Another NASA employee comes forward - 8-9 Foot Alien Sighted

don't they always try to discredit an original story with something like this ?

Originally posted by azhure heart
don't they always try to discredit an original story with something like this ?

What story?

Here are Clark's own words, from his own website:

I, Clark C. McClelland, former ScO, Space Shuttle Fleet, personally observed an 8 to 9 foot tall ET on my 27 inch video monitors while on duty in the Kennedy Space Center, Launch Control Center (LCC). The ET was standing upright in the Space Shuttle Payload Bay having a discussion with TWO tethered US NASA Astronauts! I also observed on my monitors, the spacecraft of the ET as it was in a stabilized, safe orbit to the rear of the Space Shuttle main engine pods. I observed this incident for about one minute and seven seconds. Plenty of time to memorize all that I was observing. IT WAS AN ET and Alien Star Ship!

That's it.

That's all he says.

No evidence, no facts, no dates, no mission numbers, nothing that can be verified.

He ends his statement thusly:

I am ready to tell my story, but, for compensation,

And that's the end. Nothing else.

Originally posted by azhure heart
don't they always try to discredit an original story with something like this ?

But, azhure, there is nothing to discredit. The man says he has proof that we are not alone ..... period, end of story.

Don't get me wrong, I am the first to say humans are not alone in a universe that is how bloody big? But the man has been trying to sell the supposed proof, which no one knows what is, since 1996.

Edit ........ heh, beat me to it didn't ya emsed1

[edit on 31/7/08 by Misfit]

Originally posted by Misfit

Originally posted by azhure heart
don't they always try to discredit an original story with something like this ?

But, azhure, there is nothing to discredit. The man says he has proof that we are not alone ..... period, end of story.

Don't get me wrong, I am the first to say humans are not alone in a universe that is how bloody big? But the man has been trying to sell the supposed proof, which no one knows what is, since 1996.

This is a very important point.

I believe in aliens. I believe in UFOs, but we can't go out to the world and proclaim their existence with unsubstantiated claims on silly web pages.

We have to be more critical than the apathetic public if we ever want to take a stand and say, "They are real. We have proof."

I think we are all on the same side, but we have got to dig deep when stuff like this comes up.

reply to post by CaptGizmo

www.google.com...
5th result down and bingo, you have your answer. If you expect me to spoon-feed you with every little detail then it doesn't say a lot for your research skills I'm sorry.

Emsed1, points taken. I agreee that yes with Clark's story, he should go the whole hog or it becomes just another story for the pile. But as nexusmagazine said a few pages back, it would endanger the identities of the other people involved. I bear the same frustration as you. I wish there was a way out of this.

But even if Clark could come on here, he still won't be able to provide you with the proof you require. See, we're always going to be back at square one, aren't we!

[edit on 31-7-2008 by RiotComing]

I can't believe this ahs so many flags. Such a disappointing thread.

I can't believe for a moment that Clark couldn't find someone to publish his story if he has the information. Anynumber of published respectable researchers would jump at doing a collaborative book if it provided final proof.

Regardless of who he is or what he has, he has given a statement that can't be confirmed. I can understand the reasons for not giving more info, but then he shouldn't have gone down that road in the first place.

From his website...

ScO - SpaceCraft Operator (Ground Test Astronaut)

In addition to being an Aerospace Engineer and Technical Assistant to the Apollo Program Manager during the Apollo moon landings, McClelland and other SpaceCraft Operators did extensive technical checkout of simulated flights and mission objectives of the various shuttles to assure orbital success and the personal safety of the astronauts. McClelland knew many of the astronauts who perished during the Challenger disaster and certainly did all he could to keep each shuttle from such a repeat accident. He has held important positions involving such manned projects as Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo lunar landings, Skylab, the Space Shuttle and the Space Station. He was assigned to the cockpit of the Space Shuttle missions as a SpaceCraft Operator (Ground Test Astronaut).

Google does show results for job openings for spacecraft controller/operators but I didn't see any at NASA in a short search.

Originally posted by unnamedninja

Originally posted by Demandred
reply to post by nexusmagazine

 

his employment history in my mind adds alot of weight to his claims

I watched a news clip yesterday about a cop. The cop had confiscated a bunch of marijuana from some potheads, and stole it for himself. He put it in a bunch of brownies and ate them. Then later he called ER claiming that time was slowing down and he thought he was dying.

What exactly does employment history have to do with anything?

Cops steal, judges take handouts, carers abuse. But astronauts dont lie to make a buck, right.

your comparing a cop to this guy?

"I am a SPACE PROGRAM PIONEER. I assisted in launching the Mercury, Gemini, Apollo, Apollo-Soyuz, Skylab, Space Shuttle, Deep Space Missions, and the International Space Station.

I have received character substantiation from: Walter Cronkite, Major Donald
Keyhoe, NICAP Director, Richard Hall, Assistant Director of NICAP, Astronomer, Dr. J. Allen Hynek, etc. I served as the Assistant State of Florida and KSC Director of MUFON, the Director of the NICAP (National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena) at Cape Canaveral and KSC! I have received honored mentions from US Senators, Congressman, Military Officers and Scientists."

Clark has more to loose than to gain with this disclosure and lets face it $500 isnt a large amount of money to want, considering that releasing this he risks being labeled as a tin foil hat nutter and a persona non grata in government circles, its funny the more the pesudoskeptics try to muddy these waters the more i begin to wonder that there may just be something to what he is saying.

