Thursday, March 20, 2008

UFO Looney Tunes - Classification System

There are some serious, intelligent people studying the UFO phenomenon.

And then there is Ed Komarek, one of the leading lights of the so-called Exopolitics movement / cult.

In the most recent installment of Mr. Komarek's assault on common sense, he writes:
I now believe that the U.S. Air Force is dog fighting with ETs in several areas of the U.S. and the same seems to be going on with other Air Forces around the globe.
As loony as that sounds, it gets even loonier, as he explains why this is supposedly happening:
I believe that these dogfights are ET initiated and are designed to put exopolitical pressure on national and world leaders through their respective militaries to openly disclose UFO/ET reality.
Wow.

Here's a question for Mr. Komarek - if ET wants disclosure, why don't they... well, just land on the White House lawn, or some other place where the media might be gathered, and let us know themselves?

Stuff like this has inspired me to develop a new system for rating UFO looney tunes and / or things they say and do, in much the same way as Vallee and Hynek developed systems for classifying UFO sightings and encounters.

The system is as follows:

Porky Pig - a UFO looney tune who is more or less connected to reality; they are functional, can operate in the real world, and occasionally might even contribute something useful to the overall discourse on the UFO phenomenon. In terms of ideas or conclusions, Porky Pig status indicates something that just might have at least a veneer or plausibility, if not quite probability. However, they are naive and far too trusting.

Bugs Bunny - A UFO looney tune who is connected to reality, but says ridiculous things. However, they do so knowing that what they say is ridiculous, just to have some fun with people. This applies to the ideas they put forward as well. This form of looney tune is generally harmless, and even serves a useful purpose.

Yosemite Sam - A UFO looney tune who may or may not be connected to reality, but who says and does ridiculous things regardless in order to make money. Fully capable of making stuff up if it furthers their end goal of profit. If this class of looney tune is doing it solely to make money, then they are a Yosemite Sam looney tune (sub-class I); if they are doing it to make money but they also seem to genuinely believe what they are saying (but money remains the primary motive), then they are a Yosemite Sam looney tune (sub-class II).

Daffy Duck - A UFO looney tune that is completely off the deep end. They have little or no connection to reality, and will do or say anything to buttress their single-minded belief system. They are extremely unpredictable, argumentative, and occasionally capable of stalker-like behaviour, but are not dangerous.

Tasmanian Devil - A UFO looney tune that is completely off the deep end, and dangerous. They have the capacity to harm themselves, and possibly others.
There you have it. From this point on, I intend to use this system when I run across folks like Mr. Komarek and ideas like the one noted above (classification: Daffy Duck). It should make sorting the wheat from the chaff in UFO looney-ville that much easier.

Paul Kimball

8 comments:

Alien Contactee said...

And who is going to pay attention to such that isn't already privy other then another Daffy Duck?

Ohhh, I so want to be a toon. I shall be Batty Koda because he's a mentally unstable fruit bat that was experimented on by humans and now has wires and aerials fused into his head.

You could have a lot more fun with this then you realize because there are many more interesting toons out there that are more closely related to humans. Take the Animaniacs for instance. I'm sure you can come up with a Yakko and a Wakko, or ten.

Could it be that you have burn out? I say this because such things have been around for a very long time but only now you find yourself building Toontown. I too seem to be more frustrated and aggravated while reading lately. I realize your frustrations but I've found it easier to tune such things out with my laser 'mouse' Mickey.

Bruce Duensing said...

Ha! I had a good chuckle. The Warners cartoons may be an analogy to the evolution of the human comedy as applied to all this. Dat Wabbit!

Yours Truly
Elmer Fudd

Paul Kimball said...

A good chuckle was what it was all about.
Bugs

Skeptical... said...

I've been scratching my head about Ed for quite a while now. He was one of the guys stirring the pot regarding the recent alleged UN UFO meeting. Very tenuous grasp on reality indeed.

S

NickJones said...

Paul, I wish you had provided examples for each of the categories. I imagine the dread KKK (may his name never darken this blog again) is a Tasmanian Devil, but who is Richard C. Hoagland? Or Whitley Strieber? Or the guy who heads the Disclosure Project. I've read of all of them described, at one time or another in the UFO pages, as crackpots, loons and bozos.

The scale could also easily be applied to the paranormal field. For instance, "Doc" Shiels, with his fake Nessie photo and Owlman hoax, would be a Bugs Bunny, while George and Kathleen Lutz (Amityville) were Yosemite Sams, Class II, if not Class I.

Anonymous said...

If you've seen a UFO there's not a lot you can do about it anyway, its not like you can chase them, the pictures / film would be discredited and the majority of people who hear about them are far too sceptical.

So if you see one, shrug your shoulders, understand were in a big big universe and get on with your day.

Marvin the Martian

Alien Contactee said...


CHANGE IN MARVIN’S TOON, OR WOULD THAT BE TUNE

Greg Bishop said...

Paul,

Since I am a fan of both Warner Bros. cartoons (pre-1950) and crazy UFO personalities, this is one of those "Why didn't I think of that?" posts.

There is also the matter of my theory of the WB/ Disney dichotomy:

The Warner's animators were all drunk and had no supervision. The Disney animators were on psychedelics and had strict guidelines and supervision.

Does that make sense? I think it does.