What would be regarded as strong evidence?
There was a astronomer back in the fifties and sixties, J. Allen Hynek, who tried to grapple with the evidence and types of evidence. He went off the deep end and became a True Believer (for which he attracted a great deal of criticism) but he made some very good points, too. Maybe his aim was to deliberately make himself heard by the UFO watchers to improve the quality of the reporting. His point was that there are at least four kinds of evidence: a) objects in the sky, b) close-up viewing of spacecraft within a distance where detail could be easily seen (my blimp almost was one of these), c) tangible evidence such as radar contacts or detritus, and d) actual human-aliens contact. He expressed the opinion that type a), seeing lights or distant artifacts, was next to worthless (and this is what most sightings are), type b) very suspect because of misinterpretation and wishful thinking, and type c) inconclusive. Sightings of type d), actual human-alien contact, were the only sightings t
There was a astronomer back in the fifties and sixties, J. Allen Hynek, who tried to grapple with the evidence and types of evidence. He went off the deep end and became a True Believer (for which he attracted a great deal of criticism) but he made some very good points, too. Maybe his aim was to deliberately make himself heard by the UFO watchers to improve the quality of the reporting. His point was that there are at least four kinds of evidence: a) objects in the sky, b) close-up viewing of spacecraft within a distance where detail could be easily seen (my blimp almost was one of these), c) tangible evidence such as radar contacts or detritus, and d) actual human-aliens contact. He expressed the opinion that type a), seeing lights or distant artifacts, was next to worthless (and this is what most sightings are), type b) very suspect because of misinterpretation and wishful thinking, and type c) inconclusive. Sightings of type d), actual human-alien contact, were the only sightings t
