Evaluation of Condon and Hynek

.docx

School

American Military University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

410

Subject

Philosophy

Date

Feb 20, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by AmbassadorCrab2619

Edward Condon and J. Allen Hynek were two key figures that were involved in the University of Colorado UFO study (Project Blue Book) during the 1960's. While they both approached the study with scientific backgrounds, their conclusions and perspectives on UFOs took two different routes. Condon's Skeptic views: Condon concluded that there was no convincing evidence to suggest the existence of extraterrestrial visitors or even advanced technology behind UFO sightings. He attributed most of the sightings to explanations like misidentification of natural phenomena, hoaxes or psychological factors. He took emphasis on the lack of physical evidence like wreckage or recovered crafts. The witness reports were also inconsistent and subjective in nature. Condon report concluded that further government investigation of UFOs should end, deeming it a waste of resources. Hynek's Openness Hynek acknowledged the limitation of existing data, but argued against prematurely dismissing the existence of UFOs. He believed a significant number of sightings remained unexplained after considering conventional explanations. Unlike Condon, Hynek advocated for continued scientific study with improved methodology and data collection. Hynek used the cases of multiple credible witnesses, radar detections, and physical trace evidence; although it was often inconclusive. Evaluation Both of these scientists had valid points in their studies. Condon emphasized rigorous scientific standards and skepticism challenged sensationalized claims and encouraged critical thinking. While Hynek highlighted the limitation of the investigation. He encouraged unbiased approach, while also recognizing the potential for genuine unexplained phenomena.

Personal Belief While leaving my own personal beliefs on if UFOs are real, I believe Condon makes the best argument. The lack of definitive proof and physical evidence makes a convincing case. I personally believe a combination of both Condon and Hynek studies will be the best overall approach. Pursuing a study with the openness of Hynek, while also staying focused by understand that solid proof is necessary, may produce the best overall results. The government has supposedly came out and said that extraterrestrial and UFOs are real, so I guess Hynek was correct overall. -Joseph References Condon, E. U. (1969). UFOs I Have Loved and Lost. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists , 25 (10), 6– 8. https://doi.org/10.1080/00963402.1969.11455289 J. Allen Hynek. (1981). UFO’s: It’s Time For a Scientific Approach. The Christian Science Monitor (1983) .

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