>>32261870>The question IS incoherent as I said multiple times.And my claim is that the question's generality and incoherence leaves it open to interpretation, precluding easy either/or answers to it. This is not hard to understand, and if you honestly believed the question was incoherent, you'd have agreed with me from the start.
>Your intepretation is not internally coherent because it assumes forms and species are the same thing.I never suggested that at all, and I've never claimed that forms and species are the same -- I've not been using "mon" as a synonym for "species" you absolute dope.
>Giratina o being not a species shit all over your argument.My claim was never that, say, a-Exeggutor was a new species, you impossible buffoon.
>Also , giratina is from gen 4This has nothing to do with the argument I put forward. Giratina-o is from Platinum, not Diamond or Pearl in the same way that a-Exeggutor is from gen 7, not 1. Giratina-O originating in Platinum means, if we want to narrow it down to a specific game, it's a Platinum Pokémon -- likewise, A-Exeggutor originating in gen 7 means it (Alolan Exeggutor specifically, not Exegutor in general) is a gen 7 Pokémon.
Again, I'm not saying this is the one correct answer to the question. This all boils down to how you're interpreting an incoherent question -- because you can interpret the question itself in a variety of ways, there is no clear answer to the question unless we specify it further -- what about this claim is hard to understand?
>The only possible solution is that a mon.is from the gen.it originatedNo fucking shit. Again, if we frame the question in a certain way, I'd agree. But why would anyone be asking "Where did exeggutor originate?" To say "gen 1 Pokémon are from gen 1" is just a truism, which is why I didn't interpret the question as "which generation did a-forms species originate?"
>i'll only reply if you make an actual point.nice snark, ya goober
