Comments on: The “Rods” Controversy

By: Greg Bishop

Greg Bishop — Fri, 04 Apr 2008 02:08:33 +0000

Helgarde,

I hesitated to bring up this aspect, but yes, it’s present among believers and fundamentalist skeptics, which are another type of believer.

I can’t tell you how many times people have come up to me saying that there IS an alien base under a mountain in New Mexico, but when I ask them if they’ve ever seen it, they say no and/or get irritated with me.

By: Greg Bishop

Greg Bishop — Fri, 04 Apr 2008 02:05:05 +0000

Craig,

Not if they’re INTERDIMENSIONAL!

By: Greg Bishop

Greg Bishop — Fri, 04 Apr 2008 02:04:17 +0000

Dr Dil,

Thanks for the compliment. Like you, I am also perplexed at Dr. Maccabee’s comments. Perhaps he was taken out of context? I hope so.

By: Helgarde

Helgarde — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 22:46:35 +0000

My favorite “rod video” was an old piece of film from “The Undersea World of Jacques Cousteau” from the seventies. Some goober on the internet was claiming it was “full of rods” proving that they were not only living in the air, but the waters were teeming with them

Of course, I looked at his video and what was teeming was brine shrimp.

When I pointed this out on the guy’s message board, which I did politely, mind you, the guy was quite rude and insulting. He so wanted to believe in rods living in the air and in the sea, that any proof to the contrary was enough to set him off.

So, of course, I had to track down another bit of film from the same show (different episode–and this would have been much easier now that we have YouTube!) this time with the sound narration intact, where Cousteau’s voiceover makes reference to the fact that they were swimming through a bunch of brine shrimp.

This bit of evidence was not only ignored by said rod fanatic, it was removed from his message board.

This interaction, which took place years ago, made me mistrust just about anyone who believes rods are anything but video artifacts. (This and the fact that I am friends with a professional videographer who assures me that rods are in fact nothing but video artifacts.)

By: craig york

craig york — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 22:09:30 +0000

I dunno-this is one of those things
that I never payed a whole lot of heed
to-if the things are so common, where
are the bodies? Surely somebody would
have found one on the ground, or one
the windshield of their car at some point? ( And I positively shudder at the
prospect of running into one on a motorcycle…imagine trying to pick
one of those out of your teeth.)

By: DrDil

DrDil — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 20:02:17 +0000

It always surprises me how little is known about this particular phenomenon, or at least how little it is discussed. I made a post regarding the, “Rod Phenomenon” just a couple of weeks ago and inevitably arrived at a similar conclusion, i.e. “There’s so much more information out there that only further confirms that rods are no more than insects, but perhaps more importantly there’s nothing out there that directly disputes this fact.”

I also found it puzzling that Dr Maccabee chose to avoid the more prosaic explanation, and even more so considering that he seemingly performed the necessary analysis as well as providing quite a detailed overview of the analytical process, I also commented that: “Strangely, Dr. Bruce Macabee (Navy Physicist & Image Analyst) whose opinion I would generally say carries weight was unable to verify the, ‘Base Jumping Rods’ as insects (which is what I’m sure they were.)” (http://tinyurl.com/ypkrg6)

Great post as usual…..