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?

12930313335

Comments

  • @espiegel123 said:

    @monz0id said:

    @Gavinski said:
    Watched a bit of that 3-hr vid. About 40 mins. Hope I'm not setting myself up for hate here, but I found it very boring. Far too much info. I guess I'll be waiting for actual evidence rather than anecdotes, but I'm not sure what actual evidence would mean in the age we live in with so much tech ability to fake the real. Video evidence will certainly never cut it in the age of deep fake.

    I sometimes wonder how sceptics accept that the Earth isn't actually flat, since they've only got photos and videos as proof - though I guess many still don't.

    Because, we don’t only have photos … the Earth being round provided a much more consistent explanation of a lot of observed phenomena than the earth being flat. It was figured out long long ago and provided better explanations than the earth being flat for a host of things people observed.

    Unless we are in a simulation.

  • @knewspeak said:

    @espiegel123 said:

    @monz0id said:

    @Gavinski said:
    Watched a bit of that 3-hr vid. About 40 mins. Hope I'm not setting myself up for hate here, but I found it very boring. Far too much info. I guess I'll be waiting for actual evidence rather than anecdotes, but I'm not sure what actual evidence would mean in the age we live in with so much tech ability to fake the real. Video evidence will certainly never cut it in the age of deep fake.

    I sometimes wonder how sceptics accept that the Earth isn't actually flat, since they've only got photos and videos as proof - though I guess many still don't.

    Because, we don’t only have photos … the Earth being round provided a much more consistent explanation of a lot of observed phenomena than the earth being flat. It was figured out long long ago and provided better explanations than the earth being flat for a host of things people observed.

    Unless we are in a simulation.

    And if we are, how would it be proved or disproved?

  • @espiegel123 said:

    @monz0id said:

    @Gavinski said:
    Watched a bit of that 3-hr vid. About 40 mins. Hope I'm not setting myself up for hate here, but I found it very boring. Far too much info. I guess I'll be waiting for actual evidence rather than anecdotes, but I'm not sure what actual evidence would mean in the age we live in with so much tech ability to fake the real. Video evidence will certainly never cut it in the age of deep fake.

    I sometimes wonder how sceptics accept that the Earth isn't actually flat, since they've only got photos and videos as proof - though I guess many still don't.

    Because, we don’t only have photos … the Earth being round provided a much more consistent explanation of a lot of observed phenomena than the earth being flat. It was figured out long long ago and provided better explanations than the earth being flat for a host of things people observed.

    And this guy Eratosthenes.

    https://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/200606/history.cfm

  • @knewspeak said:

    @espiegel123 said:

    @monz0id said:

    @Gavinski said:
    Watched a bit of that 3-hr vid. About 40 mins. Hope I'm not setting myself up for hate here, but I found it very boring. Far too much info. I guess I'll be waiting for actual evidence rather than anecdotes, but I'm not sure what actual evidence would mean in the age we live in with so much tech ability to fake the real. Video evidence will certainly never cut it in the age of deep fake.

    I sometimes wonder how sceptics accept that the Earth isn't actually flat, since they've only got photos and videos as proof - though I guess many still don't.

    Because, we don’t only have photos … the Earth being round provided a much more consistent explanation of a lot of observed phenomena than the earth being flat. It was figured out long long ago and provided better explanations than the earth being flat for a host of things people observed.

    Unless we are in a simulation.

    Take the red pill.

  • @Gavinski said:

    @knewspeak said:

    @espiegel123 said:

    @monz0id said:

    @Gavinski said:
    Watched a bit of that 3-hr vid. About 40 mins. Hope I'm not setting myself up for hate here, but I found it very boring. Far too much info. I guess I'll be waiting for actual evidence rather than anecdotes, but I'm not sure what actual evidence would mean in the age we live in with so much tech ability to fake the real. Video evidence will certainly never cut it in the age of deep fake.

    I sometimes wonder how sceptics accept that the Earth isn't actually flat, since they've only got photos and videos as proof - though I guess many still don't.

    Because, we don’t only have photos … the Earth being round provided a much more consistent explanation of a lot of observed phenomena than the earth being flat. It was figured out long long ago and provided better explanations than the earth being flat for a host of things people observed.

    Unless we are in a simulation.

    And if we are, how would it be proved or disproved?

