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.

 

Information on Rods?

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 01:35 AM
link   
I was just watching a film about the disclosure project and they briefly mentioned Rods.

born-into-slavery.blogspot.com...

Apparently they're giant life forms that live around us that are both two fast for us to see, as well as are only seen in the UV spectrum.

Funny how that was the only thing in the video that I couldn't wrap my head around.

Anyone got any information?




posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 03:23 AM
link   
You know what amazed the crap out of me?

It amazes the crap out of me to see/head/read about these incredible creatures & features living among us, I am WOWed by it! BUT...

Whenever you ask what they look like, you always get the same answer. Are are "invisible" "Ultra Violet" "Too Fast" "Too Furious" "Morphed" "Underground" and the excuse list goes on and on.

Amazing isn't it.



I should show you my Ferrari, I have one really!! I promise!! I just cannot upload a pic as I dont know where my USB cable it.




posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 03:28 AM
link   
Rods.. are.. or were , just a passing phase in the UFO phenomenon. I believe they have been debunked in the past and were proven to just be insects of some kind. They were said to of lived in deep caves , and that's the only place they were found but insects also live in the area and when you caught one flying across the screen of your video camera it looked like a white blur shooting down..



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 03:31 AM
link   
Rods are anything but giant lifeforms. They are beetles and bugs flying close to the camera! However, size is relative. If you were a flea you would probably think that Rods were giant!

IRM



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 02:38 PM
link   
Alright thanks,
pretty much what I was thinking.



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 08:49 PM
link   
As a rod "researcher" I find both of your replies ignorantly stupid. Why you both bothered to reply when you are not adding anything worthwhile seems to run rampant on ATS.

Rods are still a subject to discuss and have no connection to UFOs except in the minds of some because the rods discoverer, Jose Escamilla, was involved in videotaping UFOs and accidentally videotaped something he thought were UFOs but realized soon after that they were not UFOs in the same sense as alien craft. His wife, a lab assistant named them rods after seeing similar forms through microscopes in her lab work.

Rods can be compared to whales and shrimp in that they are both sea creatures. No one can say that rods are or are not insects just as no one can say what UFOs are. They just are and they are both recorded on still cameras or videocameras.

I would guess that rods can be considered aerial insects and there are small ones and giant ones. There is enough circumstancial videotaped evidence to support their reality. People from all walks of life using amateur and professional cameras/camcorders have recorded them and there is a Swedish tank test that shows a rod moving faster than the spent shells from fired ammunition arcing and falling.

Since I am TVRODMAN, so named by Jose because I showed him a ton of footage that I recorded off TV, he added my name to his research team. I have footage of rods moving gracefully over a Mexican garbage dump. I have footage of rods during a hot air balloon ascending from that famous cave in Mexico that is used to show the speed of rods when compared to swallows. I have footage of rods startling an eagle. I have footage of rods startling a pair of leopards. I have footage of rods close to the ground and way up there in airplane territory.

There is footage taken by a professional newsgatherer of a giant rod and it was confused by the FBI for a missile!

There are those, yes, who performed experiments with slow shutters, etc., who were able to capture images that resembled rods. But those images do NOT show rods, just rod look-alikes. There are a lot of detractors, such as the 2 who replied to this post, replies below, who lack the intelligence to discuss a subject with even basic knowledge.

You want to discuss rods? I'll be more than glad to fill you in and answer your questions. Send them to me at tvrodman2003@yahoo.com and you'll receive intelligent answers as far as my knowledge will allow. I'll be frank and tell you I don't know if I don't. But unlike these two, I won't b.s. you.

nasacarl
posted on 11-3-2009 @ 03:28 AM

Rods.. are.. or were , just a passing phase in the UFO phenomenon. I believe they have been debunked in the past and were proven to just be insects of some kind. They were said to of lived in deep caves , and that's the only place they were found but insects also live in the area and when you caught one flying across the screen of your video camera it looked like a white blur shooting down...

InfaRedMan
posted on 11-3-2009 @ 03:31 AM

Rods are anything but giant lifeforms. They are beetles and bugs flying close to the camera! However, size is relative. If you were a flea you would probably think that Rods were giant!



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 11:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Learhoag
 


Your post is proof positive that you know nothing about Rods. Just the BS/fantasy stuff. It's a shame when people can't accept the truth that Rods have a prosaic answer. This has been demonstrated time and time again on this website and many others.

Rods are little bugs flying close to the camera and no matter how much you wish they were something more fantastic and exotic, it isn't going to change what they truly are.

Instead of asking people to contact you privately, discuss it here in the open forum where your 'information' can be honestly scrutinized. If you truly believe in your theory then it should hold up to the scrutiny and prove us all wrong.

If you don't wish to share you 'evidence' in the open forum, then this means that you either know your theories are baseless fodder, or your intentions are to mislead people.

All your doing is spreading ignorance and disinformation mate! Try showing some intellectual honesty and integrity instead. Post your stuff here!

IRM


[edit on 11/3/09 by InfaRedMan]



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 11:54 PM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 12:14 AM
link   
Are rods real? I do not know but remember this before you say what they really are. Rememeber that cameras can see a lot of things the naked eye can not. Some one said there were a by-product of moden cameras and that much is 100% true but here is where things go out the window. Are they bugs and such being seen by the camera in a differant way than the naked eye can or are they more. One theory that I like is they may be just out of phase with our reality like lets say a billionth of a nanosecond and the camera lets us see them. OH, the camera was never ment to that but how often does something do something it was never ment to. We will not know unitl some one can build a camera that lets us see them on command and see them clearly if they are there at all



posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 12:22 AM
link   
reply to post by Learhoag
 



Originally posted by Learhoag
Looks like you took one too many stupid pills. See your doctor.


