Loopy Pro: Create music, your way.

What is Loopy Pro?Loopy Pro is a powerful, flexible, and intuitive live looper, sampler, clip launcher and DAW for iPhone and iPad. At its core, it allows you to record and layer sounds in real-time to create complex musical arrangements. But it doesn’t stop there—Loopy Pro offers advanced tools to customize your workflow, build dynamic performance setups, and create a seamless connection between instruments, effects, and external gear.

Use it for live looping, sequencing, arranging, mixing, and much more. Whether you're a live performer, a producer, or just experimenting with sound, Loopy Pro helps you take control of your creative process.

Download on the App Store

Loopy Pro is your all-in-one musical toolkit. Try it for free today.

Anyone into the WOO here? UFOs etc?

18911131435

Comments

  • @Carnbot said:

    @knewspeak said:

    @Carnbot said:
    Funny that aliens seem to appear only where there no high definition cameras, in the days where there are HD cameras everywhere.

    From the military, it has to be declassified, those videos that are available, the technology is outdated now, so they got declassified. If you manage to read the linked article I posted above, those with security clearances, state, more recent ones which are numerous, are of much better quality, as well as corroborated testimony and other separate factual corroborating data.

    A better quality of blur?
    But seriously, I'm always interested in unexplained phenonema but if they had anything convincing that they wanted different opinions of I'm sure they would release them. But yes as time goes on all recording equipment gets better, especially for the general public. That's why if there were any truth to these phenomena being alien then more data should be available and more often and it just isn't happening so far...But who knows maybe one day we'll see more convincing evidence. I'm not ruling anything out, I'm just not holding my breath. I'm just more interested in the depth of phenomena available in the universe to study as it gets richer all the time. :)

    I notice your use of past tense ‘were’ any truth …just isn’t happening . Seems to me that your mind is really made up. You constantly infer ‘alien’, as if the only possible answer. Then dismiss it. Your rationale seems quite biased to me.

  • @sevenape said:

    @Carnbot said:

    @cfour said:

    @Carnbot said:
    Funny that aliens seem to appear only where there no high definition cameras, in the days where there are HD cameras everywhere.

    Well, God… sorry, I mean… aliens work in mysterious ways :p

    Yeah, I guess they must have special rules, a galactic code which allows them to “appear’ only in front of low definition tech only
    And never to large groups of witnesses and cameras simultaneously:

    VHS,super8,hi-8,SD crt- pixelated video and low res infrared and radar imagery = fine but only vaguely and must be unconvincing and similar to naturally reproducible effects.
    720p = not recommended
    1080p-8k and above =not a chance

    What about the phoenix lights? That was filmed by many people and seen simultaneously by hundreds if not thousands of people.

    I see your point but you are refusing to see anyone else’s… it’s not a religion, it’s not spirituality, there are anomalies that are being researched that have a possibility however small of creating a paradigm shift in what we believe scientifically to be true. To laugh off everything is not only condescending, it’s anti scientific.

    And honestly it’s the people like mick west who are acting more like religious organizations, enforcing their dogma

    There are so many possible explanations for lights. I'm just being open to the other natural possibilities. If any turn out to be aliens, great but we'll need more evidence than lights and video blobs, to put more time into it.
    And no I'm not anti-scientific, just the opposite, why not be interested in it being something else? Why is that not just as interesting as aliens? To me it is.

  • @knewspeak said:

    @Carnbot said:

    @knewspeak said:

    @Carnbot said:
    Funny that aliens seem to appear only where there no high definition cameras, in the days where there are HD cameras everywhere.

    From the military, it has to be declassified, those videos that are available, the technology is outdated now, so they got declassified. If you manage to read the linked article I posted above, those with security clearances, state, more recent ones which are numerous, are of much better quality, as well as corroborated testimony and other separate factual corroborating data.

    A better quality of blur?
    But seriously, I'm always interested in unexplained phenonema but if they had anything convincing that they wanted different opinions of I'm sure they would release them. But yes as time goes on all recording equipment gets better, especially for the general public. That's why if there were any truth to these phenomena being alien then more data should be available and more often and it just isn't happening so far...But who knows maybe one day we'll see more convincing evidence. I'm not ruling anything out, I'm just not holding my breath. I'm just more interested in the depth of phenomena available in the universe to study as it gets richer all the time. :)

    I notice your use of past tense ‘were’ any truth …just isn’t happening . Seems to me that your mind is really made up. You constantly infer ‘alien’, as if the only possible answer. Then dismiss it. Your rationale seems quite biased to me.

