Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
Big Bad Voodoo

'Flying Rods' discovered

70 posts in this topic

Yes, as everyone else has said, rods are old news and have been debunked quite a few times. They have been shown to be nothing more than being the result of a slow shutter speed on a camera recording an insect flying. I believe they showed this on MonsterQuest but I am not sure of that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If your saying the OP. Yeah. But rods are not limited to that. Go read your Irish folklore if you want to hear stories about such things. Talk to a crankster. Theyll surely tell you theres rods out there. Just saying.

You're the one making statement. Now you're telling me to read about myths and ask crackpots? Good job.
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eh what the hell. Are we really discussing this!?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

. Is this a joke thread?

Well, it wasnt started as one but become. Or should I wrote it was from the beging just me didnt aware of it.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with psyche on this - OP cant be serious. Even my 7 year old (who loves the paranormal stuff) know about "rods"/buggs.

To me, I first time heard it in article I provided.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If your saying the OP. Yeah. But rods are not limited to that. Go read your Irish folklore if you want to hear stories about such things. Talk to a crankster. Theyll surely tell you theres rods out there. Just saying.

So the fairy lights were these rods?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To me, I first time heard it in article I provided.

Stop visiting believers websites...... start working on the paranormal from a skeptical point of view.

Try to debunk it.... After all, most of this stuff IS PURE BUNK.

Edited by DBunker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the fairy lights were these rods?

I thought fairy lights were either marsh/swamp gas, fireflies or piezoelectricity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

y the video so lag? nowdays high tecnology useless? we can see a smooth bullet shoting on a video, is tat 'flying rod' fastest thn a bullet? y never caught a picture tat it is stop moving? i ned an explain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

y the video so lag? nowdays high tecnology useless? we can see a smooth bullet shoting on a video, is tat 'flying rod' fastest thn a bullet? y never caught a picture tat it is stop moving? i ned an explain.

I'd like to see one at a standstill, too. I'd like to know what kind of bugs they are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These are aliens. The idea that they could be bugs is ridiculous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These are aliens. The idea that they could be bugs is ridiculous.

I agree. Always look for the most fantastic explanation.

If I cant figure out how something works, thats all the evidence I need that it doesnt work,... period.

No, aliens seems like the most logical explanation to the Rod photos.

Edited by Hazzard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To me, I first time heard it in article I provided.

I have to admit, the first time I heard the claim I was intrigued.

Did not take me long to get peeved though ;)

These are aliens. The idea that they could be bugs is ridiculous.

They live on earth genius.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These are aliens. The idea that they could be bugs is ridiculous.

well then they're easily duplicatable via camera shutter and bugs aliens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These are aliens. The idea that they could be bugs is ridiculous.

Rods were empirically explained as bugs in the 1990s, do try and keep up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone was asking how long until someone took these seriously again. I said five years.

I was wrong.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Holy hell.

:no:

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Greetings to all skeptics!

{spam link removed}

{huge image removed}

Mr Babait, a couple of things.

!. This thread is years old, and it contains plenty of information to explain EXACTLY what your 'rod' is, namely a brightly illuminated insect, probably a moth, passing in front of the lens. The shape is simply an inverse silhouette of the bug and it's wings flapping, as recorded over about 1/10 to 1/60 of a second. It's very basic stuff and quite easy to understand. Here's a few links debunking the stupidity of 'rods'..

https://en.wikipedia...ki/Rod_(optics)

http://www.amsky.com/ufos/rods/

http://www.opendb.com/sol/seq.htm

You'll see the names Jose Escamilla and Santiago Ytturia Garza mentioned in conjunction with this topic. Trust me, you do NOT want to be associated with those two raving idiots/scammers.

2. On your previous posts, you have posted links to your youtube channel and then disappeared, apparently disinterested in discussion, only in hits. If that continues, you will get reported..

3. When you attach an image to your post, please reduce it to a reasonable size unless there is a good reason.

4. Using added effects on images showing 'anomalies' will tend to make genuine UM folks ignore the content (and you). Are you after genuine responses or just channel hits?

5. Not reading or acknowledging the content of a thread you then necro-post on, gives us a very good idea of just how good your 'research' is. In this case, completely non-existent.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember being really disappointed when rods were debunked, however last year I spoke to Escamilla on FB and he told me there's still evidence they exist. He had sent me these videos.

https://vimeo.com/117878383

Basically he claims that there's many situations that slow shutter speed can't account for rods, as well as in many cases they move faster than known animals.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Greetings to all skeptics!

The vid was uploaded to YT yesterday. Do you start now to create vids based on here already existing threads?

