It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Clark C. McClelland What STS mission?

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 4 2011 @ 12:09 PM
link   
reply to post by EyeHeartBigfoot
 


It is precisely people like you that I refrain from stating any more. I could care less what your thoughts are. I have no end game. I have stated twice now that I believe Clark's story regarding the alien. That's all I was saying.




posted on Feb, 4 2011 @ 02:45 PM
link   
reply to post by cdesignmaster
 


I edited out my rude comment. Was only attempting to show my disdain (in poor taste, and I apologize) that you whet our appetites only to deny any substance.

If you do not try and read to far into this as there is no hidden meaning, I will take a leap of faith and make a couple assumptions if you will...

You have been a member since '07 and only posted 84 times so my assumption is that you are mostly lurking, which is totally fine! What I would have liked to know with my "End Game" comment is...you seem like you have something you really want to add but are hesitant. Just inquiring as to why the long post with only partial data. I can understand not wanting to be attacked but why even mention it in the first place? Does that clarify my previous post?

I really have no desire to insult or attack, but I will call foul when it seems appropriate.

Again, I HONESTLY Apologize for my rude comment and would be interested in rational & intelligent dialog if the subject warrants such attention .

Warmest Regards,

t



posted on Feb, 4 2011 @ 02:48 PM
link   
reply to post by cdesignmaster
 


i have recently arrived back home from finishing work then visiting a member of this site. the member is fully appraised of the ccm site and info. information from me over the last several months has also furnished the member with my take on this. we also discussed the situation on the board regarding time wasters,hoaxers in fact all problematic elements that everyone is aware of here. i stated that in order for the board to progress, these elements are essential. i suggested that although they are a pain in the butt, much can be learned from their presence on many levels. the member sighed and did not take kindly to my point of view. a suggestion to me was 'do you think it would be better to stay off the boards with this info and do the research with fellow minded members somewhere else?'. i speculated that if a situation was to arise that would lead to members going 'off the grid' so to say, it would be a sad day for the entire community out there. i have a feeling that this already happened on a number of occasions on this site due to negative elements present at the time. i do hope we all can take these elements for what they are and are not and carry on with the fascination.
the ccm account of what happened is a rough diamond to me and no-one on these boards or on the globe is going to sway my opinion on this. over time with or without connections with other members, i and i know of another member intend following information on this one for the long term. it may just speak volumes, you never know!
regards f



posted on Feb, 4 2011 @ 03:13 PM
link   
reply to post by JimOberg
 


So it was either STS 39 or STS 44, yes?



posted on Feb, 4 2011 @ 03:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by dalek
reply to post by JimOberg
 


So it was either STS 39 or STS 44, yes?


McClelland
explicitly
describes
the
flight
ID
on
the
link
I
provided.

It might take, maybe, 3 - 4 minutes to scan down the text on the site and find it.

Criminy.



posted on Feb, 4 2011 @ 03:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by EyeHeartBigfoot
reply to post by cdesignmaster
 


I edited out my rude comment. Was only attempting to show my disdain (in poor taste, and I apologize) that you whet our appetites only to deny any substance.

If you do not try and read to far into this as there is no hidden meaning, I will take a leap of faith and make a couple assumptions if you will...

You have been a member since '07 and only posted 84 times so my assumption is that you are mostly lurking, which is totally fine! What I would have liked to know with my "End Game" comment is...you seem like you have something you really want to add but are hesitant. Just inquiring as to why the long post with only partial data. I can understand not wanting to be attacked but why even mention it in the first place? Does that clarify my previous post?

I really have no desire to insult or attack, but I will call foul when it seems appropriate.

Again, I HONESTLY Apologize for my rude comment and would be interested in rational & intelligent dialog if the subject warrants such attention .

Warmest Regards,

t


Thank you and my appologies for misunderstanding your comments.

As for my lurking, that's pretty much true. I'm a little surprised that I posted that many times.

As someone that has never seen an UFO, nor been abducted, I don't feel that I am qualified to make judgements. Besides my brother's UFO sighting in 1985, I don't know anyone personally that has seen one, outside of the Mufon meetings and I've attempted "Abductee Only" meetings as a guest with the understanding that I'm not to repeat what I hear and not to judge the members.

That being said, then yes, sometimes there is more I would like to say, but even then, generally it would be my opinion on something I may have heard and I feel that it is an honor to be allowed to attend those meetings, so I need to keep my commitment to leave it in the room when I leave. I hope this helps.

Should I ever experience anything myself, I'll be as open as possible.



posted on Feb, 4 2011 @ 03:52 PM
link   
reply to post by cdesignmaster
 


Thanks for your reply and answering my inquiry.