    I'm biased toward being hard on seeking the truth and kicking evidence in the tyres to see if it stands up yes, but I'm open to everything. You misunderstand me then :)

  • @CracklePot said:

    @Carnbot said:

    @CracklePot said:

    @Carnbot said:

    @monz0id said:

    @Carnbot said:

    @monz0id said:

    @Carnbot said:
    Those so called tic-tac UFO videos? Interesting but to me looks suspiciously like video artifacts in the recording equipment and stabilisation technology of the lenses rather than aliens, but look forward to seeing more research on what these blobs turn out to be.

    ok, quick bit of research seems to indicate that they are likely to be glare from engines and yes, other confirmations that it's likely also from the camera technology. I work loads with video algorithms, animation and camera gear and you just notice tell-tale signs like that immediately.

    So if that's the best current visual evidence, it's nothing unfortunately. The military just report what they see and these are just natural glitches.

    Tell the Pentagon lad, they’re spending billions trying to work this out! Oh, and the associated visual sightings and radar confirmations….religion, drugs, not used to the dark, mental illness…probably.

    Haha don't worry they know by now :)

    In this case yes, I'm more experienced than the Pentagon or Military to look at video. I have over 25 years experience as an imaging expert in film and video and work with every type of image you can think of trawling through BBC archives and manipulating images and working with digital algorithms and I could spot it straight away the signs of camera anomalies.

    I presume you’ve had access to, and analysed the full-length, raw cockpit footage - not just the highly compressed, edited and repeatedly copied YouTube video, to dismiss the Pentagon’s findings?

    I'm really not interested in seeing any more footage like that because they are clearly naturally caused artifacts. But if you're not interested in expert opinions and real explanations and just want to confirm a belief then it doesn't matter what anyone says.

    I would love it as much as anyone if there was some real strong evidence and I'm not trying to put down anyone's belief. It would be great if anything genuine comes up. :)

    How do camera anomalies appear simultaneously on radar?

    It's just another plane in the distance which the gimbal has locked onto and it's an optical illusion in the camera that it's performing weird manouvers. :)

    The military would be aware of the other plane. So, you invoke phantom planes and optical illusions. Is that really your expert explanation? Nothing about digital algorithms or whatever?
    That’s pretty weak, considering you are such a experienced expert in digital imaging, as you like to mention so frequently.

    Frequently? how often have I mentioned it as an expert in my posts? :)
    It's the evidence which is weak not the explanation.
    The military are correct, it's an unidentifed object, they have not said it's not a plane, and there's nothing "phantom" about it. They are open to other explanations as well.

  • @Carnbot said:
    But seriously, I'm always interested in unexplained phenonema but if they had anything convincing that they wanted different opinions of I'm sure they would release them.

    Why do you think the Pentagon would be interested in your opinion, or try to convince you the sightings that have been recorded cannot be explained by natural means?

    If anything they have gone to great lengths to do the exact opposite - only acknowledging the recent footage as genuine when it was leaked and they were forced to do so, and thoroughly investigating and listing natural explanations where they could.

    Pilots interviewed have stated that they encounter these objects on sorties almost daily, and have been for a number of years. The US have thousands of hours of footage yet they aren’t sharing it, so if it was possible to dismiss the footage as ‘lens flares’ or whatever they’d be quick to do so. This is an embarrassment for them.

  • edited September 2022

    @monz0id said:

    @Carnbot said:
    But seriously, I'm always interested in unexplained phenonema but if they had anything convincing that they wanted different opinions of I'm sure they would release them.

    Why do you think the Pentagon would be interested in your opinion, or try to convince you the sightings that have been recorded cannot be explained by natural means?

