Chapter 4, Question #2

Condon believed that UFOs did not exist, due to the fact that there was no concrete evidence that they existed. Where Hynek believed that though there was only a small percentage of sightings, he thought they were actually alien space crafts in the world. In the middle there is Paynter, he thought that there may be a chance there were UFOs, but remained skeptical. I believe the scientist with the strongest argument is Paynter. Since there is no concrete evidence that UFOs do or do not exist, it is best to acknowledge both sides of the opinion, but to also stay skeptical. Since no one knows whether or not UFOs are real it is hard to say that they exist or even to say that they do not exist. Most of the sightings were unclear and what we learn about UFOs are usually just stories and opinion. The existence of something cannot be based off of non-concrete evidence. So in this case, I believe that Paynter’s argument was the strongest.