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

Good story,

First off this needs to be investigated but his credentials give immediate weight to his story.

There's a few positives and negatives to look at.

Positives:

His background is great.
He talked to another witness at the time. Who is it and will this person com forward?
There's corrorborating evidence that these tall beings have been seen.

In this industrial center -- population 900,000 -- a dark red, flattened sphere, about 15 x 6 m in size, circled 12 m above ground in South Park, disturbing the grass underneath. It flew away and, a few minutes later, returned and was witnessed as it hovered near ground, by twelve lower-school children playing soccer and 30 - 40 adults waiting at a nearby bus stop.
www.ufoevidence.org...

This happened in Voronezh, Russia and they saw 9 feet tall beings.

Here's a video:
www.youtube.com...

Negatives:

He has a motive. He needs money so he's saying this now to capitalize on the Edgar Mitchell story.

He's an ex-employee that's disgruntled.

He could be dis-info. NASA new this guy needed money so they paid him to come out with this story to cloud up what Mitchell is saying. If the news reports it and it turns out to be a hoax then it taints others who come out with similar backgrounds with similar stories.

Now let me address the senile NONSENSE.

I have read physics papers by men who are up there in age, should I dismiss the paper out of hand because he's old so this automatically means he's senile?

Do we take every Judge off of the bench that's old and dismiss them because they must be senile?

John McCain is 72 years old, therefore he must be senile.

What about those on the Supreme Court?

You can't make these VERY SILLY assumptions about someone being senile without any evidence except the person is old.

You disagree with the underlying subject matter and the witness, so to support your pre-existing belief on these subjects people come up with ILLOGICAL claims.

He's old, therefore he's senile because I don't agree with him.

I just look on Wikipedia.

THE SKEPTIC OF ALL SKEPTICS JAMES RANDI WAS BORN IN 1928.

I wonder if the skeptics have dismissed Randi over these past few years because he's old and therefore he MUST be senile.

reply to post by housegroove23


Good find,

This takes away any disinfo motive or trying to capitilize on Edgar Mitchell's story.

Could he be trying to make money? Of course.

Do the skeptics question the motives of Randi and Michael Shermer because the sell books and magazines? Are they just being skeptical about everything to make money?

So he has said this before and that's good to hear.

[edit on 30-7-2008 by polomontana]

reply to post by GeneralLee


General, and everyone, if you read the caption of the photo in the columbia cockpit, it mentions the year taken (1992) and Clark's age at the time (56).

You could also look up the missions of Columbia to determine the approx month the pic was taken. The vehicle is horizontal, so likely had recently finished a mission. It was likely being re-prepped for another flight. The internal power to the cockpit instruments is off, indicated by the HSI and all the little red flags on the instruments. Besides, in final prep, they teams likely wear clean suits.....

reply to post by lee anoma


Great link...never read that material, and glad I had the chance to.

These stories should be circulated more, as there may be clues or incidents that allow others to interpret what they may have seen or experienced in the past - but because of fear of ridicule or physical well being, they never took their story public or even tried to decipher the moment internally.

Thanks again.

He had over thirty years in the government. He could of retired easily. The story does not make any sense.
"If you don't pay me, I'll tell all your secrets" sounds very childish.
I do not believe his story.

reply to post by Anonymous ATS


Batteries for Video Camera to catch Alien footage - $20

Disclosure from an ex Astronaut - $500

Weeding out Hoaxes - Priceless

Originally posted by thrashee

Originally posted by spacevisitor
By insulting those men the way you do here you definitely want to diminish the importance of the story in my opinion.
Amazing that you even received some stars for this in fact insulting remark.

While I can certainly see how this comment was off-colored and perhaps disrespectful, I think people are getting a little carried away with it. I don't believe the poster was trying to slander older people (or the senile), but was rather making an (apparently failed) attempt at humor.

I don’t say he was trying to slander older people (or the senile), I say he was insulting specific those men by saying that.
And in my opinion he wasn’t making an attempt at humor.

Originally posted by thrashee

Originally posted by spacevisitor
Is this really how you think about people like Dr. Edgar Mitchell a former NASA astronaut and former ScO, Space Shuttle Fleet Clark C. McClelland?

Credentials don't matter--old age and possible senility do not discriminate. You seem to be stating that people with such credentials are not allowed to be viewed as old and senile.

That is not what I am stating, the people mentioned aren’t senile and therefore I find it very improper to call them so.

Originally posted by thrashee

Originally posted by spacevisitor
Especially people with there background disserves absolute respect for being so brave in coming forward with such highly sensitive information.

No. Their background deserves respect. Whether they deserve respect for coming forward with such information depends on the veracity of that information. If it's not true, for instance, we should most certainly disrespect them for it, especially considering that they would have leveraged their background to spread disinformation.

I agree with what you said here, that if it's not true, for instance, we should most certainly disrespect them for it, especially considering that they would have leveraged their background to spread disinformation.
But my personal opinion however is that I believe that they tell the truth.
Sorely you can disagree with that, no hard feelings whatsoever.