    >

    Why wouldn't they be interested in explanations? That's why they released them, to get them.

    if it was possible to dismiss the footage as ‘lens flares’ or whatever they’d be quick to do so. This is an embarrassment for them

    Not at all, it just shows they are fallible like everyone and it's quite nice that they are opening things up a bit, but its an easy mistake to make because there are many illusions like that possible with new and emerging digital and optical technology, coupled with natural phenomena.

  • @monz0id said:

    @Carnbot said:
    But seriously, I'm always interested in unexplained phenonema but if they had anything convincing that they wanted different opinions of I'm sure they would release them.

    Why do you think the Pentagon would be interested in your opinion, or try to convince you the sightings that have been recorded cannot be explained by natural means?

    If anything they have gone to great lengths to do the exact opposite - only acknowledging the recent footage as genuine when it was leaked and they were forced to do so, and thoroughly investigating and listing natural explanations where they could.

    Pilots interviewed have stated that they encounter these objects on sorties almost daily, and have been for a number of years. The US have thousands of hours of footage yet they aren’t sharing it, so if it was possible to dismiss the footage as ‘lens flares’ or whatever they’d be quick to do so. This is an embarrassment for them.

    The USAF and NASA have been devoid of reports, yet the US Navy has encountered an abundance, which seems more inline with reporting from quite a few other nations. Something very strange I would say going on there, especially when USAF personnel have actually been ridiculed for coming forward and making report’s to the media after the events. Woodbridge USAF base in the 80’s is an example, Holloman AFB another.

  • @Carnbot said:

    @monz0id said:

    @Carnbot said:
    But seriously, I'm always interested in unexplained phenonema but if they had anything convincing that they wanted different opinions of I'm sure they would release them.

    Why do you think the Pentagon would be interested in your opinion, or try to convince you the sightings that have been recorded cannot be explained by natural means?

    >

    Why wouldn't they be interested in explanations? That's why they released them, to get them.

    if it was possible to dismiss the footage as ‘lens flares’ or whatever they’d be quick to do so. This is an embarrassment for them

    Not at all, it just shows they are fallible like everyone and it's quite nice that they are opening things up a bit, but its an easy mistake to make because there are many illusions like that possible with new and emerging digital and optical technology, coupled with natural phenomena.

    I think the real reason they got released is to show, something anomalous is still happening, hasn’t stopped happening, people reporting these sort of thing’s aren’t crazy, so let’s do a real investigation this time, not a sham. They’re under NDA national defence ones, the type you go to prison for releasing classified material, so they were limited as to what they could get released through declassification.

  • The whole point of science is to open all findings to the community to see it it stands up to interrogation, to see if the evidence is strong, not just leave it as the hopeful opinions of a few people. So that's what will happen. It's has to get through thousands of other experts opinions. To me this data isn't strong enough for that and you'll find many other video experts who will agree with me this time.

    But it doesn't mean that evidence will never appear.

  • @Carnbot said:

    @monz0id said:

    @Carnbot said:
    But seriously, I'm always interested in unexplained phenonema but if they had anything convincing that they wanted different opinions of I'm sure they would release them.

    Why do you think the Pentagon would be interested in your opinion, or try to convince you the sightings that have been recorded cannot be explained by natural means?

    >

    Why wouldn't they be interested in explanations? That's why they released them, to get them.

    It wasn’t, and they have not asked the public to provide their own theories on the naval aircraft footage.

    The footage was leaked. It was then reluctantly confirmed and an internal report eventually published.

  • @knewspeak said:

    @monz0id said:

    @Carnbot said:
    But seriously, I'm always interested in unexplained phenonema but if they had anything convincing that they wanted different opinions of I'm sure they would release them.

    Why do you think the Pentagon would be interested in your opinion, or try to convince you the sightings that have been recorded cannot be explained by natural means?

    If anything they have gone to great lengths to do the exact opposite - only acknowledging the recent footage as genuine when it was leaked and they were forced to do so, and thoroughly investigating and listing natural explanations where they could.

    Pilots interviewed have stated that they encounter these objects on sorties almost daily, and have been for a number of years. The US have thousands of hours of footage yet they aren’t sharing it, so if it was possible to dismiss the footage as ‘lens flares’ or whatever they’d be quick to do so. This is an embarrassment for them.