Another one here link

Edited by toast

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I remember being really disappointed when rods were debunked

So you learnt enough about them to accept the debunking? Were there any issues you thought were not adequately explained?

however last year I spoke to Escamilla on FB

Really? I've got to ask, why were you at his facebook page?

You ARE aware of the sort of stuff he promotes? :td: Escamiller is a promoter of anything he can see a dollar in. You ARE aware that he has been shown to be incredibly ignorant of basic photography (eg here, and yes that's me - watch what unfolds before the foul-mouthed Escamilla got banned..) and that's being polite - I will wager a significant amount that he knows this is crap but he can see the ability to still make a buck or two with it....

and he told me there's still evidence they exist. He had sent me these videos.

{escamilla crud removed}

Why didn't HE have the balls to post them here? You have been suckered by him.

Basically he claims that there's many situations that slow shutter speed can't account for rods

So where has he fully documented this???? I'll guarantee he hasn't, as this is patently bullcrap of his usual standard. I'll be happy to show you how these calculations can be made, so bring the information back here. IF however you have just taken the word of Jose the scammer, you have been taken for a ride.

as well as in many cases they move faster than known animals.

You brought this crud here on his behalf, so YOU explain the technical issues, the calculations that were made, and the actual evidence he has.

Escamilla is probably the WORST source of information around - he's even more deceitful than Jaime Maussan.

Go on, ask me what I really think of that fraud...

Edited by ChrLzs
4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

So you learnt enough about them to accept the debunking? Were there any issues you thought were not adequately explained?

The overexposed insects explanation seemed adequate, so I saw no reason to be open minded to the existence of rods at that point.

Really? I've got to ask, why were you at his facebook page?

You ARE aware of the sort of stuff he promotes? :td: Escamiller is a promoter of anything he can see a dollar in. You ARE aware that he has been shown to be incredibly ignorant of basic photography (eg here, and yes that's me - watch what unfolds before the foul-mouthed Escamilla got banned..) and that's being polite - I will wager a significant amount that he knows this is crap but he can see the ability to still make a buck or two with it....

...you need to chill out. I was merely posting information for debate and discussion. I don't see what I did as promotion.

I forget but I remember communicating with him in email almost 10 years ago. I don't recall how long I had him added on FB. We spoke on literally two occasions ever.

Why didn't HE have the balls to post them here? You have been suckered by him.

I'm not even sure if he knows about this forum. This was also in October 2015.

So where has he fully documented this???? I'll guarantee he hasn't, as this is patently bullcrap of his usual standard. I'll be happy to show you how these calculations can be made, so bring the information back here. IF however you have just taken the word of Jose the scammer, you have been taken for a ride.

You brought this crud here on his behalf, so YOU explain the technical issues, the calculations that were made, and the actual evidence he has.

Escamilla is probably the WORST source of information around - he's even more deceitful than Jaime Maussan.

I'm sorry but why are you making this a personal attack? You seem seriously on edge. Calm down.

Edited by Gravitorbox

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do you think I'm angry? I'm as happy as Larry..

This is a Discussion forum. Do you understand what that involves?

Clearly you think it's enough to just post links. Umm, where is the *discussion*?

Jose Escamilla has a reputation for being completely and wilfully ignorant on photographic concepts - did you not read MY LINK? That seems a bit hypocritical if you expect us to blindly click on yours. Did you google his name and see the rubbish he supports, and the silly video productions he makes and tries to sell?

Escamilla is a very well known scam artist and tinfoilhat wearer. You came here with no sign of any expertise on this matter, and just posted his links. Step back for a moment and see how that appears...

If you think it's fair that WE go and examine those videos (which probably contain no verifiable information anyway, just Jose's claims) and then go through a full analysis solely on your sayso and given Escamilla's background.... think again.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have an interesting story on these rod things. I have an old hippy neighbor I've known since I was a kid. Kinda out there, but a really nice guy. He has a couple grand kids that come over all the time. Once in a while I bring my boys up to hang out with the kids. So one summer night, couple years ago we were all hanging out. Had a fire going for the kids to roast marshmallows. Anyhow he goes on to tell me that just the night before there were these really strange long bug looking things all over the place. Super fast. Here's the strange part, said they were diving into the ground, then popping back up outta the ground in all different places. Like they were ghosts or something. Now at that point I had never even heard of flying rods. Wasn't long after I was watching a show on them. So I recorded the show, and showed it to him. He was freaking out yellin yes that's them, that's it. Now like I said, he's kinda out there. His wife though is of sound mind. An she collaborated his story. I didn't know what to think. Anyhow that's all I got. Found the whole think pretty strange.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.