Rods were so-called "creatures" said to flit about in the air at such a high speed as to not be seen by the naked eye. Rods are rodlike, cylindrical shaped creatures with a thin membrane across their axis, claimed to be used for propulsion through the air. Are they the result of how images are recorded and played back, maybe?
By Michele Bugliaro Goggia - last modified: April 12, 2007 5:52 PM
Rods, also called "flying rods", "skyfish", "solar entities" and "Roswell rods", are a rather new entry in the field of ufology. These so-called "living beings " are said to flit about in the air at such a high speed as to not be seen by the naked eye. Rods appear as rodlike, cylindrical shaped creatures with a thin membrane across their axis, claimed to be used for propulsion through the air.
The one behind the discovery of rods is Jose Escamilla, a Producer-Director who has been editing film and video for over 20 years. Following the popular Coast to Coast AM radio broadcast web site:
"On March 5, 1994, Escamilla videotaped sixteen minutes of UFO footage in broad daylight nine miles south of Roswell, New Mexico. He thought this would be the only UFO encounter he and his family would ever have. But fourteen days later he captured something on videotape that would forever change his life. He discovered something flying in the skies that just didn't look normal. At first he thought they were insects flying close to the video camera. After a number of tests he found out they were not insects. He found out they were not birds. Instead he discovered something that will forever change the way we accept reality. They are called Rods. And they are appearing everywhere, all over the world."
Escamilla himself, in an interview with About.com's Paranormal Phenomena guide, has stated he and his team have observed different kinds of rods:
"The different types we have recorded are: the "centipede" types, which have the appendages across the torso; "white rods," which have no appendages, but appear to have a ribbon-like appearance; and "spears," which are super-thin and very fast with no appendages at all. Color varieties are yellow, white, reddish brown, and dark brown."
The work of Escamilla has received much public attention, thanks to the medias and Escamilla's own activity of promoting his research on rods. Yet, what do we know about rods?
Rods: what kind of life form?
Rods sure look weird. By examining the many screenshots of rod videos, it is possible to make some good comments. Rods were fast flying creatures, yet they possess no classic wings. The essential material of all insect wings is the same: a thin membrane which is supported by blood-filled veins around the margin and within. When wings are present in insects, they commonly consist of two pairs. Bee wings are rigid at the front and flexible at the back. Such structure is the most efficient for generating maximum vortices, or spinning masses of air. The vortices generate lift and keep the insects in the air. Rods' wings, or membrane, behave differently. It is not clear how rods can be so fast, let alone change direction. Why no insect has developed a flight solution similar to the rod's? A life form possessing a thin membrane across its axis probably is more adapt to live in a dense fluid like water (the ocean, to be precise). Vetustovermis planus can be an interesting example of a membrane:
Judging from the many stills, rods appear to be quite fragile. Furthermore, how do rods reproduce? We don't know. What do they eat? We don't know, and no apparatus can be seen. Actually, no apparatus, eye or leg can be seen at all! It doesn't make sense.
Rod mystery solved
Rods are not creatures, they are not a previously unknowm life form. All evidence points to the conclusion that rods result from how images (primarily video images) are recorded and played back. In particular, the fast passage before the camera of an insect flapping its wings 2 to 4 times during a 1/60th video exposure has been shown directly to produce rod-like effects, due to motion blur in the two interlaced image fields that compose each video frame, lasting 1/60th of a second (NTSC) at the camera's slowest shutter speed. This points to the video being physically unable to capture a clean image of something that moves so fast, relative to the camera. In particular, the "membrane" visible in a frame of a rod is effectively a time-lapse of the wings of the flying animal in different positions over several wingbeats, while the central "rod" is a time-lapse image of the body, related to the distance traveled in 1/60th of a second.
Conclusion: rods are not a new life form. It is just amazing how an experienced Director like Escamilla has failed to identify such a common issue. It is even more amazing there are believers of the rods nonsense.
© Michele Bugliaro Goggia. All rights reserved. All content on the Ufopsi website, including texts and graphics, is property of Michele Bugliaro Goggia. Some content may be protected by other copyrights and other restrictions as well. Site designed for 1024x768 resolution.