    Who knows unless there are limitations, bugs or it crashes.

  • @SirMcp said:
    SpookyZoo, Nasa is as independent as NPR. If you are funded by the man how autonomous can you be? There’s always rules, regulations and over sight to deal with…plus funding. How is your budget going to look next year if you are kicking dirt in his face this year?

    And I just might have to appropriate “ NO 1 FOR ECCLESIASTICAL SPACESHIP SHENANIGANS” from The Daily Star. Stan Lee must be their EIC.

    Actually, one of the great misconceptions that seems to linger is that NPR is a government operation.

    Presently, NPR receives funding for less than 1% of its budget directly from the federal government. In total, less than 10% of its budget comes from federal, state, and local governments indirectly. Not that you would ever listen, but that’s why their programs are now chock-full of commercials.

    Of course morons like “genius” Elon Musk do their best to propagate the misconception.

  • @SpookyZoo said:

    @cyberheater said:

    @Carnbot said:
    This is worth listening to for anyone interested in the subject:

    https://www.theguardian.com/science/audio/2023/jun/08/why-is-nasa-looking-into-ufos-and-what-has-it-found-so-far-podcast

    It's a useful perspective from the chairman of the NASA committee assigned to investigate UFO sightings. It's interesting because they are independent and have a job to find out more about the subject. I also would think that if anyone has a good chance of coming across alien technology it would be NASA. (he's also not selling a book, or product etc)

    I think when this all unfolds there's going to be a bit where NASA turns around and says "Yeah we did know but we were told to keep quiet about it. Sorry about that. Carry on. You can still trust us bro".

    Exactly this unfortunately. The illusion of NASA being independent needs a good shaking, methinks.

    Well, my brother used to work for NASA, and they are not in the business of hiding things. As he says in the interview they couldn't for long even if they wanted to. The whole point of the committee is to find out some truth from the evidence.

    What would be the point of them lying, risking their careers and respect, when it's much more interesting to reveal the truth of their findings. They aren't saying nothing is out there, just that NASA don't have any evidence for it.

    A problem as he says in the interview is that they are threatened with abuse from believers when they reveal information that they don't want to hear. It's just a shame it has to be like that.

  • edited June 2023

    @espiegel123 said:
    Because, we don’t only have photos … the Earth being round provided a much more consistent explanation of a lot of observed phenomena than the earth being flat. It was figured out long long ago and provided better explanations than the earth being flat for a host of things people observed.

    But there is more than just photographic proof of UFO/UAP existence. Expert, respected testimonies, police/military statements, videos, cockpit, radar recordings etc. Even the PENTAGON acknowledges many of these reports are unexplained.

    Out of the 100's of thousands of reports since the 1940's, it's a long stretch of the imagination that something hasn't been recovered at some point.

    Aside from actually taking a ride in one, with a genetically proven alien, it's hard to see what would actually convince a hardened sceptic.

    Any ideas?

    @Gavinski said:
    Woah Tiger. What @espiegel123 said above. We often disagree but on this he's bang on the money

    Woah tiger yourself, with your 'fries in arse' headlines.

    Or is it only sceptics that are allowed to take the piss?

  • @Carnbot said:

    @SpookyZoo said:

    @cyberheater said:

    @Carnbot said:
    This is worth listening to for anyone interested in the subject:

    https://www.theguardian.com/science/audio/2023/jun/08/why-is-nasa-looking-into-ufos-and-what-has-it-found-so-far-podcast

    It's a useful perspective from the chairman of the NASA committee assigned to investigate UFO sightings. It's interesting because they are independent and have a job to find out more about the subject. I also would think that if anyone has a good chance of coming across alien technology it would be NASA. (he's also not selling a book, or product etc)

    I think when this all unfolds there's going to be a bit where NASA turns around and says "Yeah we did know but we were told to keep quiet about it. Sorry about that. Carry on. You can still trust us bro".

    Exactly this unfortunately. The illusion of NASA being independent needs a good shaking, methinks.

    Well, my brother used to work for NASA, and they are not in the business of hiding things. As he says in the interview they couldn't for long even if they wanted to. The whole point of the committee is to find out some truth from the evidence.