    The USAF and NASA have been devoid of reports, yet the US Navy has encountered an abundance, which seems more inline with reporting from quite a few other nations. Something very strange I would say going on there, especially when USAF personnel have actually been ridiculed for coming forward and making report’s to the media after the events. Woodbridge USAF base in the 80’s is an example, Holloman AFB another.

    I guess because it was leaked and they had no other option but to acknowledge it, but they still have more footage they’re not releasing:

    Some two years later, the government confirmed it had more footage, but refused to release it, citing concerns for national security. Deputy director of the Department of the Navy's Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) program, Gregory Cason, stated in the response: "The release of this information will harm national security as it may provide adversaries valuable information regarding Department of Defense/Navy operations, vulnerabilities, and/or capabilities."

    No doubt we’ll eventually hear about other investigations in decades to come - this stuff usually eventually leaks out.

  • @monz0id said:

    @Carnbot said:

    @monz0id said:

    @Carnbot said:
    But seriously, I'm always interested in unexplained phenonema but if they had anything convincing that they wanted different opinions of I'm sure they would release them.

    Why do you think the Pentagon would be interested in your opinion, or try to convince you the sightings that have been recorded cannot be explained by natural means?

    >

    Why wouldn't they be interested in explanations? That's why they released them, to get them.

    It wasn’t, and they have not asked the public to provide their own theories on the naval aircraft footage.

    The footage was leaked. It was then reluctantly confirmed and an internal report eventually published.

    Hopefully if they have an amnesty from prosecution, some who have possibly remained silent or covered thing’s up, may come forward to testify.

  • @knewspeak said:
    Hopefully if they have an amnesty from prosecution, some who have possibly remained silent or covered thing’s up, may come forward to testify.

    There’s a lot at stake for these guys, particularly pilots. Commercial pilots reporting UFO’s buzzing their flights risk losing their license, military pilots much worse. Then of course there’s the ridicule, and barrage from debunkers dismissing their reports as ‘lens flare’ or ‘mental health problems’.

    Would you be comfortable in a plane piloted by someone who reports seeing a tic-tac shaped object buzzing around their aircraft at incredible speed, making current physics-defying changes in course, morphing into a different shape before vanishing completely - when all along it was just a bit of smudged fat on their camera lens making the light look a bit funny?

    No wonder most keep shtum.

  • edited September 2022

    @monz0id said:

    @knewspeak said:
    Hopefully if they have an amnesty from prosecution, some who have possibly remained silent or covered thing’s up, may come forward to testify.

    There’s a lot at stake for these guys, particularly pilots. Commercial pilots reporting UFO’s buzzing their flights risk losing their license, military pilots much worse. Then of course there’s the ridicule, and barrage from debunkers dismissing their reports as ‘lens flare’ or ‘mental health problems’.

    Would you be comfortable in a plane piloted by someone who reports seeing a tic-tac shaped object buzzing around their aircraft at incredible speed, making current physics-defying changes in course, morphing into a different shape before vanishing completely - when all along it was just a bit of smudged fat on their camera lens making the light look a bit funny?

    No wonder most keep shtum.

    I think it was Burroughs from the Woodbridge incident, he suffered physical injury from the incident, took him year’s to get his medical file’s released from the USAF, think it needed congressional intervention, he has got them, his pension reinstated I believe and proof as to the physical effects of the encounter he testified to. I think his medical anomalies have been investigated by Professor Garry Nolan. A very interesting person, worthy of listening to his opinions on the subject.

    https://web.stanford.edu/group/nolan/

    Interview with regarding UFO’s and research.

  • edited September 2022

    @monz0id said:

    @Carnbot said:

    @monz0id said:

    @Carnbot said:
    But seriously, I'm always interested in unexplained phenonema but if they had anything convincing that they wanted different opinions of I'm sure they would release them.

    Why do you think the Pentagon would be interested in your opinion, or try to convince you the sightings that have been recorded cannot be explained by natural means?

    >

    Why wouldn't they be interested in explanations? That's why they released them, to get them.

    It wasn’t, and they have not asked the public to provide their own theories on the naval aircraft footage.

    The footage was leaked. It was then reluctantly confirmed and an internal report eventually published.

    @Carnbot said:
    But seriously, I'm always interested in unexplained phenonema but if they had anything convincing that they wanted different opinions of I'm sure they would release them.

