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.


- - - - -

More Ravings from Clark McClelland


  • Please log in to reply
85 replies to this topic

#76    bee

bee

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,355 posts
  • Joined:24 Jan 2007
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:England

Posted 08 March 2013 - 04:05 PM

View PostJimOberg, on 08 March 2013 - 03:36 PM, said:

Meanwhile, in light of the new reconstruction of events, it's clear that the impossibility of McClelland seeing the SAME event as the Japanese astronomer doesn't reflect badly on his credibility if he didn't claim to have seen the same event. But a different event at a different date.


I suppose it depends how long the 'event' lasted....and if it could be considered the 'same event'....

ie. same thing happening in the same place...

I only heard about it in the last couple of days....so I don't know at the moment.

It will probably come down to semantics in the end...

I don't have the time right now to go and find out exactly what McClelland said about it...but I might do over the weekend.

:)


#77    JimOberg

JimOberg

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,812 posts
  • Joined:03 Sep 2007

Posted 08 March 2013 - 04:11 PM

View Postquillius, on 08 March 2013 - 03:46 PM, said:

I applaud you for admitting the mistake Jim, but with this in mind, does this mean that we now have a reasonable appreciation of how you interpret events/evidence and therefore fall inline with Mitchells 'misinterpreting' the ESP conclusion?

All interpretations are subject to reappraisal with new evidence. regarding Mitchell's experiment, there is no new evidence in forty years -- just the original data sheets.

...and from that raw data, in my assessment, I see Mitchell altering the criteria for 'hits' several times until he finds an arbitrary scheme that produces statistical significance. And in my view, from classic science training, that's not good science.

By all means, try it yourself.

First thing you notice -- the paper is not online, anywhere on the Internet, and Mitchell refuses permission to post it on line. Only HIS summaries of HIS assessment of his own experiment are allowed to be released. If you try hard you can find a few reviews by other ESP researchers, and they are not kind.

You can confirm that.

Then you can draw conclusions from that behavior.

Then you can generalize that behavior, tentatively.

Try it yourself.


#78    JimOberg

JimOberg

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,812 posts
  • Joined:03 Sep 2007

Posted 08 March 2013 - 04:13 PM

View Postbee, on 08 March 2013 - 04:05 PM, said:

I don't have the time right now to go and find out exactly what McClelland said about it...but I might do over the weekend.

I have the same problem.

...but thanks for making an issue of it and getting the hitherto unknown-to-me detailed email exchanges posted. Better to be embarrassed among friends than to make an incomplete and misleading allegation on a widely-accessed news website.


#79    quillius

quillius

    52.0839 N, 1.4328 E

  • Member
  • 4,983 posts
  • Joined:04 Aug 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:LONDON

  • A man should look for what is, and not for what he thinks should be.
    Albert Einstein

Posted 08 March 2013 - 04:25 PM

View PostJimOberg, on 08 March 2013 - 04:11 PM, said:

All interpretations are subject to reappraisal with new evidence. regarding Mitchell's experiment, there is no new evidence in forty years -- just the original data sheets.

...and from that raw data, in my assessment, I see Mitchell altering the criteria for 'hits' several times until he finds an arbitrary scheme that produces statistical significance. And in my view, from classic science training, that's not good science.

By all means, try it yourself.

First thing you notice -- the paper is not online, anywhere on the Internet, and Mitchell refuses permission to post it on line. Only HIS summaries of HIS assessment of his own experiment are allowed to be released. If you try hard you can find a few reviews by other ESP researchers, and they are not kind.

You can confirm that.

Then you can draw conclusions from that behavior.

Then you can generalize that behavior, tentatively.

Try it yourself.

ok noted on top half of post.

As for the paper, what data specifically?....if you can point to specific faults I should be able to find some 'extracts' from the paper that relate directly to said fault.

may I ask you how and when did you read the paper? is there anywhere that confirms his reluctance to post it online? and if so why? rather than jumping to conclusions as to why do we know anything factually speaking?


#80    JimOberg

JimOberg

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,812 posts
  • Joined:03 Sep 2007

Posted 08 March 2013 - 06:43 PM

View Postquillius, on 08 March 2013 - 04:25 PM, said:

ok noted on top half of post.

As for the paper, what data specifically?....if you can point to specific faults I should be able to find some 'extracts' from the paper that relate directly to said fault.

may I ask you how and when did you read the paper? is there anywhere that confirms his reluctance to post it online? and if so why? rather than jumping to conclusions as to why do we know anything factually speaking?

Let's discuss the mitchell stuff on the mitchell thread.


#81    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 31,204 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 11 March 2013 - 04:33 AM

View Postbee, on 08 March 2013 - 01:22 PM, said:

how sad...never mind...he will notice you now after your previous post about the Mars sighting..of what-ever-it was.... :w00t:  

Yeah right Bee, your getting the credit for the email exchanges! I am invisible :cry: It's unrequited I tells ya!
Glad you liked the link! :D I like to help out when I can, for everyone.