    What would be the point of them lying, risking their careers and respect, when it's much more interesting to reveal the truth of their findings. They aren't saying nothing is out there, just that NASA don't have any evidence for it.

    A problem as he says in the interview is that they are threatened with abuse from believers when they reveal information that they don't want to hear. It's just a shame it has to be like that.

    Well that's refreshing to hear and provides some optimism. That wasn't quite the tone I got from that NASA event though. Will keep fingers crossed that all the important parties in this really do want to be transparent.

  • edited June 2023

    @Carnbot said:
    What would be the point of them lying, risking their careers and respect, when it's much more interesting to reveal the truth of their findings. They aren't saying nothing is out there, just that NASA don't have any evidence for it.

    But that's exactly what the video was discussing - that NASA don't have this information available. Or top level government. Or the military. Because of the compartmentalised nature of government it's been filtered into black ops, and public corporations.

  • @monz0id said:

    @espiegel123 said:
    Because, we don’t only have photos … the Earth being round provided a much more consistent explanation of a lot of observed phenomena than the earth being flat. It was figured out long long ago and provided better explanations than the earth being flat for a host of things people observed.

    But there is more than just photographic proof of UFO/UAP existence. Expert, respected testimonies, police/military statements, videos, cockpit, radar recordings etc. Even the PENTAGON acknowledges many of these reports are unexplained.

    The evidence that led to the theory that the earth is round provided for more accurate prediction than a flat earth model. Nothing about the purported reports of extraterrestrials provides better , more accurate predictions of observed phenomena.

    This doesn’t mean extraterrestrials don’t exist, but your analogy about the flat earth isn’t relevant. The arguments in favor of a round earth add up to a simpler more accurate understanding of observed phenomena than a flat earth model.

    Photographs and eyewitness accounts aren’t proof. As has been pointed out, throughout history there have been eyewitness accounts of fairies and devils and a host of monsters and creatures few now believe in.

    Out of the 100's of thousands of reports since the 1940's, it's a long stretch of the imagination that something hasn't been recovered at some point.

    Not that long a stretch. People report things they believe they have seen all the time which later turn out to be wrong.

    Centuries of people reporting angel sightings doesn’t mean angels exist.

    Being in the military or a pilot doesn’t prevent one from being wrong in one’s conjectures.

    Aside from actually taking a ride in one, with a genetically proven alien, it's hard to see what would actually convince a hardened sceptic.

    Any ideas?

    >

  • @monz0id said:

    @espiegel123 said:
    Because, we don’t only have photos … the Earth being round provided a much more consistent explanation of a lot of observed phenomena than the earth being flat. It was figured out long long ago and provided better explanations than the earth being flat for a host of things people observed.

    But there is more than just photographic proof of UFO/UAP existence. Expert, respected testimonies, police/military statements, videos, cockpit, radar recordings etc. Even the PENTAGON acknowledges many of these reports are unexplained.

    Out of the 100's of thousands of reports since the 1940's, it's a long stretch of the imagination that something hasn't been recovered at some point.

    Aside from actually taking a ride in one, with a genetically proven alien, it's hard to see what would actually convince a hardened sceptic.

    Any ideas?

    @Gavinski said:
    Woah Tiger. What @espiegel123 said above. We often disagree but on this he's bang on the money

    Woah tiger yourself, with your 'fries in arse' headlines.

    Or is it only sceptics that are allowed to take the piss?

    You didn't sound like you were taking the piss though! You sounded deadly serious. Sometimes things get lost in translation.

  • @SNystrom said:

    @SirMcp said:
    SpookyZoo, Nasa is as independent as NPR. If you are funded by the man how autonomous can you be? There’s always rules, regulations and over sight to deal with…plus funding. How is your budget going to look next year if you are kicking dirt in his face this year?

    And I just might have to appropriate “ NO 1 FOR ECCLESIASTICAL SPACESHIP SHENANIGANS” from The Daily Star. Stan Lee must be their EIC.

    Actually, one of the great misconceptions that seems to linger is that NPR is a government operation.

    Presently, NPR receives funding for less than 1% of its budget directly from the federal government. In total, less than 10% of its budget comes from federal, state, and local governments indirectly. Not that you would ever listen, but that’s why their programs are now chock-full of commercials.

    Of course morons like “genius” Elon Musk do their best to propagate the misconception.