The site looks badly made...and it seems that a kid/ teenager wrote all that. I'll believe the story if this guy had the courage to go to CNN or some other type of media and reveal all the secrets and NOT ask for money. With that said he might also be a dis-info agent. Sadly we can really trust people these days without at least some type of prove(documents/ contracts that he was with NASA, pictures with members of NASA etc). Even ONE little picture/ document can make a difference.

And why will he come with this type of information now?

But I'll still keep track of this

[edit on 30-7-2008 by apk4o7mxb]

[edit on 30-7-2008 by apk4o7mxb]

reply to post by wakeupcall1111


He's not an astronaut.

He is a disgruntled low-level NASA peon who was fired for lying about his background.

Over the last 15 years he has traveled the Internet spreading his tale to anyone who would listen while throwing his ex-NASA job title around to try and lend credibility.

He disappeared from the radar and is now trying to ride along on Ed Mitchell's coattails so he can get his 15 minutes of fame.

He is also a member of ATS and I challenge him to come forward and answer some tough questions.

[edit on 7/30/08 by emsed1]

This stinks on ice. Mr. McClelland's story is contradictory. From the email I recieved:

I WILL NOT cause these brave astronauts any problems, since several are NOT yet retired!

Then why bother mentioning the story in the first place? If this incident did happen, then the powers-that-be already know who these astronauts are. If McClelland is worried about their safety, wouldn't they be in danger already?

If he is worried about their privacy, Mr. McClelland has revealed too much information: there are only a handful of people from his tenure at NASA that are still serving in the astronaut corps. It would be a very simple matter of elimination to find out who the astronauts in question may be.

reply to post by Tha Joker


I agree. He also jumps points of view in the story. He starts out as if it is him and then transisions to a third person view. Doesnt add up with the pay either.

Per Project Camelot, Richard Hoagland will discuss the subject on C2C
in the firtst hour tonight..............

projectcamelot.org...

Nice post here. I feel sad that someone can be robbed of his pension like that, glad I dont live in the US.

Without actual evidence any testimony is purely a story, interesting or otherwise i personally think asking for money or donations etc undermines the perception of trust and implies someone cashing in.

After the first gulf war we began seeing SAS etc solidiers writing books and insider information, now they are all doing it (must be a course they do) i think we might be seeing NASA astronaughts cashing in as well.

reply to post by emsed1


NASA?? Credible? You're joking, right?

Low-level NASA peons are allowed access for a photo-op on the flight deck of an STS vehicle? OK, I'll grant you, the caption could be a deception....that might have been one of the simulators. I'll have to take a closer look at the windows....that's usually a tip-off to whether it's the real deal, or a sim.

In any case, let's assume the man is legit. Based on the story, as I read between the lines, he stepped on toes somewhere, and got thrown under the bus. You know what? I'd be disgruntled too, and would say 'phooey' to any non-disclosure docs I'd signed before. AND I'd be screaming the 'truth' as loud and as hard as I could....maybe I'd go about it differently, though.....just thinkin'

reply to post by weedwhacker


His job allowed him access to the shuttle and launch vehicles as he helped maintain them between launches (like thousands of others).

However he was far from an astronaut. He likes to name-drop and gives evidence of his acquaintance with high government officials, scientists and astronauts as photo op snapshots when VIPs visited.

It's hard to say about this article, because I don't have any proof of his credentials. His story seems like more of a sales pitch than an actual disclosure, and anytime I see money, books, or personal glory involved, I have to stop and question things from that perspective as well.

Mitchell's testimony really doesn't compare to this in any way. He merely stated that he knows they exist and that it has been covered up. He didn't have to try and PROVE all his credentials or sell himself or his articles.

It also is questionable since he is disgruntled. Some people are willing to do or say anything when they are treated unfairly, including making up elaborate stories.

I'm going to have to call this one a hoax myself, but there is no way of knowning 100%.

Originally posted by polomontana
You can't make these VERY SILLY assumptions about someone being senile without any evidence except the person is old.

The evidence was all the contradictory information already discussed, his website and statements themselves, and various posts he's made here. It is you who mistakenly believe this comment was said ONLY because the man is old.

You disagree with the underlying subject matter and the witness, so to support your pre-existing belief on these subjects people come up with ILLOGICAL claims.

You have no evidence that these statements were made by people holding any pre-existing beliefs. So instead of quoting various wikipedia articles, youtube videos, and other nonsense, why don't you start backing up your own statements?

Almost forgot...........

Who could ever forget this thread:
NASA Scientist Fired - Promises Disclosure

This was over some stuff that "Ken Johnston" said. That was back in the John Lear days. This was one of the most exciting threads in ATS history where "John Lear" dooked it out with "James Oberg" who is an official "NAZA" disinformation agent and by the way, still has an active account on ATS as well.

I tell ya, those where the good old days. The excitement factor of ATS went down 10 notches after John Lear left...........(If that is what you want to call it).