    Why do you think the Pentagon would be interested in your opinion, or try to convince you the sightings that have been recorded cannot be explained by natural means?

    >

    Why wouldn't they be interested in explanations? That's why they released them, to get them.

    if it was possible to dismiss the footage as ‘lens flares’ or whatever they’d be quick to do so. This is an embarrassment for them

    Not at all, it just shows they are fallible like everyone and it's quite nice that they are opening things up a bit, but its an easy mistake to make because there are many illusions like that possible with new and emerging digital and optical technology, coupled with natural phenomena.

    I think the real reason they got released is to show, something anomalous is still happening, hasn’t stopped happening, people reporting these sort of thing’s aren’t crazy, so let’s do a real investigation this time, not a sham. They’re under NDA national defence ones, the type you go to prison for releasing classified material, so they were limited as to what they could get released through declassification.

    Ok, great lets see more data and wait and see :)

    Luckily the military are well trained and mostly non judgmental so they report things without prejudice and don't leap to exotic conclusions without more evidence. But also pilots going at those speeds only have their instruments to go on, and these like any equipment and data is fallible.

    But since they have to deal with reality, they ultimately want to know the truth and I think one of the reasons they don't release more data is in case they are revealing too much about their own military tech limitations to any perceived enemy etc.

  • @Carnbot said:

    @monz0id said:

    @Carnbot said:

    @monz0id said:

    @Carnbot said:
    But seriously, I'm always interested in unexplained phenonema but if they had anything convincing that they wanted different opinions of I'm sure they would release them.

    Why do you think the Pentagon would be interested in your opinion, or try to convince you the sightings that have been recorded cannot be explained by natural means?

    >

    Why wouldn't they be interested in explanations? That's why they released them, to get them.

    It wasn’t, and they have not asked the public to provide their own theories on the naval aircraft footage.

    The footage was leaked. It was then reluctantly confirmed and an internal report eventually published.

    @Carnbot said:
    But seriously, I'm always interested in unexplained phenonema but if they had anything convincing that they wanted different opinions of I'm sure they would release them.

    Why do you think the Pentagon would be interested in your opinion, or try to convince you the sightings that have been recorded cannot be explained by natural means?

    >

    Why wouldn't they be interested in explanations? That's why they released them, to get them.

    if it was possible to dismiss the footage as ‘lens flares’ or whatever they’d be quick to do so. This is an embarrassment for them

    Not at all, it just shows they are fallible like everyone and it's quite nice that they are opening things up a bit, but its an easy mistake to make because there are many illusions like that possible with new and emerging digital and optical technology, coupled with natural phenomena.

    I think the real reason they got released is to show, something anomalous is still happening, hasn’t stopped happening, people reporting these sort of thing’s aren’t crazy, so let’s do a real investigation this time, not a sham. They’re under NDA national defence ones, the type you go to prison for releasing classified material, so they were limited as to what they could get released through declassification.

    Ok, great lets see more data and wait and see :)

    Luckily the military are well trained and mostly non judgmental so they report things without prejudice and don't leap to exotic conclusions without more evidence. But also pilots going at those speeds only have their instruments to go on, and these like any equipment and data is fallible.

    But since they have to deal with reality, they ultimately want to know the truth and I think one of the reasons they don't release more data is in case they are revealing too much about their own military tech limitations to any perceived enemy etc.

    I’d say the military is possibly governed by similar biased view’s in all aspect’s, as found here, I do believe some have tried to be rigorous in the pursuit of evidence, perhaps venturing into scientific fields we have yet to find out about.

    Yes, science is fallible.

    I agree about the release of data from military and governments, it’s probably highly filtered releases we’ll get at best, but from the academic research I hope we get more ‘curiosity’ and openness and with it funding, at least in this, I think, more and more academics are giving the subject serious consideration.

  • @knewspeak said:
    I agree about the release of data from military and governments, it’s probably highly filtered releases we’ll get at best, but from the academic research I hope we get more ‘curiosity’ and openness and with it funding, at least in this, I think, more and more academics are giving the subject serious consideration.

    Yeah funding for academic research is always good and whatever the results, things would be learned.