    My local NPR station is commercial free so i’ll consider myself lucky but that is interesting. So instead of NPR, insert DOE, DOD, NSA or X government organization in.

  • Monzoid

    ‘ Aside from actually taking a ride in one, with a genetically proven alien, it's hard to see what would actually convince a hardened sceptic.’

    That is the problem. The is no physical evidence to back up what these witnesses are claiming. I believe that any government would cover up reverse engineering the technology but I have no evidence. But I trust no government because I’m paranoid.

  • edited June 2023

    From the 40 mins or whatever I watched of that video, I heard a lot of fluff, with a few interesting observations thrown in.

    I found it interesting that the people I did watch all seemed to find it necessary to mention their wife, kids, grandkids etc. Anything wrong with being single? Felt like those speakers were doing their utmost to appeal to the 'normies'. All felt a bit like some kind of evangelical church event.

    The military jargon reminded me of the church in the middle ages, or actually the Catholic Church up until a few generations ago. The Latin mass, etc. Impress the people with big words and technical detail to show your intellectual chops - but most of the detail seemed aside from the point.

    I did also hear some really fascinating things about craft flying at speeds that are impossible for our earthly craft. That stuff I really did find compelling. Really compelling. And I have no reason to think they were lying. But it was quite a chore to get those interesting nuggets out of a sea of unimportant detail.

  • edited June 2023

    @monz0id said:

    @Gavinski said:
    Watched a bit of that 3-hr vid. About 40 mins. Hope I'm not setting myself up for hate here, but I found it very boring. Far too much info. I guess I'll be waiting for actual evidence rather than anecdotes, but I'm not sure what actual evidence would mean in the age we live in with so much tech ability to fake the real. Video evidence will certainly never cut it in the age of deep fake.

    I sometimes wonder how sceptics accept that the Earth isn't actually flat, since they've only got photos and videos as proof - though I guess many still don't.

    Math and basic observation prove the Earth is round.

    Per Google Bard:

    The earliest known evidence that humans believed the Earth was round dates back to the 5th century BC. This is when the Greek philosopher Pythagoras first proposed that the Earth was a sphere. He based this on his observation that the Moon and the Sun were round, and that the Earth must therefore be round as well.

    In the 3rd century BC, the Greek astronomer Eratosthenes devised a clever method for measuring the circumference of the Earth. He noticed that on the summer solstice, the Sun was directly overhead at Syene (now Aswan, Egypt), but that it was lower in the sky at Alexandria, which is about 800 kilometers (500 miles) north of Syene. He reasoned that if the Sun were a very large, distant object, it would appear to be the same size in the sky no matter where on Earth you were standing. The only explanation for why it appeared smaller at Alexandria was that the Earth was curved and that Alexandria was further away from the Sun.

    Eratosthenes used this observation to calculate the circumference of the Earth to be about 252,000 stadia. This is a very close estimate of the actual circumference of the Earth, which is about 40,000 kilometers (25,000 miles).

    The belief that the Earth was round was not universally accepted in ancient times. Some people, such as the ancient Egyptians, believed that the Earth was flat. However, by the end of the Roman Empire, the belief that the Earth was round was generally accepted by educated people in Europe.

    The belief that the Earth was round was further solidified by the voyages of exploration that took place during the Age of Discovery in the 15th and 16th centuries. These voyages showed that the Earth was much larger than anyone had previously thought, and that it was possible to sail around the world.

  • @monz0id said:

    @Carnbot said:
    What would be the point of them lying, risking their careers and respect, when it's much more interesting to reveal the truth of their findings. They aren't saying nothing is out there, just that NASA don't have any evidence for it.

    But that's exactly what the video was discussing - that NASA don't have this information available. Or top level government. Or the military. Because of the compartmentalised nature of government it's been filtered into black ops, and public corporations.

    Well I just think that we are more likely to find evidence of Alien technology in deep space, not on earth. If NASA find anything they aren't going to hide it, scientists don't find it easy to keep quiet about anything :)

  • It’s an interesting topic of conversation. What level of proof would you need to convince a hardened skeptic?

  • edited June 2023

    @cyberheater said:
    It’s an interesting topic of conversation. What level of proof would you need to convince a hardened skeptic?

