the mysterious "rowsell rods" - new species, or a hoax?

[dsknr009]

I just saw a rod in columbus ohio. after watching the video on the website http://www.roswellrods.com and hearing the guys who started this whole thing on the Art Bell show, I have to believe that there is at least something weird flying around in the air that we don’t notice. Anybody else ever seen a rod? anybody want to call me a kook? =)

[bare]

Anyone who listens to Art Bell is a KOOK.

[The_Bad_Astronomer]

*Originally posted by dsknr009 *
I just saw a rod in columbus ohio.

Was this on tape or in person? I have seen a fairly convincing analysis (no cite handy, sorry) that shows that the footage of these things is simply explained as insects whose wings beat in resonance with the frame rate of the camera. That produces the effect that they are long tubes.

[bibliophage]

Welcome to the Straight Dope Message Board. A link to the Staff Report is appreciated. Providing one can be as simple as pasting the URL into your post, making sure to leave a space on either side of it. I think this is hte one you have in mind: http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mrodhoax.html

[Duck_Duck_Goose]

…something weird flying around in the air that we don’t notice.

Um, if we don’t notice them, how do we know they exist? Do we just have to take Art Bell’s word for it?

http://www.artbell.com/rods.html

Me, I’d rather listen to Csicop.
http://www.csicop.org/si/2000-03/psychic-vibrations.html

Some of his “rods” were obviously insects zipping across the field at a high angular rate. Others appear to have “appendages” in stop-frame video, apparently birds’ wings blurred in zipping across the frame.

Or this guy, with an excellent technical explanation.
http://www.amsky.com/ufos/rods/

In real-time the video shows swarms of bugs around the cave opening. There was nothing out of the ordinary except when he showed individual still frames of the video, the bugs became blurry streaks, their wings appearing as sinusoidal gossamer streamers along their sides. Mr. Escamilla saw the resemblance of these blurs to some marine worms and declared he had found a new life form, that he calls “rods”, invisible to the unaided eye and visible only in still frames of videos.

<snip>

I had no trouble finding video of swarming bugs on the Paramount nature show Wild Things. This man is in the Pacific Northwest looking for light-coated brown bears known as Spirit Bears. He found his bears but also found no shortage of swarming bugs in the forrest. When I saw a scene of him with bugs swarming around his head I captured a few frames. Sure enough, what were bugs in real-time were “rods” in the still frames.

[Duck_Duck_Goose]

Evidently KFMB no longer has the “rods” show posted on its own website, but they reckoned without the power of the Internet.

http://www.flyingrods.com/articlesfl/kfmb1.asp
http://www.flyingrods.com/articlesfl/kfmb2.asp

It even includes nifty Windows Media Player streaming video clips from the show. Kewl!

Bob DuHamel is right, if KFMB is serious, it’s infantile and insulting to our intelligence, but then again, on another level, I found myself wondering whether KFMB wasn’t doing it tongue-in-cheek. Especially after watching a few of the video clips.

Anyway, according to KFMB:

The only way to see them is on videotape played back frame by frame.

They are not visible to the naked eye, in other words. In the video clips, Jose Escamilla takes them “sky fishing”, and there are complete instructions posted for how to “catch” your own rods on video.

Adjust your video camera’s shutter setting. Depending on your camera, it might be a dial with little pictures on it. Look for the sports setting. That will ensure you have a high shutter setting so each frame of video will look like a single picture without blur.

<snip>

Time to look at your video. Play the video at regular speed. If you see something go by, replay it at slow speed.

So, if you record an insect or bird flying at high speed on a video camera and play it back at slow speed or frame by frame, chances are good it will look like a “rod”.

[C_K_Dexter_Haven]

As Duck says, and as Staffer Doug says in the Staff report What’s up with “rods,” the mysterious insects that can be seen only on video?, already cited. When you film an insect or hummingbird (whose wings flap at incredibly high speeds), the camera picks up a bizarre image: the rod.

It’s as simple as that. Nothing mysterious, nothing alien, nothing supernatural. Just low-speed photography filming a high-speed activity.

[Duck_Duck_Goose]

Hey, more tech stuff! This is fun. It’s raining, I have nothing better to do.

http://www.ntskeptics.org/1999/1999april/april1999.htm#fishing

Footage taken with the shutter speed set at 1/60th of a second, shows short “rods” making tight turns in the mouth of a cave just like a bird or bug would do. Some of the same slow footage, found at http://www.roswellrods.com, shows a cave swallow flying from a nest to give chase after a “rod,” but the “rod” quickly pulls away from the swallow. Now don’t worry that the blurry images of the swallow have some striking similarities to the “rod,” nor that all footage taken so far looks like the blurred, elongated images of bugs, birds, or projectiles moving quickly across the screen. Because Escamilla and others have done tests with the same brand of camera used in the cave footage.

In the tests, Escamilla’s camera, set to its highest setting 1/10,000th of a second shutter speed, shows almost crisp stills of birds, bugs, and projectiles. The test images look nothing like the “rods” in the footage taken at the slower speed. Now your next question may be, is there any “rod” footage at the highest setting? Of course there is. In the 1/10,000th of a second footage — or is that 1/10,000th of a minute — well which ever, the “rods” show up as only straight wingless rods estimated to be up to 100 feet long. While in the slower footage, they show up as short blurred winged “rods” like the one shown in Figure 1.

