Week 2 discussion (1)

.docx

School

American Military University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

410

Subject

Arts Humanities

Date

Feb 20, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

2

Uploaded by AmbassadorCrab2619

Allen Hynek was an astronomer and ufologist known for his work with Project Blue Book, a United States Air Force program that investigated UFO reports. In "UFOs: It's Time for a Scientific Approach," He advocated for a more rigorous and scientific investigation of UFO phenomena. He argued that dismissing UFO sightings without proper investigation was unscientific and that there were credible reports that should have been studied further. He then proposed a plan to studying UFOs, including gathering data, conducting thorough investigations, and applying scientific methods to research the evidence. On the other hand, EU Condon was a physicist and led the Condon Committee. This concluded that further study of UFOs was not warranted and that there was no evidence to support the existence of extraterrestrial visitation. In "UFOs I Have Loved and Lost," Condon stated his experiences that were built up to the committee and his skepticism towards UFO sightings. He argued that most UFO reports could be explained by natural phenomena, misidentifications, or hoaxes, and that there was no actual evidence to suggest they warranted any investigation. The main contrast between Hynek and Condon lies in their approaches to the UFO phenomenon. Hynek wanted a more open minded and scientific investigation, while Condon was skeptical and dismissive of UFO sightings. Hynek emphasized the need for systematic research and the importance of considering all possible explanations, including the possibility of extraterrestrial visitation. Condon, on the other hand, focused on debunking UFO reports and finding conventional explanations for them. In evaluating their conclusions, you must take into consideration the evidence each person uses to support their arguments. Hynek relies on the idea that there are credible reports of UFO sightings that warrant scientific investigation, while Condon states the lack of compelling evidence for
extraterrestrial visitation and the prevalence of natural explanations for UFO reports. As for which person makes the best argument, it depends on your personal perspective. Those who are more inclined to believe in the possibility of extraterrestrial visitation may find Hynek's arguments more compelling due to his open minded approach and emphasis on scientific investigation. However, those who are more skeptical of UFO sightings may find Condon's arguments more persuasive, as he provides conventional explanations for most UFO reports. Personaly I find Hynek's arguments more compelling because I don't think we can ever truly dismiss something without applying the proper research. Even if they do not exist, then after a scientific, open minded approach we would be able to come to the same conclusion
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help