Is that the best you can come up with? Name calling and personal attacks?

It confirms my suspicion that your evidence wont stand up to scrutiny here on the forum. Prove me wrong LearHoag!

Lear & Hoagland... hmmm... says it all really! Fanciful stories with no acceptable evidence or science to back their statements.

IRM


[edit on 12/3/09 by InfaRedMan]



posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 12:24 AM
link   
I have seen the rod topic alot... there are many many threads already on ATS about this subject if you bother to actually look it up in the archives...

The one question I have... has there ever been any "rod footage" shot indoors? Or is it all footage that takes place outside? From what I have seen (I admit I have not delved too far into it for I too believe it is insects) most of the footage is always outdoors.

That to me brings more credence to the insect theory.



posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 12:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Learhoag
As a rod "researcher" I find both of your replies ignorantly stupid. Why you both bothered to reply when you are not adding anything worthwhile seems to run rampant on ATS.

It frustrates me see an insult like this........followed by reading "I did this" and "I've done that". If you, in fact, have information that supports your insult, show us. It's no different than what you've accused as being "rampant". I come to this site, as others do, to learn, but I have to see it. Credentials don't mean much without something to back it up. This could be a good thread and I would love to see more on this subject. But I'm not e-mailing someone to get it.



posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 12:35 AM
link   
reply to post by TwiTcHomatic
 


Just a thought , I dont think they could be filmed inside, to stay in flight I believe they need to "fly" at a high rate of speed..



posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 02:44 AM
link   
Monster Quest on The History Channel did an episode about rods.

This video pretty much explains everything.




[edit on 12/3/2009 by mandrake]



posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 04:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Learhoag
As a rod "researcher" I find both of your replies ignorantly stupid. Why you both bothered to reply when you are not adding anything worthwhile seems to run rampant on ATS.




You say you have video post some links then please also post info re the camera settings etc as most rod videos have been proven to be flying insects who image is distorted due to shutter speed/ video problems.


Just watched video above so no need


[edit on 12-3-2009 by wmd_2008]



posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 04:43 AM
link   
There you go - the video says it all.

Rods are an artifact of the standard speed video camera and insects or birds passing through the field of view.



posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 07:18 AM
link   
Explanation of the rod effect.

The "rod effect" can be reproduced using a video camera, and can be duplicated in a repeatable scientific manner by anyone. Low light conditions in particular are contributing factors. Any objects rapid movement across the video sensors field of view will elongate as the frame rate of the camera cannot capture a clear image, the resulting sequence will show the classic rod phenomenon.

Insects and even tiny gnats can look like Rods under the proper circumstances. Birds or windblown debris in a wide range of sizes can cause the effect. In outer space, ice particles and pieces of debris have also caused the effect. Often a type of undulating wavy structure can be seen running along the sides of the "rod." This repeating pattern gives grounds for believing that there was something moving rapidly on the object. An insects, or bird’s wings repetitive up and down motion is a likely explanation.

A smooth appearance can result when the object is stable during its transit of the cameras field of view. A bird that was gliding or a non rotating piece of space debris is an example of the smooth looking objects. The translucent nature of the phenomena is dependent on the lighting angles and can cause them to appear to disappear when passing in front of clouds or anything with similar colorization.

The illusion of a rod being very large and or fast moving is explained by the fly-by of a small object close to the lens. If we do not know the precise distance and speed of the objects in question, we cannot accurately assert the size or speed of the object.

Watch this video to the very end, it shows how easily the effect can be duplicated.



Feel free to go to the YouTube site to comment on this video, and rate it .



posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 08:31 PM
link   
Wow that escalated quickly haha
I don't see why both of you can't be right. That video above me seems right and probably accounts for a large amount of so called sightings.

On the other hand the video I posted looks nothing like the video above me, if it did I would of picked out the insect thing originally, as your video looks exactly what you claim it to be.

This argument seems to me like a ufo video, where debunkers show how they can perfectly mimic it by mundane means. True that disproves the video but it hardly proves that all UFO sightings are therefore false.

I haven't seen enough evidence either way to get it out of the unknown classification



posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 09:35 PM
link   
Since you and all of the other ATS "geniuses" know everything, there is nothing left to say since it would fall on deaf and dumb ears.


Originally posted by InfaRedMan
reply to post by Learhoag
 


Your post is proof positive that you know nothing about Rods. Just the BS/fantasy stuff. It's a shame when people can't accept the truth that Rods have a prosaic answer. This has been demonstrated time and time again on this website and many others.

Rods are little bugs flying close to the camera and no matter how much you wish they were something more fantastic and exotic, it isn't going to change what they truly are.

Instead of asking people to contact you privately, discuss it here in the open forum where your 'information' can be honestly scrutinized. If you truly believe in your theory then it should hold up to the scrutiny and prove us all wrong.

If you don't wish to share you 'evidence' in the open forum, then this means that you either know your theories are baseless fodder, or your intentions are to mislead people.

All your doing is spreading ignorance and disinformation mate! Try showing some intellectual honesty and integrity instead. Post your stuff here!

IRM


[edit on 11/3/09 by InfaRedMan]



posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 09:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Learhoag
Since you and all of the other ATS "geniuses" know everything, there is nothing left to say since it would fall on deaf and dumb ears.


LearHoag,

More personal attacks & insults? Classy!

But it doesn't prove the existence of Rods!

Why don't you bring a scientific argument that verifies your claims to the table instead? You do have one - don't you? All this amazing information you say you have can be shared in this thread too. Why only by email?

Surely if it's that great, it will turn us all into ROD believers. That is your goal isn't it? To prove they are real? So do it mate! Surprise us!

IRM


[edit on 12/3/09 by InfaRedMan]




top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join