Even though I find this story intriguing, the source is suspect to say the least. He uses convoluted stories that make him his own worse enemy in the battle of proving his story.

The truth is always the truth while his story is all over the place.

Then he offers an artistic depiction of the event with a description that states the "aliens" head was smaller than that of the NASA astronauts. However, the depiction shows a giant head "alien".

I am done with this thread and most definitely done with CCM's convoluted Mickey Mouse BS.

Honestly Hope You Find What Your Looking For...

t

PS Thanks to J.O. for steering all to seeking their own answers - As Always My Warmest Regards.



posted on Feb, 4 2011 @ 04:35 PM
link   
reply to post by JimOberg
 


From information gleaned from the various websites linked
McClelland says it was a STS DoD package in 1991
that makes it either STS 39 or STS 44
The ATS links that you have provided only show yourself as a slippery character that enjoys the notoriety on these boards.

moreover, my question remains unanswered and this thread appears to have been a showcase for certain individuals to demonstrate their hostility, egos and self-importance whilst belittling honest people who ask questions and are insulted by being questioned on conduct of their "Character".






edit on 4-2-2011 by dalek because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 4 2011 @ 05:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by dalek
reply to post by JimOberg
 


From information gleaned from the various websites linked
McClelland says it was a STS DoD package in 1991
that makes it either STS 39 or STS 44
The ATS links that you have provided only show yourself as a slippery character that enjoys the notoriety on these boards.

moreover, my question remains unanswered and this thread appears to have been a showcase for certain individuals to demonstrate their hostility, egos and self-importance whilst belittling honest people who ask questions and are insulted by being questioned on conduct of their "Character".


edit on 4-2-2011 by dalek because: (no reason given)


OK, are you telling me you can't find the exact mission to be explicitly described by McClelland on that link?

When you are frustrated by your own inabilities to perform research, do you always/often/occasionally resort to personal attacks against innocent parties trying to be helpful?

Can somebody who DOES know how to read for comprehension find the info on that link and help our friend?



posted on Feb, 4 2011 @ 05:48 PM
link   
reply to post by dalek
 


i will refer the member to the answer i gave earlier approx 8 posts from the start on pg1.
it is in the link if you look btw.
regards f



posted on Feb, 4 2011 @ 05:52 PM
link   
reply to post by JimOberg
 



It was you who questioned my character although I note that that insult has been removed from your post.
so I will disregard that.
But why do you need others to pin point the extact STS mission when you appear to know the answer yourself, or do you?



posted on Feb, 4 2011 @ 06:03 PM
link   
reply to post by fakedirt
 


Thx bud but there were 2 STS DoD package missions in 1991
I was asking on which one did the alien event occur
was it STS39 or STS44



posted on Feb, 4 2011 @ 06:12 PM
link   
reply to post by dalek
 

the actual mission ccm claimed the incident occured on. it is in the link and i did speculate. if i may ask, have you read the link?
regards f



posted on Feb, 4 2011 @ 06:30 PM
link   
reply to post by fakedirt
 


I have read the link/s and no where does it state a date or particular STS mission number, from other contributors and sources i have learned that it was
1 a STS mission in 1991
2 there were 6 STS missions during that year
3 the event occurred on a DoD package launch
4 STS 39 and STS 44 fit those parameters

I would like to know was it 39 or 44, that is all



posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 12:12 AM
link   
reply to post by dalek
 


in ccm thread there is a section regarding pentagon nasa astronauts ussr cosmonauts that ccm assisted in launching into space. now scroll down to dr storey musgrave.
regards f



posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 03:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by dalek
I would like to know was it 39 or 44, that is all


Hi dalek,

That's a straightforward request and I don't know why some people appear to be a bit coy about giving an equally straightforward answer.

From information given by Clark C McClelland on his website (the link to which has already been given repeatedly above), the relevant alleged sighting was on STS-44.

As you probably has seen already, McClelland says he saw the alien in the space shuttle payload bay in 1991, see - for example- the following:

www.stargate-chronicles.com...


WISE UP WORLD! The Tall Entity I have observed in the Space Shuttle Payload Bay in 1991 and the other Tall Entity observed by my other witness within the shuttle crew compartment during a separate shuttle mission


McClelland website has a separate page that lists numerous individuals with which he claims to have met. The brief summaries associated with those individuals includes various UFO sightings those individuals (allegedly) had.

If you search that page for "STS" you can find the summaries that include references to sightings on space shuttle missions.

One of the results of that search is as follows:
www.stargate-chronicles.com...


