Everyone has heard about people who claim to have seen or been abducted by a UFO, how seriously they are taken, and most importantly, do skeptics believe them. Many skeptics believe that the existence of UFOs is not real. However, individuals from different parts of the world claim to have seen a UFO and even been abducted. All these stories share a common plot, seeing bright lights, memories of an operation and then suddenly waking up with an inexplicable loss of time. This is a phenomenon that has escaped scientific study. With little evidence, all scientists have to rely on is anecdotal evidence. Many skeptics in the scientific community argue that the study of UFO phenomena does not offer a fruitful field in which to seek important scientific discoveries, because of these opinions it is not widely accepted. Skeptics will argue for other explanations such as perceptual and social errors. in our thinking and even hallucinations can cause these unexplained sightings. Most scientists will argue that there are natural explanations for these phenomena. It is also a fact that although hoaxes, delusions, and misidentification of natural or man-made objects are responsible for most UFO reports, they do not explain all of them. There are those sightings that, despite the best efforts of science and the military to explain, simply defy explanation and need to be examined more closely. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay. Both Condon and Paynter's views on the physical evidence for the existence of UFOs are similar. Physical evidence is essential for scientific research. In scientific research, evidence is accumulated through the observation of phenomena that occur in the natural world and created as experiments in a laboratory or other controlled conditions. This type of observation is generally expected to be empirical. Similarly, Condon argues that physical evidence is more reliable than individual anecdotal evidence which can be inaccurate; this type of evidence is usually unsupported and would be of greater value to the social and behavioral sciences. Paynte, like Condon, also argues that there is no physical evidence to conclude that aliens have ever visited Earth. He states that there is no existing physical object left behind by aliens. Individuals can believe in the existence of UFOs in the same way that an individual can believe in a God. Without physical evidence to conclude, one relies primarily on the memories of the individual's account. This form of evidence is unreliable because individuals can exaggerate and distort what they think happened. On the contrary, what makes these two arguments different is Paynter's belief that without evidence we should be skeptical about such claims, be open-minded. Evidence can come from different sources, some will be more reliable than others and we will stay away from looking only for evidence that confirms our hypotheses. There is not enough evidence to conclude that the existence of UFOs is not real. Yet Condon argues that, without any physical evidence, there must be other natural explanations for these phenomena, such as weather balloons or airplanes. He claims that the topic of UFOs has been widely misrepresented to the public by the media. Individuals' perception of the world can be easily manipulated and influenced. Our brain filters our perceptions and fills in missing information, which can lead to us seeing things that aren't real. Both Condon and Hynek acknowledge that they are happening.