>>17964074>I've only cited in game examples. Period. This statement is bullshit, pure and simple.You've cited only the in game examples that support your case, and you've put out a lot of imagination (just the fact that the cradle character is a perfectly legit source of information is something you've said, not what Game Freak has said either way) into it to explain the rest. You've glanced over and ignored several of my key arguments, and misrepresented others to support your own stand. I'm aware of the whole buzzword deal, but I'm genuinely beginning to think you're autistic - you're taking everything 100% literally without regards for the fact that it's a game world with its own inconsistencies, your argument for them not being animals with regards to Pokeballs is "it's not possible in real life so it's not possible in this fictional universe" and you're not indicating you see anything but black and white in my arguments.
The issue is left ambiguous, and you or I have no way of knowing what is fact and what isn't because there's a lot of inconsistencies and unexplained shit either way. The only thing you can reliably say is that your interpretation is different to others, not that theirs is necessarily incorrect. The whole point of what I've been trying to say is that Pokemon could just as easily be animals as they could whatever you think they are - there are several different viewpoints with supporting facts and theories, and you're retarded if you think that your interpretation is the only correct one. Until it's confirmed either way what Pokemon specifically are and specifically how they breed (not going to happen because E for everyone), I'll maintain my opinion.
And I'm done, because I'm not sure I'll ever convince you, but I hope you'll consider that there's more viewpoints beyond your own, and that, same as yours, they're not provably incorrect.