View Postbee, on 08 March 2013 - 01:22 PM, said:

zat is, again...very sweet of you...... :P

I'm just that kind of guy, in fact I am a little hurt that it took you so long to notice.

View Postbee, on 08 March 2013 - 01:22 PM, said:

But only when he is strapped to the wall with a black belt thingy......like in your pic..... :innocent:



.

You would think so wouldn't you! Seems like there must be a trick some place, but have a look at this clip, no black belt thingy! @ about 13:40

*snip*

Edited by Saru, 11 March 2013 - 09:18 AM.
Youtube video removed due to copyright

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. - Dr Who

#82    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 31,204 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 11 March 2013 - 05:16 AM

View Postbee, on 08 March 2013 - 01:42 PM, said:

Cheers for that Psyche......so the Saheki and McClelland sightings of the what-ever on Mars... took place on different dates......mmmmmmmm


Did you realise that Jim?

And does this make that particular accusation that you have levelled at McClelland nul and void...?


Perhaps you should withdraw it...or people might think you are just trying to cast aspersions on McClelland because he is

spilling the beans.....the secret beans..... :)


.


You are welcome Bee, but I do not hink there is anything Jim could possibly say to make MClelland look worse than he already does.

Giant entities! Great Shatner's Ghost!

Edited by psyche101, 11 March 2013 - 05:16 AM.

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. - Dr Who

#83    bee

bee

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,355 posts
  • Joined:24 Jan 2007
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:England

Posted 11 March 2013 - 02:22 PM

View Postpsyche101, on 11 March 2013 - 04:33 AM, said:

Yeah right Bee, your getting the credit for the email exchanges! I am invisible :cry: It's unrequited I tells ya!

haha...yes I did get the credit :lol:


I watched the Penn and Teller vid before it was removed....it was funny.... :tu:



.


#84    bee

bee

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,355 posts
  • Joined:24 Jan 2007
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:England

Posted 11 March 2013 - 02:54 PM

View PostJimOberg, on 08 March 2013 - 04:13 PM, said:

I have the same problem.

...but thanks for making an issue of it and getting the hitherto unknown-to-me detailed email exchanges posted. Better to be embarrassed among friends than to make an incomplete and misleading allegation on a widely-accessed news website.


I did a search for McClelland explosion on mars and in this short video he says....(in the first couple of minutes)


"I observed there on Mars in 1954 (I believe it was now, not 1952 like I said earlier)...an explosion on Mars.

I had 58 seconds of that explosion. There was one other people on earth that observed the explosion with me.

He was a Japanese astronomer. We both observed it in the same area."







So....as I predicted it comes down to semantics....

When McClelland says 'with me'....he must have meant.....'as well as me'...


Lets be fair here...he is not expressing himself very well...like saying 'people' when it should have been 'person'.



As you have already seen the vid and  commented on it 2 months ago saying....



Quote

JamesOberg 2 months ago

Kathleen, you forgot to check on the visibility of Mars during that explosion, as seen from Pennsylvania. Unless the Earth is flat, it was physically impossible for anyone in the US to have seen the explosion that was visible to the astronomer in Japan. What am I overlooking?



I would say that you are overlooking that the sightings, of what-ever..... happened on two different dates....but you have jumped

on McClelland saying 'with me'......when this was just a poorly expressed statement.


Jeeez Jim.....hasn't the poor guy suffered enough? Are you trying to put people off spending a few dollars on his chapters...?

If everything he says is so wrong...why are you taking it so seriously?


:huh:


.


#85    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 31,204 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 12 March 2013 - 03:10 AM

View Postbee, on 11 March 2013 - 02:54 PM, said:

I did a search for McClelland explosion on mars and in this short video he says....(in the first couple of minutes)


"I observed there on Mars in 1954 (I believe it was now, not 1952 like I said earlier)...an explosion on Mars.

I had 58 seconds of that explosion. There was one other people on earth that observed the explosion with me.

He was a Japanese astronomer. We both observed it in the same area."







So....as I predicted it comes down to semantics....

When McClelland says 'with me'....he must have meant.....'as well as me'...


Lets be fair here...he is not expressing himself very well...like saying 'people' when it should have been 'person'.



As you have already seen the vid and  commented on it 2 months ago saying....







I would say that you are overlooking that the sightings, of what-ever..... happened on two different dates....but you have jumped

on McClelland saying 'with me'......when this was just a poorly expressed statement.


Jeeez Jim.....hasn't the poor guy suffered enough? Are you trying to put people off spending a few dollars on his chapters...?

If everything he says is so wrong...why are you taking it so seriously?


:huh:


.



That''s a bit rough Bee, you said yourself McClelland represented himself badly, no wonder this is some confusion. He should not talk with his fingers in his mouth.

McClelland suffered?

Anyone who spends money on that nonsense has too much money.

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. - Dr Who

#86    DONTEATUS

DONTEATUS

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 17,433 posts
  • Joined:15 Feb 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Planet TEXAS

Posted 13 March 2013 - 01:45 AM

THeres only so much the Human mind can take before it Explodes  I see alot of Grey matter splattered on the electrons in here ! :sk

This is a Work in Progress!




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users