Comments on: Rods, Please!

By: greenmartian2007

greenmartian2007 — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 15:40:12 +0000

or put the feet/second rate at 100+/frames a second. It might eat the film quickly, but that would freeze any “bug movements,” and that would resolve everything I would think. Then we can say, “it is bugs!” or not.

By: greenmartian2007

greenmartian2007 — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 15:35:03 +0000

I feel a need to post one more comment or so on this….

If this phenomenon is, as some here promulgate, merely an “artefact of video-ography,” then it is relatively simple to remove this idea as a factor.

Film the rods using 16mm color film. Put the film rate at 28 feet/second. Get the film developed, and look at the results, frame by frame.

Process the results. No more videotape or video flip rate problems.

By: silvereagle

silvereagle — Wed, 14 Mar 2007 17:00:55 +0000

I am skeptical of all reports debunking phenomenon that may upset some people. Reason being is the apparent presence of a curious cycle of coincidence in the past, whereby every 6 months, the UPI would release a story implying that Bigfoot was all a clever hoax. The feds have an unlimited amount of money to affect public sentiment by manufacturing propaganda that keeps the 100 to 200 million people in the US, that are barely hanging onto reality by their fingernails, in their comfort zone. Bigfoot, particularly a paranormal Bigfoot, took them out of that comfort zone. So the feds in the past, appear to have been behind that cycle of Bigfoot hoax propaganda. With the recent onset of Bigfoot commercials coming out of Hollywood that humorize them, perhaps due to a nearby BFRO influence in California, that cycle of Bigfoot hoax propaganda appears to have ceased. So any Rod hoax propaganda that I may read about, causes me to have flashbacks of deja vu.

By: ladd

ladd — Wed, 14 Mar 2007 01:33:07 +0000

The only rods I’m familiar with are hotrods, fishing rods and lightning rods.

By: ZenBug

ZenBug — Tue, 13 Mar 2007 19:02:39 +0000

You’re right Loren, I once found a video on the Web that showed a lamp post at night. There were dozens of “rods” flying around it, until the camera zoomed in, and it became obvious that they were bugs. It was undeniable. I can’t find the video now, sadly.

So spare [me] the rods.

By: dbard

dbard — Tue, 13 Mar 2007 18:59:24 +0000

Rods are bugs, IMHO.

By: DWA

DWA — Tue, 13 Mar 2007 04:32:52 +0000

Oh, sorry, I thought you meant pretzel rods.

Thanks, I’ll pass.

By: Ceroill

Ceroill — Tue, 13 Mar 2007 02:59:12 +0000

I still find this interesting, if only as an illustration of the illusions that can be inadvertently created.

By: sasquatch

sasquatch — Tue, 13 Mar 2007 01:34:15 +0000

This is embarrasing to Cryptozoology. It’s not anything but an optical illusion due to frame rates. So move on already. And don’t waste money on the videos. Why do we put up with this and at the same time demand that someone bring in a body of a bigfoot? Why doesn’t Jose bring in a Rod body? At least we have a decent film/video of a real Sasquatch.

And the only thing that happens when the frame rate of that film is adjusted to it’s probable proper speed we only get a true feel of the weight and power of the animal. Can’t say this for “Rods”. I saw a slowed down film of what one looks like and it was a moth. Patty doesn’t turn into a puppy.

By: Rillo777

Rillo777 — Mon, 12 Mar 2007 23:31:28 +0000

Sanderson was the first that I know of who mentioned these, although they’ve probably been around for ever. (At least, his was the first mention I read about). He called them “Atmospheric Fish” and speculated that they floated, nearly transparent in the atmospheric winds that surround the planet like atmospheric jellyfish. I’m very skeptical about their existence, but there have been reports of “globs” settling to earth every so often that quickly evaporate. Also “angel hair”–strands of weblike filament, and so forth.

I’ll file it away in the back of my mind to wonder about on lazy days, I guess.