November 2012 - 04:42 AM, said:

You cross paths with lots of top people at a rocket base, and sometimes get to be photographed with them -- but in at least several cases [von Braun, for example, or his claim of direct contact with Story Musgrave], I've concluded McClelland's claim of a personal friendship with them, and secret revelations from them, is imaginary.

The challenge is to see what sort of self-styled 'whistle blower' is really just a self-promoting 'smoke blower'. Some may be, some others may not be. That uncertainty makes case-by-case validation critically important, because you do NOT want to reject or overlook those with authentic information.

McClelland is maybe at one end of the spectrum, Jacobs and his missile shootdown at the other [I think he reported his personal observations quite accurately, just misinterpreted them]. Donna Hare-Tietze may be somewhere in the middle -- reporting stories people told HER, with significant exaggeration and garble. Gordon Cooper's dramatized 'improvement' of his own experiences and of rumors he heard at the Officers Club places him towards the McClelland end, in my view.

HI Jim

Thank you, I truly am befuddled by those that bleat amazing revelations without confirmation, and expect to be taken at their word. I would agree with the above, the relationships seem imaginary, but where you say people like Donna Hare-Tietze may be somewhere in the middle, again I find this confusing as Donna Hare has sided with Stephen Greer as opposed to the people who actually study space. Greer, as you would know, is a physician, and UFOLogist. I find the UFO being airbrushed out claim, threats to Astronauts and her insistance that incredible resolution was quite possible when it was not rather large flags that she is just another crackpot. As she did work at NASA, how can she remain so incredibly credulous? Does she not have direct access to people and data that can answer such questions definitively?
It seems strange to me that people can enter a forum like this, and manage to speak with experts such as yourself, yet some of the people actually at NASA seem to have less information than I can find on the other side of the planet? And come up with ridiculously wild tales to support a vague instance. How can this happen? Honestly, I would give my eye teeth to work at NASA in such a capacity (try me! I'd do it t! :lol: ) and I would be in a seventh heaven walking by Astronauts and Shuttles, and would suck in information like a Dyson. It honestly strikes me as nothing short of bewildering that someone can work at NASA and come out the other end with the sort of tales Donna Hare has to tell. Shouldn't she be too smart to believe Greer's nonsense? And just as a prerequisite to work in such a fine place?  Or could perhaps her "ET Encounter" have relieved her of objectivity? May I ask if you could express where you see the difference between them. Donna strikes me as worse because she implicate NASA, which I always find pretty ridiculous. That just seems to me like implicating Arrnott's Biscuits or something. NASA is well policed by the amateur community, not to menton that Private Enterprise is keeping up with NASA just fine. Branson is really making a name for himself. It is hard to pardon such gross inaccuracies from people whom I feel really ought to know better. I really do not know what depth of analysis Jacobs was capable, of, and I suppose could have made an honest mistake, but I cannot see that being the case with Donna.
Regardless you certainly have well established the validity of claims made by Clark McClelland.

Cheers.

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo 'If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants.' - Sir Isaac Newton. "Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit." Ed Stewart. Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs. Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Sir Wearer of Hats.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users