Flying Rod UFO's, The book should still be open

originally posted by: ArMaP

originally posted by: Thoseaintcontrails
The cameras not being fast enough is a myth.

It's not, the speed needed changes with the light conditions. With a strong light the cameras can use faster speeds, with low light levels they need to use lower speeds, unless you are talking of high speed, high sensitivity cameras.

Any modern camera phone can record insects and birds at normal speed and many can show exceptional detail at 240 fps.

Why 240 fps? Depending on the conditions even a 1000 fps may not be enough.

There are many $100,000 or more T.V. cameras that record rods as well.

The most expensive car in the world can also be stationary, those two things are not directly related.

I write 240 fps because that is more than enough fps to differientiate everyday objects in the day with plenty of sunlight. My video of the rod in the moth comparison has plenty of natural light shining towards the rod. No one has yet posted a daytime video of insects appearing as rods at 240fps. That is because there isn't one. That in itself is pretty good evidence suggesting the reality of rods.

originally posted by: ArMaP
a reply to: Thoseaintcontrails

If it's something happening at dusk or night how can they have daytime footage?

To be able to make a real comparison we would need to have a known insect, film it in the day and filming it in the dusk/night and then compare the videos.
Filming a moth during the day means nothing if what we see in a night video is a different insect, faster and with smaller wings.

PS: the above applies also to anyone trying to prove that rods are insects.

There are plenty of rods flying around during the day, you just have to be lucky to catch one. If they were insects, they would be far more common. Anyone who has recorded them and does a lot of outdoor videos knows they are rare. No night video should be used for an experiment because of artificial light source needed. Quality is also poor at night. Why would you need something of lesser quality?

originally posted by: Thoseaintcontrails
a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

The cameras not being fast enough is a myth. Any modern camera phone can record insects and birds at normal speed and many can show exceptional detail at 240 fps.
There are many $100,000 or more T.V. cameras that record rods as well.
youtu.be...

I have seen a couple documentaries say this as well, that they were using fast shutter speed on bright sunny days. The problem is they don't say what the speed was or the model of camera used. I am willing to entertain that there is some unknown things though since I know there really are a lot of unknown things.

Nothing in life is truly debunked unless it is us ourselves who do the work ourselves to debunk things. Not many people will actually lift a finger to do it for themselves and want to go with the flow to avoid ridicule.

Especially here on ATS

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed

originally posted by: Thoseaintcontrails
a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

The cameras not being fast enough is a myth. Any modern camera phone can record insects and birds at normal speed and many can show exceptional detail at 240 fps.
There are many $100,000 or more T.V. cameras that record rods as well.
youtu.be...

I have seen a couple documentaries say this as well, that they were using fast shutter speed on bright sunny days. The problem is they don't say what the speed was or the model of camera used. I am willing to entertain that there is some unknown things though since I know there really are a lot of unknown things.

Nothing in life is truly debunked unless it is us ourselves who do the work ourselves to debunk things. Not many people will actually lift a finger to do it for themselves and want to go with the flow to avoid ridicule.

Especially here on ATS

I used a note 5 to record the rod in the moth video. Sample phone cameras on youtube at 240 fps and you will be amazed at the quality. I am not sure how to look up shutter speed on a note 5 at 240fps. I have attempted to look up the model camera and fps that the American Pickers rod was seen on, but I could't figure out how to contact them.

This is one of the clearest rods in existence. This object is clearly in focus. youtu.be...

originally posted by: Thoseaintcontrails

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed

originally posted by: Thoseaintcontrails
a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

The cameras not being fast enough is a myth. Any modern camera phone can record insects and birds at normal speed and many can show exceptional detail at 240 fps.
There are many $100,000 or more T.V. cameras that record rods as well.
youtu.be...

I have seen a couple documentaries say this as well, that they were using fast shutter speed on bright sunny days. The problem is they don't say what the speed was or the model of camera used. I am willing to entertain that there is some unknown things though since I know there really are a lot of unknown things.

Nothing in life is truly debunked unless it is us ourselves who do the work ourselves to debunk things. Not many people will actually lift a finger to do it for themselves and want to go with the flow to avoid ridicule.

Especially here on ATS

I used a note 5 to record the rod in the moth video. Sample phone cameras on youtube at 240 fps and you will be amazed at the quality. I am not sure how to look up shutter speed on a note 5 at 240fps. I have attempted to look up the model camera and fps that the American Pickers rod was seen on, but I could't figure out how to contact them.

Note 5 is limited to 120 fps. The 240 fps are marketing hogwash.