  • @SNystrom said:
    @auxmux: your anti-UFO arguments are rather hard to take seriously when your profile graphic totally matches the object observed in the Phoenix lights incident:

    Hundreds of thousands of people saw the, btw…. 😉

    Sorry to disappoint but I've never heard of that. I do know who Raelians are, does that count? 😄 It could be the collective unconscious, but in actuality it's the letters in my moniker: AM, made to look like a mountaintop.

  • edited September 2022

    @sevenape said:

    @auxmux said:
    What's the point for an alien species to randomly visit earth? Are we special as a species that advanced aliens should care for us? In the Bible, angels come to interfere in the affairs of the earth. Greek gods did the same. Is this just the same story?

    What’s the point of human beings observing an ant colony then?

    I think those that believe give too much credit to aliens like gods or angels, who in myths came to observe us, as if humans are like lowly animals who are worthy of study or curiosity. If aliens do exist they might be stupider or more tribalistic than humans. They also might be so superior that we don't matter to them at all. Semi-benevolent beings who care to watch us veers very close to religion.

  • One other thing I'll add. Ufo-ology is much like old western Gnostic religions which focused on secret knowledge; that only those in the know are aware of hidden truths that the masses miss or are too afraid to acknowledge. A lot of "evidence" presented focuses on there being secret government or other hidden information which proves the truth about aliens.

    This in my opinion is a transference of these Gnostic types of belief into modernity, where only those who know the hidden truth know what's real. What if there is no hidden truth?

  • I’m with Simon here. I would hope we had better evidence of UFO with all the available technology by now. I truthfully wish that I can see aliens or anything paranormal before I’m gone.

  • When you think about it though - the speed of light is only the fastest speed that is known to mankind on our little planet.
    With the size of the universe there are bound to be speeds on record elsewhere that will dwarf that.
    Yes?

  • edited September 2022

    @robosardine said:
    When you think about it though - the speed of light is only the fastest speed that is known to mankind on our little planet.
    With the size of the universe there are bound to be speeds on record elsewhere that will dwarf that.
    Yes?

    Well the expansion rate between two points in the universe can be faster than the speed of light. The scale of the universe is truly unimaginable.

  • @auxmux said:
    One other thing I'll add. Ufo-ology is much like old western Gnostic religions which focused on secret knowledge; that only those in the know are aware of hidden truths that the masses miss or are too afraid to acknowledge. A lot of "evidence" presented focuses on there being secret government or other hidden information which proves the truth about aliens.

    Speaking of “secret knowledge,” have you ever heard of the Freemasons? One third of all U.S. presidents and numerous founding fathers were high ranking members of this secret society. From George Washington and Benjamin Franklin to FDR and Harry Truman, the list is endless. Secret handshakes and ceremonial rituals exclusive to some of the most powerful people of the United States as well as the world.

    If you think millions of secrets aren’t being kept from the general public, then I have a bridge in Arizona I’d like to sell you.

    Oh yeah, your forum icon not only looks like the triangular ship from the Phoenix lights incident, but the triangle is a founding symbol of the Freemason. Have any secrets you care to share with us?

  • Notice any subtle similarities???

  • Lolol. The more we stare into the abyss, the more it stares back.

  • Well, can you at least teach me the secret 33rd degree Freemason handshake?

  • @magnusovi said:

    @robosardine said:
    When you think about it though - the speed of light is only the fastest speed that is known to mankind on our little planet.
    With the size of the universe there are bound to be speeds on record elsewhere that will dwarf that.
    Yes?

    Well the expansion rate between two points in the universe can be faster than the speed of light. That’s why there is an edge to the observable universe. Past that edge the light’s speed is not fast enough to overcome the expansion rate as it relates to the distance and time needed for that light to get to us. The scale of the universe is truly unimaginable.

    Mmm… would that be just a little bit faster or much faster. Is it even measurable? How could.. what the…

  • edited September 2022

    That’s a great question and I am not an expert. At this point my head starts to hurt though lol

    Here is great video on this:

  • edited September 2022

    This is an interesting development.

    Check the insignia.

    https://www.airdomainintelligence.mil/

    Is this trolling? A hack!? A not so subtle move towards disclosure!?

This discussion has been closed.