Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
JimOberg

Clark McClelland's Phony "Business Card"

11 posts in this topic

A few days ago we were directed to Scott McCleland's photograph and business card

as displayed at http://rense.com/1.imagesH/d312s2.jpg

as a demonstration that he was a fully credible source on UFO information.

At that time, I had noticed that it said:

Kennedy Space Center, Florida

PO Box 690662, Orlando, FL 32869

Now, since the Kennedy Space Center is not in Orlando, I was curious

whether this was some branch office. I asked around. My associates at

the 'real' KSC now tell me they have no idea what KSC function could be

using a post office box in a city an hour's drive away from the real space port.

They suggested -- and after a few moment's thought I can't think of any argument to

refute them -- that the alleged 'business card' was privately printed up

by somebody wanting to falsely claim a non-existent current relationship

with NASA's Kennedy Space Center.

All accessible records indicate that the genuine address and zip-code of the

Kennedy Space Center is:

Kennedy Space Center, Florida 32899-0001

and that current employees giving out genuine business cards also need

to include a 'mail code', usually a capital letter or two followed by a few digits.

They also would include an office phone number.

What other explanations are possible, before we rush to judgment here?

I don't doubt that McClelland was working at the Cape during the period he claims --

he's provided plenty of credible evidence for that. But I have my doubts about

that supposed 'business card'. Let's discuss this, and its implications.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you ask the people at KSC if McClelland has ever worked there before? Just wondering.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Did you ask the people at KSC if McClelland has ever worked there before? Just wondering.

I have no reason to doubt he worked there the years he claims to have.

The guy I did check up on is Maurice Chatelain, widely touted on the WWW-UFO sites as 'Chief of NASA Communications'.

I can't find where HE ever made that claim -- which is good, because it's false. He was fired from a contractor job in California in 1965, before the Apollo program even started flying. But look at the quotations commonly attributed to him and his 'inside knowledge'.

Edited by JimOberg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't doubt that McClelland was working at the Cape during the period he claims --

he's provided plenty of credible evidence for that. But I have my doubts about

that supposed 'business card'. Let's discuss this, and its implications.

...as for Clark's business card you are protesting about, call NASA and complain to them directly if you have a problem with it...please do, I'm sure they would love for you to lodge a complaint about the fictitious business card wrongfully displaying their copyrighted name and logo. And have them remove the fictitious picture of Clark sitting in the pilots seat of the space shuttle while you are at it too! Go ahead Jim, please do, and post the results here for all to see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...as for Clark's business card you are protesting about, call NASA and complain to them directly if you have a problem with it...please do, I'm sure they would love for you to lodge a complaint about the fictitious business card wrongfully displaying their copyrighted name and logo. And have them remove the fictitious picture of Clark sitting in the pilots seat of the space shuttle while you are at it too! Go ahead Jim, please do, and post the results here for all to see.

I'm not complaining to NASA (which by the way, has no 'copyrighted name and logo' -- you keep making stuff up out of your own fantasies and calling it 'evidence') because they've done nothing wrong. The UFO nuts who posted this 'business card', and presented it as evidence for McClelland's credibility -- they're the ones who have been incompetent and dishonest. But I'm not complaining about that either -- it's a perfect demonstration of their own lack of credibility.

I'm just asking if there is ANY legitimate reason, that I may have missed, why anybody should think that the card and its patently fake address is evidence for anybody to believe anything McClelland has said. That's clearly the reason the card was posted in the first place. And it's a bogus reason, as far as I can tell -- except I'm waiting to be shown an alternate, innocent explanation for it.

And you don't even have the intellectual honesty to attempt an answer -- you just try to pass on to ME the responsibility that you and your buddies have flubbed. As if that arguably fake card were a 'problem' for me, when your inability to grapple with its implications is a major problem for YOU.

The kind of card that would BE no problem would have McClelland's name and address with 'former NASA ScO at KSC" on it, using any space-related logo he liked. He did honorable service and rightfully deserves to be proud of it.

But implying current NASA employee status is unjustified -- and posing as a federal emplyee, especially with a more serious piece of faked ID like a badge (which there's no reason to suspect McClelland has done) -- would have been a much more serious issue for NASA to look at. A guy named Jerry Whittridge is in jail for doing exactly that at several NASA bases, several years ago.

The photo is not fictitious, and your comment that I might think so again shows how you have confused your own fantasies with the nature of the outside world and of other people's opinions.

Edited by JimOberg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What was McClelland's official position, and at what location was he employed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What was McClelland's official position, and at what location was he employed?

The position on the card, ScO, involved work checking out actual shuttle orbiter's

during launch preparation. I don't doubt he had that job in the period he describes,

that ended in 1992, and that he did honorable and competent service.

The job was at the Kennedy Space Center.

The card gives a private PO Box in Orlando, Florida. My presumption -- subject to counter-argument -- is that

the card uses a private PO Box because it was printed long after he left the NASA job, but still liked posing as

a NASA employee. Heck, bragging about being an ex-employee in those types of critical jobs would be considered

plenty honorable, and fully honest. Posing as a current employee, when he wasn't, is tacky.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...as for Clark's business card you are protesting about, call NASA and complain to them directly if you have a problem with it...please do, I'm sure they would love for you to lodge a complaint about the fictitious business card wrongfully displaying their copyrighted name and logo. And have them remove the fictitious picture of Clark sitting in the pilots seat of the space shuttle while you are at it too! Go ahead Jim, please do, and post the results here for all to see.

Don't be surprised if further attacks on his character are continued. I hear them coming!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Don't be surprised if further attacks on his character are continued. I hear them coming!

I truly feel sorry for people like Jim Oberg, I really do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm just asking if there is ANY legitimate reason, that I may have missed, why anybody should think that the card and its patently fake address is evidence for anybody to believe anything McClelland has said. That's clearly the reason the card was posted in the first place. And it's a bogus reason, as far as I can tell -- except I'm waiting to be shown an alternate, innocent explanation for it.

Perhaps it is a more personal business card. Maybe NASA doesn't want any and every piece of mail to end up in the main headquarters. Maybe they want the mail sent to this location so that they can inspect it or whatever they might want to do, and then if it is "clean" they forward it to his working location. So as to make sure people aren't transporting information to and from NASA employees. Just a thought. ^_^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Perhaps it is a more personal business card. Maybe NASA doesn't want any and every piece of mail to end up in the main headquarters. Maybe they want the mail sent to this location so that they can inspect it or whatever they might want to do, and then if it is "clean" they forward it to his working location. So as to make sure people aren't transporting information to and from NASA employees. Just a thought. ^_^

Thanks for the suggestions. That's the first mature response to this issue that has appeared.

Other responses are more amusing, such as people who like calling me a 'liar' [with no examples] whining over the actions and statements of their favorite experts being brought into question, via specific examples and checkable references, and calling that an 'attack'. As if they hadn't been attacking the character of all their opponents for decades.

Nope. Criticism of anyone's actions and statements, with documentation, isn't an 'attack'. It's a method of movement towards truth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.