The wingbeat frequency of insects can be as low as 6 hz (butterfly) and as high as 480 hz (mosquito). So no 120 fps or even 240 fps might be not enough depending on the insect.

a reply to: Thoseaintcontrails

Anyone who has recorded them and does a lot of outdoor videos knows they are rare.

DEBUNKED....Well, here's a video of a guy catching thousands of "rods" during the day. I guess he must've been really lucky, huh? LMAO!

a reply to: moebius

Please explain further, how do you know its only 120 when the video is much larger, slower, and longer at 240 than 120. And do you know what the shutter speed is? 240 or 120 is plenty enough until you can post video of why its not. Again, you are promoting a myth that you need a muli thousand dollar camera to properly record insects which is nonsense.

originally posted by: shawmanfromny
a reply to: Thoseaintcontrails

Anyone who has recorded them and does a lot of outdoor videos knows they are rare.

DEBUNKED....Well, here's a video of a guy catching thousands of "rods" during the day. I guess he must've been really lucky, huh? LMAO!

So you just post videos of a lot of rods, then shout debunked while having no way to show they arent rods? Please provide proof of how they are identifyable as insects. These are rare, if you think they are common, I challenge you to record some today. I am still waiting on anyone to post video of insects at 240fps that are non identifyable as insects.

youtu.be...

Small insect swarm at 120fps. At no time do they appear as rods at 120fps or "normal" recording speed.

this again?
no

a reply to: humanoidlord

Please read the OP, there is no point in your post. Why come to a thread that your not interested in just to post that?

a reply to: Thoseaintcontrails

because just like flat earth, hollow earth, mandela effect and chemtrails its an subject thats impossible to believe

originally posted by: humanoidlord
a reply to: Thoseaintcontrails

because just like flat earth, hollow earth, mandela effect and chemtrails its an subject thats impossible to believe

I don't care to change your belief, I just ask that you share your reasoning behind it. What are the main reasons, because so many people say they are bugs, because of the monsterquest poor excuse of an experiment, because Joe Rogan and Eddie Bravo laugh at them?
What if the government came out and said the rods are true ufos or alien, would you believe them?

originally posted by: Thoseaintcontrails
I write 240 fps because that is more than enough fps to differientiate everyday objects in the day with plenty of sunlight. My video of the rod in the moth comparison has plenty of natural light shining towards the rod.

Not really, as we can see that the scene the camera "sees" has not that much light. Also, seeing the light doesn't mean it was enough to capture images in a short time, as shorter exposure times/faster shutter speeds get less light in the image and vice-versa, so if you point a camera to a scene under the trees, like in that video, although we can clearly see the scene, the camera could not have enough light to capture an image in a short time, so it would use a longer time. I'm not sure, as I have very little experience with video, but I think (based on videos I have seen) that sometimes cameras use more than one frame to capture a full image, turning the video, in fact, in a slower frame rate version.

No one has yet posted a daytime video of insects appearing as rods at 240fps. That is because there isn't one. That in itself is pretty good evidence suggesting the reality of rods.

It's not, lack of evidence is not evidence of any thing, only that nobody has found it yet. Before you joined ATS I didn't have any evidence of your existence, but you existed. If anyone had asked me for evidence that you existed I wouldn't be able to provide it, and that wouldn't prove that you didn't exist.

originally posted by: Thoseaintcontrails
No night video should be used for an experiment because of artificial light source needed. Quality is also poor at night. Why would you need something of lesser quality?

Many videos of rods are taken in the night, using artificial light.

Anyone doing any real experiment would try all the possibilities, not only the ones that only prove their point but also the ones that may disprove it.

originally posted by: Thoseaintcontrails
What if the government came out and said the rods are true ufos or alien, would you believe them?

Only if they provided clear evidence. At the time I haven't seen any.

originally posted by: ArMaP

originally posted by: Thoseaintcontrails
What if the government came out and said the rods are true ufos or alien, would you believe them?

Only if they provided clear evidence. At the time I haven't seen any.

What would you consider evidence to believe, a physical speciman? What if they had no speciman to present because they are too fast and intelligent to catch, so all they have is video?

As much as I want to believe rods are real, there is much more evidence debunking them. When it comes to the paranormal, it’s usually an open topic because you can’t debunk or find evidence explaining truth.

My true question is this and while it may seem silly take it to heart: If there are UFO crashes and cover ups, unless you’re implying that rods are extra-dimensional beings without a physical body, how come there hasn’t been one found on a windshield, or remnants of one that has smack me in the face flying at god-knows how fast.

To my knowledge, this is a UFO that there isn’t even a documented story about a crash. That’s a first in my book.

Where is the Roswell Rod crash info?