What do you propose as a more scientifically valid study of this cartoon?

Why does it need to be scientific in the first place?

it doesn't, but you're the one who implied that being unscientific invalidates scholarship

They clearly want to believe it was a valid response, but I didn’t bother responding because we, they, and everybody else, knows it was an obvious cop out.

I feel also than this article is a bit weird.

It start by making citations form Roffat, Takai and Okuda, to blindly classify Porco Rosso as an "anti war propaganda" movie. The article did not even discuss this classification.

- Is "Porco Rosso" anti-war or anti-fascist (or both)?

- Is it even propaganda?

The article cite "The Wind Rises" just to tell than this other movie also have the same themes (war, fascism, planes) but do not even even try to analyze if this other movie is "propaganda" too. At last make a paragraph to compare the two movies.

The article have around 30 citations (including 4 auto-citations) mainly to state the obvious to anybody who have watched the movie or read the Wikipedia page.

And finally the conclusion is something like: "i have see this movie and now is will now state the obvious about it".

At least, try to explain :

- Why "Le temps de cerises"?

- What about "The Princess and the Frog" in the story?

- What was the real meaning of "porco rosso", as an insult, during the fascism period in Italy?