In response to the rapid rise in court cases related to the adequacy of school funding, a variety of alternative methods have been developed to provide an analytical base about the necessary expenditure on schools. These approaches have been titled to give an aura of a thoughtful and solid scientific basis: the professional judgment model, the state-of-the-art approach, the successful schools method, and the cost function approach. Unfortunately, none can provide a reliable and unbiased answer to the question "how much do adequate schools cost?" Each is highly manipulable, generally satisfying the interested party commissioning the work to be done but not meeting the fundamental tenets of scientific inquiry. This paper reviews and critiques the methodology as applied in a substantial number of states. (Contains 43 endnotes.)