It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Rods - Camera Anomaly or Hoax ?

page: 1

log in


posted on Dec, 21 2007 @ 11:56 PM
Hey guys,

Last night or the night before I can't exactly remember when I whats Jose Escamilla's UFO: The Greatest Story Ever Denied and I got interested in these rods I was being shown. However they looked so easy to fake. So I asked myself a few questions like;

Has anyone but Jose Escamilla ever captured footage of them ?

If radar can pick up UFOs which travel in thousands of kilometers/miles per hour why can't they pickup these 'Rods' which travel at similar speeds ?

The pictures hosted on his site could be faked with say an hour and a little photoshop experience.

In UFO: Greatest Story Ever Denied theres two shots of these 'rods' that look very suspicious. Theres the one thats underwater. Which I honestly think is a fish with afew effects thrown through it. Theres another that looks like its on some sort of plateau. To me all it looks like is a bird, again with afew filters thrown through it.

That just looks like a brush straight from photoshop with a few layer effects on it.

That could be a comet with various blur effects added on.

This just looks like hes abused the fact that images have compression lines and thrown a few filters through them.

Tell me what you think, all I can say is it looks very suspicious to me.

posted on Dec, 22 2007 @ 12:07 AM
did you even really watch the movie. In the movie there are way better videos and pics of the rods as well as an interview with a different person, besides jose, who filmed the rods and was on fox news. He was ridiculed, as always, on fox news for finding it. Those photos i have never seen but the ones in jose's movie look real enough to me. go watch it again and you'll see what i am talking about. good research though.

posted on Dec, 22 2007 @ 12:12 AM
I supose I maybe shouldn't have just skimmed through it and began critisizing it. However heres a picture I photoshopped and it took me 2 minutes. OMG its a rod !

I know Jose's look a lot more interesting however you've got to remember this was literally whipped up in 2 minutes. Also does anyone know if there's a reason why Radar hasn't picked them up ?

EDIT: For those who can't see it, to the right of the big tower.

[edit on 22-12-2007 by eRauzed]

posted on Dec, 22 2007 @ 12:16 AM
yeah, that looks nothing like the actual rod phenomena. please take this seriously. go watch the movie again before you start making fun of stuff. let's be a little more mature about this. ok guy?

posted on Dec, 22 2007 @ 12:55 AM
he talks about radar like nothing will ever get past it

posted on Dec, 22 2007 @ 01:12 AM
The rope flung across the camera was obvious.

Anything bright as lighting or invisible by UV (due to high voltage)
radiation can't be a living organism.

People want the pictures taken down because its bugs.

When the Super Zeppelin video was posted, that was told to be taken down.

When the Mexican Air Force chased triangle ufos back to Arizona, that
was told to be taken down.

Thanks to the great deluge of photographic evidence,
we can choose what we like.

I don't know who the complainers are, make you own opinion and never
kill the messenger.

The golden goose of weird photographs.

posted on Dec, 22 2007 @ 01:18 AM
reply to post by eRauzed

Dark images appear in photos from time to time.

I have seen them posted in the UFO forums.

Thanks for telling you made the photo with the ufo.

When a poster puts up a ufo photo, do you ever say its a ufo?

posted on Dec, 22 2007 @ 01:27 AM

Originally posted by isitmagic
he talks about radar like nothing will ever get past it

If they are really as common as they are thought or are living organisms then they would have had to be caught on radar atleast once.

I have watched UFO: Greatest story ever denied and they still don't look real to me. Don't get me wrong they are hell interesting but honestly you can't buy anything that jose gives you. Especially when his F.A.S.T objects are nearly debunked.

posted on Dec, 22 2007 @ 01:53 AM
I don't beleive in "rods". I think those are just insects being too fast for a camera.
Some time ago we had a member film an example and it proved to me it's nothing extraordinary.

Mr. Escamilla said he knows a woman who allegedly has a rod, bring it on, let's see it and then you'll make me a believer.

[edit on 22-12-2007 by Breadfan]

posted on Dec, 22 2007 @ 02:16 AM
Heres a site which explain the hoax.

posted on Dec, 22 2007 @ 12:21 PM
reply to post by eRauzed

IF its something out of this world, why do you think it would be captured by radar? Who knows that the thing is.
Some planes can even get past radar

posted on Dec, 22 2007 @ 01:17 PM
im just presuming but arnt rods meant to be fairly small? if that is the case then why would you think a radar would pick them up?. Was under the impression radar picks larger things up i.e enemy planes and missiles or what not, obviously not a radar 'specialist' but just kinda guessing thats why we dont hear in the news lady bug mistaken for enemy fighter over secret building xx..

anyhoo, not saying I fully agree with 'if' rods are real because I seriously doubt they are they seem a manufactured camera settings, and no I havent got a fancy a camera to prove my theory but if someone wants to send me one I'll have a good crack at making some fancy rods!...

posted on May, 26 2008 @ 01:21 AM
reply to post by FremenBlueEyes

Take it seriously? Let's take it with a grain of skepticism.

posted on May, 26 2008 @ 01:24 AM
I have photographed a rod before, by accident. They are real unexplained phenomena.

posted on May, 26 2008 @ 11:08 AM
These have been shown to be insects, Watch the video, (by RING0), you can easily see that the rods are insects, there is no doubt at all. Anyone can duplicate this effect with some insects flying around lights at night using a video camera. Watch it till the end.

Mystery of the RODS!

Insects that look like rods are sometimes misjudged to be large objects seen from far away, when they are, (of course.), just a small object close to the camera. The translucent nature of the phenomena causes them to disappear when seen in front of clouds. A repeating pattern means the object was undulating in some fashion, a smooth appearance results when the object is stable during its transit of the cameras field of view. A bird that was gliding or a piece of space debris are examples of the smooth objects. You can duplicate both types with any video camera, the pattern is caused by the insects flapping wings, the movement of the wings are being stretched and blurred by the slow speed, (low light), setting that was used. You can see this effect by waving a flashlight quickly in front of a video camera while the low light setting is on. The light will leave a persistent trace of the lights movement across the video sensors field of view. Any moving object will elongate, but motion such as flapping will be included in the patterns seen.

new topics

top topics


log in