    Observable physical evidence and analysis. But to be honest about it, I'd still remain skeptical until I could see something living or 'flying' for myself. I've seen lots of strange things in my lifetime, but nothing I'd ever attribute to an 'alien intelligence'.

  • @cyberheater said:
    It’s an interesting topic of conversation. What level of proof would you need to convince a hardened skeptic?

    I'm genuinely not sure. But probably something from some of those Sci fi movies where obviously alien spacecraft fly over cities and destroy millions of people, including people you know - or God forbid - you yourself, would be pretty damn convincing!

  • @espiegel123 said:
    This doesn’t mean extraterrestrials don’t exist, but your analogy about the flat earth isn’t relevant. The arguments in favor of a round earth add up to a simpler more accurate understanding of observed phenomena than a flat earth model.

    It was an example of sceptics requiring immutable, potentially unobtainable proof. There are still some who still reject the notion that the Earth is round. A quarter of people in the UK believe Covid was a hoax: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/jun/13/quarter-in-uk-believe-covid-was-a-hoax-poll-on-conspiracy-theories-finds

    You don't get to decide what what another person considers immutable proof. One person's Covid hoax is another persons UFO.

    @espiegel123 said:
    Photographs and eyewitness accounts aren’t proof. As has been pointed out, throughout history there have been eyewitness accounts of fairies and devils and a host of monsters and creatures few now believe in.

    Centuries of people reporting angel sightings doesn’t mean angels exist.

    Many of these sightings could be explained by extra-terrestrial means, just different times and different beliefs and viewpoints.

  • @NeuM said:
    I'd still remain skeptical until I could see something living or 'flying' for myself. I've seen lots of strange things in my lifetime, but nothing I'd ever attribute to an 'alien intelligence'.

    Ain't gonna happen.

  • @monz0id said:

    @NeuM said:
    I'd still remain skeptical until I could see something living or 'flying' for myself. I've seen lots of strange things in my lifetime, but nothing I'd ever attribute to an 'alien intelligence'.

    Ain't gonna happen.

    That's my take. It ain't gonna happen.

  • @Gavinski said:

    @monz0id said:

    @espiegel123 said:
    Because, we don’t only have photos … the Earth being round provided a much more consistent explanation of a lot of observed phenomena than the earth being flat. It was figured out long long ago and provided better explanations than the earth being flat for a host of things people observed.

    But there is more than just photographic proof of UFO/UAP existence. Expert, respected testimonies, police/military statements, videos, cockpit, radar recordings etc. Even the PENTAGON acknowledges many of these reports are unexplained.

    Out of the 100's of thousands of reports since the 1940's, it's a long stretch of the imagination that something hasn't been recovered at some point.

    Aside from actually taking a ride in one, with a genetically proven alien, it's hard to see what would actually convince a hardened sceptic.

    Any ideas?

    @Gavinski said:
    Woah Tiger. What @espiegel123 said above. We often disagree but on this he's bang on the money

    Woah tiger yourself, with your 'fries in arse' headlines.

    Or is it only sceptics that are allowed to take the piss?

    You didn't sound like you were taking the piss though! You sounded deadly serious. Sometimes things get lost in translation.

    I said:

    "I sometimes wonder how sceptics accept that the Earth isn't actually flat, since they've only got photos and videos as proof - though I guess many still don't."

    Where in the above was the need for a 'woah Tiger' warning? It's a genuine question, which reading the comments above, I still have no answer to.

  • @monz0id said:

    @espiegel123 said:
    This doesn’t mean extraterrestrials don’t exist, but your analogy about the flat earth isn’t relevant. The arguments in favor of a round earth add up to a simpler more accurate understanding of observed phenomena than a flat earth model.

    It was an example of sceptics requiring immutable, potentially unobtainable proof. There are still some who still reject the notion that the Earth is round. A quarter of people in the UK believe Covid was a hoax: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/jun/13/quarter-in-uk-believe-covid-was-a-hoax-poll-on-conspiracy-theories-finds

    You don't get to decide what what another person considers immutable proof. One person's Covid hoax is another persons UFO.

    @espiegel123 said:
    Photographs and eyewitness accounts aren’t proof. As has been pointed out, throughout history there have been eyewitness accounts of fairies and devils and a host of monsters and creatures few now believe in.