Sure makes me wish I knew more about how video and stuff works. And, it sure makes me wish Doug could amplify his Staff Report for those of us who need it spelled out in words of one syllable. Preferably with lots of diagrams.

Simple diagrams.

[Mr.Miskatonic]

*Originally posted by C K Dexter Haven *
**As Duck says, and as Staffer Doug says in the Staff report What’s up with “rods,” the mysterious insects that can be seen only on video?, already cited. When you film an insect or hummingbird (whose wings flap at incredibly high speeds), the camera picks up a bizarre image: the rod.

It’s as simple as that. Nothing mysterious, nothing alien, nothing supernatural. Just low-speed photography filming a high-speed activity. **

No! There are Rods in photos! Here is proof of Rods!

[C_K_Dexter_Haven]

Ummmm… You can’t get much “lower speed photography” than a single snap shot.

Hence, I repeat: low speed photography of high-speed activity produces a blurred image at best.

[Duck_Duck_Goose]

LOL, Miskatonic! But I don’t get all the guys. Rod Serling I recognize, Rod the Rock Singer married to the supermodel, geez, what IS his name?

But who is this guy?
http://www.watchingyou.com/ROD4.JPG

Rod the baseball player? Complete blank.
http://www.watchingyou.com/ROD5.JPG

Absolutely no clue.
http://www.watchingyou.com/ROD2.JPG

[Dijon_Warlock]

*Originally posted by Duck Duck Goose *
LOL, Miskatonic! But I don’t get all the guys. Rod Serling I recognize, Rod the Rock Singer married to the supermodel, geez, what IS his name?

Rod Stewart. Don’t know any of the others.

[Irishman]

Geez, Dex, the least you could do is look at the site before debunking it. (Then maybe you’d notice the parody when it slaps you in the face.)

ROD4 = Roddy McDowell, most noted for the original Planet Of The Apes movies (he was always an ape)

[Antonius_Block]

I think ROD2 is Rod Steiger, the actor (“In the Heat of the Night” and many other movies).

Wait a minute – IMDB says that he was in a 1997 flick called “Truth or Consequences, N.M.”, which is in real life a town about 150 miles west of Roswell, NM.

Coincidence? I think not…

[Antonius_Block]

I can’t believe I’m wasting time on this, but…

ROD5 seems to be Alex Rodriguez, aka “A-ROD” (thanks, Google Images search tab).

[Duck_Duck_Goose]

Hey, that IS Roddy McDowell! He looks funny with a mustache, though…

And “Alex Rodriguez” is a shortstop with Texas Rangers, or so Google informs me?

Okay. Now I’m happy. See →

However, I think Rod #2 looks like a Pope or something. Steiger? Are you sure?

[Antonius_Block]

Duck Duck Goose:
(Antonius Block shuffles feet. Hates explaining clues).

The text descriptions of the images provide clues, so we are not reliant solely on visual identification.

Thus, for ROD6, Rod Serling:
“This black and white image was taken … well before twilight” (Twilight Zone reference)

For ROD3, Rod Stewart:
“It was late September when I took this picture. The morning sun really shows the age of that cottage.”

(cf. Rod Stewart song: “Maggie May”:
“It’s late September and I really should be back at school”
“The morning sun when it’s in your face really shows your age”).

For ROD4, Roddy McDowell:
“This truly eerie rod is dowel-shaped.” (Mc_Dowel_l)

For ROD5, Alex “A-ROD” Rodriguez:
“Prior to the photograph being taken, bats were seen in the area.” (Bats => baseball).

Now, for ROD2, we have:
“Many scenes from “Streets” were filmed on the waterfront. I had to rush to take this picture before the heat of the night. My friend Marty is visible in the doorway to the church.”

Now, look at http://us.imdb.com/Name?Steiger,+Rod:
Rod Steiger’s picture looks like ROD2.JPG, no?
Rod Steiger’s most famous role, for which he won the Oscar for Best Actor, was in “In the Heat of the Night” (1967).
He was also in “On the Waterfront” (1954), and was “Marty” on TV in 1953.

I rest my case.

[Mandarax]

I believe ROD5 is Rod Carew. Notice the Minnesota Twins cap.

[Duck_Duck_Goose]

I have the feeling we are all spending WAYYY too much time on this.

[Antonius_Block]

Mandarax,

>I believe ROD5 is Rod Carew. Notice the Minnesota Twins cap.

I bow before your superior baseball knowledge.

Unfortunately, that’s not much of a compliment coming from me. I bow before the baseball knowledge of most sentient creatures, my own being minimal.

A quick glance at
home.pon.net/hunnicutt/ images/carew.jpg
suggests that you are right.

I cannot tell a Minnesota Twins cap from a Texas Rangers one, alas.

[off-topic: how does what appears to be a T and an O or an eye get to represent the MN Twins? Is the latter a pre-split zygote or something? Now I’m really showing my baseball ignorance.]

I still think we’ve identified the other RODs, except for the apparent lack of ROD1:

– Who is ROD 1?
– You… are ROD 6.
– I am not a ROD, I am a free man!
– Bwaa haa haa haa haaaaaaa.

Yes, DDG, we have spent WAAAY too much time on this.