Condon claims that the reason there has been so little study
of UFOs and their sighting is because it is not a field that will lead to
fruitful scientific discovery. Although he does encourage the continued study
of it by those with adequate training and experience, he doesn't approve of
their writing and spreading unsubstantiated claims. Hynek believes that the
study of UFOs needs to increase their efforts. He says they should
categorically compare large groups of sightings and investigate further into
eye witness accounts. Hynek believes all of the confusion about the topic has
prevented proper data collection and essentially kept them from making more
progress. Paynter, although skeptical about the matter, believes it should be
conducted in accordance with the highest standards of scientific inquiry. I believe
that Paynter makes the best argument. As there is not enough evidence, he doesn’t
claim that UFOs to be real but he doesn't discount the possibility either. He
says that they need more research before they can know for certain.
No comments:
Post a Comment