Edward U. Condon was a physicist at the University of
Colorado. In his writing, I noticed he claimed that UFO is a fruitful field to
conduct studies on, however, he could not find sufficient information to proof
the existence of UFO. He still encouraged scientists, who find adequate
information to lead them for further studies, should continue their studies. He
believes media makes UFO a bigger priority to people in the country. The second
research was J. Allenhynek conducted by a consultant for the U.S. Air Force, claimed
there is a possibility that UFO exists. He believes scientists have to conduct
more research on UFO to check the validity. The third research, by Royston
Paynter discusses that UFO might or might not exists. He encourages scientist
to collect sufficient evidence and reasoning to seek for the fact. I believe
Paynter is more trustable because he is open-minded and not bias on both sides.
He also urge that scientists who conduct the study should collect sufficient
info to proof the existence or nonexistence.
I agree. I thought that Payner’s argument was the strongest because his perspective was right in the middle of the other two. He was able to find a way that scientists could try and study UFOs and a way to state that UFOs and aliens might not exist. Although his argument wasn’t the longest, it was very clear and concise. He finds a clear medium within the arguments, proving that both sides do not have sufficient evidence. Your evaluation of the arguments really helped me understand the different sides of their arguments. I’m not sure if I believe in UFO’s and aliens. I don’t think I believe in them and I’m not sure that the government should investigate the existence of them considering there are so many problems on Earth right now.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you saying that Paynter is more trustable because of his open minded and no bias. After reading three articles regarding the existence of UFO’s, we can tell Condon claimed that UFO is a fruitful field to conduct studies. It is so true that he could not find any supportive information to argument about the existence of UFO. In the article by Hynek, he said that was possible for UFO to exist. However, as you said in your post, he needed to check for the validity. Overall, Paynter encouraged scientist to seek for proofs. This made the article became the best argument.
ReplyDelete