ufo's

In the essay “Perspectives on evaluating evidence for the existence of unidentified flying objects” Condon presents the argument that the study of ufo’s is fruitless and should not be encouraged or be the target of public or private financing. He suggests that individuals with strong scientific backgrounds should not be discouraged from studying the subject on their own terms, but it is not a fit subject for school children or public funds. This is based on the lack of evidence on their existence at all. Hynek believes that ufo’s should be studied and that the only reason it is not more widely accepted discipline is because of the present lack of study in the field. He suggests that the first viable step toward understanding of the subject is data gathering and data processing. I feel that Hynek presents the strongest argument because to date the only real study of the subject has been on a case by case. To really study ufo’s we should study all that is known and look at it through the big picture.