Dr. Story Musgrave, STS-6, 51F, 33, STS- 44 (Giant in payload bay), 61(Hubble ST repair mission), 80


So the sighting of a giant alien in a payload bay allegedly happened on STS-44.

STS-44 was an Atlantis shuttle mission launched on 24 November 1991.

The crew was Frederick D. Gregory, Terence T. Henricks, F. Story Musgrave, Mario Runco, Jr., James S. Voss, and Thomas J. Hennen.

You can find some information about STS-44 on quite a few websites, including:

(1) On the relevant Wikipedia page and the websites cited on that page
en.wikipedia.org...


STS-44 was a Space Shuttle mission on Atlantis that launched November 24, 1991. It was a U.S. Department of Defense space mission.

Commander Frederick D. Gregory
Third spaceflight

Pilot Terence T. Henricks
First spaceflight

Mission Specialist 1 F. Story Musgrave
Fourth spaceflight

Mission Specialist 2 Mario Runco, Jr.
First spaceflight

Mission Specialist 3 James S. Voss
First spaceflight

Payload Specialist Thomas J. Hennen
First spaceflight


(2) in the video below narrated by the astronauts themselves:


All the best,

Isaac
edit on 5-2-2011 by IsaacKoi because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 05:58 AM
link   
reply to post by IsaacKoi
 

with regards to dalek and his request for the information, i felt it would be of benefit for the member to find the text himself. there were many hints and doing some research on the matter never harmed anyone. i do apologise if you or dalek saw me coming over as being coy on the subject but you must appreciate that there are posters who expect to be furnished with answers without searching themselves. i do not know dalek and you must understand that people with mileage on here with this subject can be a little impolite to posters who sometimes seem to come across as impatient. i myself have known of this incident for nearly 20 years.
this considered i appreciate your statement given, i will adjust my attitude towards members accordingly from henceforth.
regards f



posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 06:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by fakedirt
reply to post by IsaacKoi
i do apologise if you or dalek saw me coming over as being coy on the subject but you must appreciate that there are posters who expect to be furnished with answers without searching themselves. i do not know dalek and you must understand that people with mileage on here with this subject can be a little impolite to posters who sometimes seem to come across as impatient.


No need to apologise so far as I'm concerned.

I know exactly where you are coming from, but my personal view is just a bit different.

Personally, when it comes to discussion of such a controversial topic as UFOs, I'd rather more people on ATS and elsewhere stated relevant facts clearly and concisely with supporting references - with far less argument or mere hints or clues.

Frankly, I don't know if this approach is any more effective and I've been becoming increasingly frustrated with ufology in the last 5 or 10 years.

All the best,

Isaac



posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 07:12 AM
link   
reply to post by IsaacKoi
 


agreed.
we have lost many important assets on this site when accusations are thrown around of being agents etc imo.
after years of reading crap from trolls and the like. i guess one is guarded to the possibility of being in the presence of. i am accusing no-one in particular of this but i feel it is a factor in members mindsets.
regards f



posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 09:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by IsaacKoi

Originally posted by fakedirt
reply to post by IsaacKoi
i do apologise if you or dalek saw me coming over as being coy on the subject but you must appreciate that there are posters who expect to be furnished with answers without searching themselves. i do not know dalek and you must understand that people with mileage on here with this subject can be a little impolite to posters who sometimes seem to come across as impatient.


No need to apologise so far as I'm concerned.

I know exactly where you are coming from, but my personal view is just a bit different.

Personally, when it comes to discussion of such a controversial topic as UFOs, I'd rather more people on ATS and elsewhere stated relevant facts clearly and concisely with supporting references - with far less argument or mere hints or clues.

Frankly, I don't know if this approach is any more effective and I've been becoming increasingly frustrated with ufology in the last 5 or 10 years. All the best, Isaac


Apparently we share that frustration, and part of what I see as the problem is people demanding to be spoon-fed by strangers. Dalek was absolutely convinced that the information was NOT on the link, and now that he's been shown exactly where it is, I wonder if he'll be appreciative and contrite, or defiant in his inadequate reading skills.

People with the latter quality make the most sincere 'believers', and introduce such a toxic tone to discussions that genuinely curious and capable people can easily be turned off.

Which is sad -- because original research by talented enthusiasts is still possible -- and still desperately needed.

An example where inadequate reading/research skills has infected -- and polluted -- even the most 'authoritative' UFO data bases ('pilot cases') is discussed here:

1965 multiple pilots sighting -- can it be explained?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

edit on 5-2-2011 by JimOberg because: add example



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join