Old Project Avalon Forum (ARCHIVE) - View Single Post

gscraig · 01-29-2010, 04:03 AM

Well let's take a gander.

Can we begin with the Tether incident. I never mentioned it, and because I have a couple of unanswered questions related to that personally, I would not have mentioned it. Therefore, no comment on that topic.

Now, let's move on to the Rods. Most of the difference in proof of our opinions is actually addressed in the first two minutes of the video.

Elongation and duplication of objects at high speeds is the proposed premise of the video's first attempt to dismiss Rod's being...well, Rods. It proclaims that objects moving at a very high speed tend to take up dual fields (or 2 frames for a rough example) instead of one, due to elongation which causes the object to appear longer and differently than what is actually there (or seen).

Let's begin;
1) After proclaiming the above, the video then goes into it's first demonstration of it's theory on why and how this happens. The demonstration is using a paint ball being fired in front of a camera. However, (to avoid typing each phase)as the narrator clearly states, the "experiment is not a complete success", the paint ball did not elongate into 2 fields, but remained in one. The narrator goes on to say this is because "THE PAINT BALL WAS TOO FAST TO BE CAPTURED". <----This was one of the original understandings and fascination with the rods that were being filmed to begin with. At this point of the video, the entire argument or claim of evidence has crumbled like a house of cards....in my opinion.

I won't dismantle the rest of the video's credibility, and some of it's legitimate imagery disputes (insects) that still pales in comparison to some actual rod footage. Here are the other factors I consider in reaching my maintained "belief", as it was referenced...

2.) There is footage of very fast Rods leaving our atmosphere with a presumed aim at unidentified objects. As a result, the UFO's quickly maneuvered out of it's path and out of harms way. This immediately dismantles the insect/bug theory for they do not have the ability to withstand gravity, yet alone, survive out of our atmosphere to project as a fast moving blur aimed at a HUGE object. This also further dismantles the elongated theory of the object being something else, and harmless.

3) You have to ponder, who and why did someone decide to spend the time, money, and other resources to disprove the rods that were not common knowledge to the general public? To furhter that questioning, they ironically managed to conveniently have it aired on the History Channel???

4) There are also a couple of questions that are posted in the comments section below the video that really expands more on this than what I've expressed thus far.

Again, I think some of the video does explain away some things that have been, filmed, but others it again....Does not come close.

01-29-2010, 04:03 AM	#6
gscraig Avalon Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 335	Re: Mysterious Rods...What are they? Well let's take a gander. Can we begin with the Tether incident. I never mentioned it, and because I have a couple of unanswered questions related to that personally, I would not have mentioned it. Therefore, no comment on that topic. Now, let's move on to the Rods. Most of the difference in proof of our opinions is actually addressed in the first two minutes of the video. Elongation and duplication of objects at high speeds is the proposed premise of the video's first attempt to dismiss Rod's being...well, Rods. It proclaims that objects moving at a very high speed tend to take up dual fields (or 2 frames for a rough example) instead of one, due to elongation which causes the object to appear longer and differently than what is actually there (or seen). Let's begin; 1) After proclaiming the above, the video then goes into it's first demonstration of it's theory on why and how this happens. The demonstration is using a paint ball being fired in front of a camera. However, (to avoid typing each phase)as the narrator clearly states, the "experiment is not a complete success", the paint ball did not elongate into 2 fields, but remained in one. The narrator goes on to say this is because "*THE PAINT BALL WAS TOO FAST TO BE CAPTURED*". <----This was one of the original understandings and fascination with the rods that were being filmed to begin with. At this point of the video, the entire argument or claim of evidence has crumbled like a house of cards....in my opinion. I won't dismantle the rest of the video's credibility, and some of it's legitimate imagery disputes (insects) that still pales in comparison to some actual rod footage. Here are the other factors I consider in reaching my maintained "belief", as it was referenced... 2.) There is footage of very fast Rods leaving our atmosphere with a presumed aim at unidentified objects. As a result, the UFO's quickly maneuvered out of it's path and out of harms way. This immediately dismantles the insect/bug theory for they do not have the ability to withstand gravity, yet alone, survive out of our atmosphere to project as a fast moving blur aimed at a HUGE object. This also further dismantles the elongated theory of the object being something else, and harmless. 3) You have to ponder, who and why did someone decide to spend the time, money, and other resources to disprove the rods that were not common knowledge to the general public? To furhter that questioning, they ironically managed to conveniently have it aired on the History Channel??? 4) There are also a couple of questions that are posted in the comments section below the video that really expands more on this than what I've expressed thus far. Again, I think some of the video does explain away some things that have been, filmed, but others it again....Does not come close.