UFOTV - RODS: A Strange UFO Mystery

[Turcurulin]

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=mSwbmPM8D40

RODS: The Smoking Gun Evidence. See evidence of a newly discovered and previously unknown life form that currently exists on this planet. Presented for the first time in this program is stunning high quality video of "Rods" in flight taken by a production company working for the Discovery Channel while taping cliff jumpers in South America. New methods are presented using the sun which illuminates the phenomenon, providing incredible detail for analyzing the anatomy of this life form. Included in this program are comments by renowned scientists as part of the process of authentication. Discover new sky fishing methods for capturing this entity on film that you can use with your own camera.

Rods are an odd type of unidentified flying object indeed, but seem to have a very terrestrial nature. Wikipedia has quite the skeptical explanation for the Rods phenomenon -

In cryptozoology, ufology, and outdoor photography, rods (sometimes known as "skyfish" or "solar entities") are elongated artifacts produced by cameras that inadvertently capture several of a flying insect's wingbeats.[1] Videos of rod-shaped objects moving quickly through the air were claimed by some to be alien life forms or small UFOs, but subsequent experiments showed that these rods appear in film because of an optical illusion/collusion (especially in interlaced video recording).

Various paranormal interpretations appeared in the popular culture, and one of the more outspoken proponents of rods as alien life forms is Jose Escamilla, who claims to have been the first to film them on March 19, 1994 at Roswell, New Mexico, while attempting to film a UFO. Since then, Escamilla has made additional videos and embarked on lecture tours to promote his claims.[3]

However, investigators have shown that rods are mere tricks of light which result from how images (primarily video images) of flying insects are recorded and played back. In particular, the fast passage before the camera of an insect flapping its wings has been shown to produce rodlike effects, due to motion blur, if the camera is shooting with relatively long exposure times.[4]

On August 8/9, 2005, China Central Television (CCTV) aired a two-part documentary about flying rods in China. It reported the events from May to June of the same year at Tonghua Zhenguo Pharmaceutical Company in Tonghua City, Jilin Province, which debunked the flying rods. Surveillance cameras in the facility's compound captured video footage of flying rods identical to those shown in Jose Escamilla's video. Getting no satisfactory answer to the phenomenon, curious scientists at the facility decided that they would try to solve the mystery by attempting to catch these airborne creatures. Huge nets were set up and the same surveillance cameras then captured images of rods flying into the trap. When the nets were inspected, the "rods" were no more than regular moths and other ordinary flying insects. Subsequent investigations proved that the appearance of flying rods on video was an optical illusion created by the slower recording speed of the camera.

Several scenes in the film, as well as the fact that slow-motion is filmed at a high frame-rate (fast recording speed,) serve to refute this argument.

What are your thoughts?

The prospect of the discovery of new life is always very exciting. Here is point to consider -

One can get caught up in the extra-dimensional nature of ETs, archons (Don Juan, the Yaqui shaman, called archons 'sky-fish' as well, ?) jinn, ghosts, and the like, but my question is - "What other very physical phenomenon, if any, remains invisible to us?"

[KosmicKat]

So a faster camera should be able to distinguish between insect and not-insect?

[vortexpoint]

I think they are probably some insects. If the rods would be a physical phenomena, there would be some physical evidence. No one has ever seen a dead body of a "rod".

[DeDukshyn]

I read a really good analysis into this one time. I wish I could remember the site.

They analysed it all as scientifically as they could - paying special attention to light physiscs of the camera. They claimed by current light physics theories, the images of "rods" as insects should not be possible. Yet they were able to re-produce "rods" on images with real insects with the right light conditions and camera settings (cameras have a lot of settings)-- this was repeatable. In the end they said that "Rods" have to be just insects, but the way they form images is not understood - as they were expecting insects to not be able to make "rod" images, based on the physics of light and the camera -- yet it does. Still a bit of mystery - even if you fully believe it is just insects (and there is good evidence to support this, but I have no URLs at hand - google should help).

[Turcurulin]

Posted by vortexpoint (here)
No one has ever seen a dead body of a "rod".

This occurred to me as well and is the only factor that doesn't allow me to be convinced that they are insects - We surely would have seen the bodies.

Posted by DeDukshyn (here)
I read a really good analysis into this one time. I wish I could remember the site.

They analysed it all as scientifically as they could - paying special attention to light physiscs of the camera. They claimed by current light physics theories, the images of "rods" as insects should not be possible. Yet they were able to re-produce "rods" on images with real insects with the right light conditions and camera settings (cameras have a lot of settings)-- this was repeatable. In the end they said that "Rods" have to be just insects, but the way they form images is not understood - as they were expecting insects to not be able to make "rod" images, based on the physics of light and the camera -- yet it does. Still a bit of mystery - even if you fully believe it is just insects (and there is good evidence to support this, but I have no URLs at hand - google should help).

You are correct. Check this -



However, if you watch the entire video, (besides the scene where they compare the film, using the same camera method, of conventional flying insects versus the rods) there is a scene toward the end where one can see moths and rods flying together. The movie is a decent watch.

[RMorgan]

Here´s a video explaining it.

It´s just another cinematic phenomenon misinterpreted by the general public, in this case, caused by insects, frame rates, frame interlace and motion blur.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=ZdbHNbGgTuM

And here is the full video (move to the 38 minutes mark to go straight to the point).

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=HSTAaUO1_eM

Cheers,

Raf.