Originally posted by Demandred
Clark has more to loose than to gain with this disclosure and lets face it $500 isnt a large amount of money to want, considering that releasing this he risks being labeled as a tin foil hat nutter and a persona non grata in government circles,

Except according to people here, he's already been black-listed in those same circles. In fact, it's apparently why he is so poor now, because his pension was taken away.

He's 70-some years old, broke, and has ALREADY come forward claiming what you've obviously read.

What, again, by your logic is he going to lose by disclosing more information??

its funny the more the pesudoskeptics try to muddy these waters the more i begin to wonder that there may just be something to what he is saying.

Something tells me you muddy them on your own

I don't mean to be sniffy about this, but after reading the statement in support of Ed. Mitchell on Clark C. McClelland's website, I'm very confused by the way the 'NOTE' at the foot of the page has been written.

If Mr. McClelland was such an experienced CSo with, presumably, a highly academically qualified background, and a lifelong requirement for accuracy in technical reporting, why does his grammar seem to be falling apart in the 'NOTE'? Why the use of $$$ instead of "money" or "savings"? It comes across like it's been written by, dare I say it, a teenager. It doesn't fit properly.

To quote a line verbatim: "I am asking those that are rich, famous, like Rock Stars, Movie Stars, Bill Gates, all who have enough $$ for ten life times, PLEASE HELP ME!" This is a juvenile writing style, and it bothers me because it's so different from other material on the site..

Elsewhere on this, there's the really excessive use of exclamation marks, more like a younger person posting on a teen social networking site trying to make a point.

Something doesn't sit very easily here with the more mature, considered writing on other pages.

Compare this inconguity to the much more intelligently written INTRODUCTION, supposedly written also by Mr. McClelland as it is in the first-person. This reads like it has been written by a mature, educated, thoughtful person. Reading THIS, I can believe that this is, indeed, a man who's spent years on the lecture circuit.

Can anyone else see what I'm getting at?

I would LOVE to be 100% convinced that this is the real deal, as I believe Dr. Mitchell completely, and if Mr. McClelland is genuine, then that's an absolutely fantastic endorsement, and I sincerely hope he can get his book published. If he DID write his own 'NOTE', then I have to say that he seems to be under helluva a lot of stress, because his use of english has deteriorated considerably.

reply to post by jupiter1uk


Actually several people brought up the exact same point about the writing style earlier in the thread. So yes, we get what you are trying to say.

Originally posted by thrashee

Originally posted by Demandred
Clark has more to loose than to gain with this disclosure and lets face it $500 isnt a large amount of money to want, considering that releasing this he risks being labeled as a tin foil hat nutter and a persona non grata in government circles,

Except according to people here, he's already been black-listed in those same circles. In fact, it's apparently why he is so poor now, because his pension was taken away.

He's 70-some years old, broke, and has ALREADY come forward claiming what you've obviously read.

What, again, by your logic is he going to lose by disclosing more information??

its funny the more the pesudoskeptics try to muddy these waters the more i begin to wonder that there may just be something to what he is saying.

Something tells me you muddy them on your own

good morning thrashee

ok... what we have is someone who has had a very distinguished career within the space agencies comeout in support of another person whom had a distinguished career also within the space agencies, yes hes broke but being poor isnt an automatic exclusion that what he has to say isnt true, nor is his age.

Ive never requested anything under the FOI but from what ive been told there are fees involved in that too so does that mean just because Gov wants money to release information that that documentation is also false?

now im not saying what clark has to say is true, ive never made that claim in any of my posts however im not saying its false either, however i think what he is saying IS highly plausable so im inclined to put it on the back burner with a wait and see attitude as opposed to dismissing it out right




p.s and as to what else he could loose ... his life

[edit on 31-7-2008 by Demandred]

reply to post by Alora


Oops! I must have missed that bit. Can you feel me blushing all the way from London? That'll teach me not to skip pages...

Originally posted by jupiter1uk
reply to post by Alora

 

Oops! I must have missed that bit. Can you feel me blushing all the way from London? That'll teach me not to skip pages...

We've all done it. And it's still a good point as far as I am concerned. One other point I brought up earlier was in the original article cited he changed POV in the first paragraph (I believe it was the first paragraph) . I understand typos, but never not once have I ever accidentally referred to myself as "she".

so the alien went on a military mission?

that's weird/creepy. it reminds me of the comic book powers where a superman like character went on missions in the iraq war with the military.

reply to post by Demandred


Wow...I don't know why, but I thought FOIA requests would be free.

According to the gov, if you're a private individual, it costs $8 - 45 per hour after the first two hours for research, and $.10 - $.35 per sheet to copy for more than 100 pages. You can apparently request a waiver explaining how the info is not to be solely used for your benefit, but something tells me "in order to prove alien life claims by government workers" probably wouldn't cut it

Originally posted by thrashee
reply to post by Demandred

 

You can apparently request a waiver explaining how the info is not to be solely used for your benefit, but something tells me "in order to prove alien life claims by government workers" probably wouldn't cut it

nothing good in life is ever free

but then i guess you never know till you try...

can i ask you do you believe ET's have visited the earth?

reply to post by Demandred


Hmm, should I answer?

I'm honestly undecided on that one. Do I believe they exist? Yep. I'd like to believe they've been here (I think...but if they really look like that? I'm sorry, I'm scared #less).

reply to post by thrashee


always believed they existed but i was more of the opinion "why the hell would they wanna come here?"

but these days.. its just hard to see the truth from the lies ... i can understand the skeptical nature of people, but sometimes you never really know if your looking at a diamond or a rock with all the disinfo and lies ...

peace

FOIA is not that expensive. I am doing it right now for another subject. You have to request it per agency

www.usdoj.gov...