    Centuries of people reporting angel sightings doesn’t mean angels exist.

    Many of these sightings could be explained by extra-terrestrial means, just different times and different beliefs and viewpoints.

    You are correct. I don't get to decide what constitutes proof. But I can say that the analogy isn't apt. Your analogy can be applied to anything where some people believe something that other people don't.

    The case for the earth being round is not: some people say so. It is a model that long before we could see the earth from afar provided for better predictions and simpler explanations of readily observed phenomena than a flat earth model.

    Nothing about the argument for a round earth relies on eyewitness testimony. Eyewitness testimony is highly unreliable not just as far as extraterrestrials is concerned.

  • @cyberheater said:
    It’s an interesting topic of conversation. What level of proof would you need to convince a hardened skeptic?

    They come face to face with it, then off to a psychiatric institution.

    Anyway crossed wires how many at NASA knew about this…

  • I think the same applies to UFOs as to religion... Why do so few people see these things? Why is it almost always based on faith in a few people who (claim to) have seen?

    Something interesting I read in an article in The New Statesman: maybe all alien intelligent species are too short lived to get to the point where they are capable of intergalactic travel. Once they get too much power they wipe themselves out.

    This is what has happened to all ancient human civilizations. Often it was due to ecological reasons. Other times due to being overcome by enemies.

    Our human history until now has only featured civilizational extinctions, but a wipe out of modern humanity as we know it is easy to imagine if we keep caring more about what's theoretically happening in the skies compared to the mass extinctions of species we are currently seeing happening on earth, and the existential threat we pose to ourselves through overpopulation, climate change, possession of weapons of mass destruction etc.
    Far more likely we destroy ourselves than that we are destroyed by any alien civilization.

  • @NeuM said:

    @monz0id said:

    @NeuM said:
    I'd still remain skeptical until I could see something living or 'flying' for myself. I've seen lots of strange things in my lifetime, but nothing I'd ever attribute to an 'alien intelligence'.

    Ain't gonna happen.

    That's my take. It ain't gonna happen.

    So why are you still taking part in this thread? You have ruled out any kind of acceptance that these things exist unless you personally witness one, which is extremely unlikely.

    The thread is titled "Anyone into the WOO here? UFOs etc?"

    What are you here for since you're obviously not? Are you just here for a row or what?

  • @Gavinski said:
    I think the same applies to UFOs as to religion... Why do so few people see these things? Why is it almost always based on faith in a few people who (claim to) have seen?

    Serioulsy, this is starting to get offensive now.

  • @monz0id said:

    @Gavinski said:

    @monz0id said:

    @espiegel123 said:
    Because, we don’t only have photos … the Earth being round provided a much more consistent explanation of a lot of observed phenomena than the earth being flat. It was figured out long long ago and provided better explanations than the earth being flat for a host of things people observed.

    But there is more than just photographic proof of UFO/UAP existence. Expert, respected testimonies, police/military statements, videos, cockpit, radar recordings etc. Even the PENTAGON acknowledges many of these reports are unexplained.

    Out of the 100's of thousands of reports since the 1940's, it's a long stretch of the imagination that something hasn't been recovered at some point.

    Aside from actually taking a ride in one, with a genetically proven alien, it's hard to see what would actually convince a hardened sceptic.

    Any ideas?

    @Gavinski said:
    Woah Tiger. What @espiegel123 said above. We often disagree but on this he's bang on the money

    Woah tiger yourself, with your 'fries in arse' headlines.

    Or is it only sceptics that are allowed to take the piss?

    You didn't sound like you were taking the piss though! You sounded deadly serious. Sometimes things get lost in translation.

    I said:

    "I sometimes wonder how sceptics accept that the Earth isn't actually flat, since they've only got photos and videos as proof - though I guess many still don't."

    Where in the above was the need for a 'woah Tiger' warning? It's a genuine question, which reading the comments above, I still have no answer to.

    OK forget the Woah Tiger bit. My only point was that the idea the earth is round is based on masses of scientific evidence, not video, photos or anecdotes. Sorry, I genuinely didn't mean to insult you, if that was what you felt my intention was. I was just pretty shocked that you would draw an equivalence between what I previously stated regarding my scepticism about ufo 'evidence' to date and the evidence that the earth is round.

This discussion has been closed.