[Turcurulin]

Posted by KosmicKat (here)
So a faster camera should be able to distinguish between insect and not-insect?

The significance of a high frame-rate is to reduce motion blur and flicker. It's a lot like shutter-speed on a regular camera -

Fast shutter speed, short exposure of a water wave.

Slow shutter speed, long exposure of the wave.

In the comparison scene, one can see the clear, distinct image of a fly with no trace of a trail or motion blur behind it. By the same camera at the same frame rate, we can see the Rod. In this case, if the rod is actually an insect that is creating motion blur, then it would have to be traveling much faster than any known insect could fly in order to create that effect at that frame-rate.

Otherwise, one would have to film very slowly in order to achieve a long exposure value. In this case, everything in the image that isn't completely stationary would trail and blur as well (like the photo of the moths in my above post.) The problem with this argument is that one can see on the video that it is not filmed in this way. We wouldn't be able to distinguish a moth and a rod in the same shot.

High-Frame Rate Video

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=MX6aerxQPOs

If one were to, say, fire a round in front of a camera that is filming at the same rate a human-eye sees, then, upon playback, all one would see is a trail of the bullet (or 'rod,' if you will) or nothing at all (just as the human-eye would see.)

If one fires a round in front of a camera filming at a high frame-rate, then the slow-motion playback reveals a crisp, clear image of the bullet as it flies.

In both cases, a freeze-frame shows the object in motion (more clearly at High FPS.) All frozen images of rods, from the movie above, maintain their tubular form.

Archon Manifestations? Black-Ops Spy-Drones? Or... Starting to reach out there now...

[RMorgan]

Hey Turcurulin,

Just watch the videos I posted above and you will see that it´s totally possible for some rods to be insects, birds and many other regular flying objects.

Speed, for a camera, is not the same thing as speed is for our eyes.

The closer an object passes in front of the camera´s field of view, the faster it will look. Also, if you consider that the camera is also moving, if it moves to the opposite direction of the flying object, it will make the object look even faster.

Just watch the videos and you´ll get it.

Cheers,

Raf.

[Turcurulin]

Posted by RMorgan (here)
Hey Turcurulin,

Just watch the videos I posted above and you will see that it´s totally possible for some rods to be insects, birds and many other regular flying objects.

Speed, for a camera, is not the same thing as speed is for our eyes.

The closer an object passes in front of the camera´s field of view, the faster it will look. Also, if you consider that the camera is also moving, if it moves to the opposite direction of the flying object, it will make the object look even faster.

Just watch the videos and you´ll get it.

Cheers,

Raf.

Thanks for the videos, bro. I understand that the phenomenon can be easily replicated (such is the case with UFOs in general, I suppose,) because today's technology is becoming more and more impeccable. As well, it is clear to me that some of the phenomenon can be explained by conventional and logical means (again the case with UFOs in general.)

I still see anomalous cases that cannot be explained this way, however. The MonsterQuest video, on the whole, seems to agree with this idea. Certain images and footage from the video were not explained - such as the photo from 1910 at the beginning of the film (limited technology) and the thing in the cave video toward the middle (that should almost go up on the fairy thread. =) And, ultimately, the people submitting the footage seem to be trying to capture as opposed to create this footage. Likewise - please watch the whole video I posted above.

For the record, I don't have any preconceived ideas about what these anomalous cases are. I know that there may be millions of species of insects, plants, and microorganisms still undiscovered in the rainforests and that archons, for lack of a better term, exist. I'm not saying it is or isn't these - just approaching the question with an open-mind and a sense of humor (as I do most things, I guess.) But, if all of the cases were really proven to be camera tricks, then I'd be just as content.

I'll remain unconvinced for now. =)

[DeDukshyn]

Posted by Turcurulin (here)

Archon Manifestations? Black-Ops Spy-Drones? Or... Starting to reach out there now...

Maybe just different speed insects ... ? I'm more interested in the physics anomaly that allows them to be captured on film in a way that theoretical calculations differ.

[Turcurulin]

Posted by DeDukshyn (here)

Posted by Turcurulin (here)

Archon Manifestations? Black-Ops Spy-Drones? Or... Starting to reach out there now...

Maybe just different speed insects ... ? I'm more interested in the physics anomaly that allows them to be captured on film in a way that theoretical calculations differ.

My first instinct is too think that they are an unknown insect as well. A couple things prevent me from committing to this, however -

1. These insects would have to be really, REALLY fast. The species would immediately qualify for both the fastest animal as well as the fastest object on Earth.

2. If we are able to catch them on film in places of different parts of the Earth, then why hasn't anyone discovered bodies, fossils, nests, etc.?

Also, the argument in the MonsterQuest video @ 41.16 is misleading. The only time that this type of artifact seems to be created is in the case of rods - why don't we see this same artifact on other broadcasts from time to time? Does this ever happen when a pitcher throws a baseball on screen? I wouldn't know because I don't watch baseball... or TV, for that matter. =) But, without examples, the argument doesn't seem to hold up.

[Vitalux]

Posted by vortexpoint (here)
I think they are probably some insects. If the rods would be a physical phenomena, there would be some physical evidence. No one has ever seen a dead body of a "rod".

the only thing is that flying rods are tracked even during the winter time in sub-zero conditions.

There have been enough researchers that have studied this ....that it is a fact they exists.

I've even saw videos showing worm like creatures and flying rods up around the space station.
As you can imagine, there should not be any bugs, worms or flies up there...right?

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=fVkIArOlx44