>>46930423Charizard has more than enough evidence to suggest that it IS a dragon, but because it doesn't have the dumb typing, mind you for game balancing reasons, you're actually trying to argue that it's not a dragon at all. Meanwhile, you think that a fucking tree is a legitimate dragon just because it's based off a real life tree that contains fruit named "dragon", despite having no draconic features or characteristics whatsoever. If Lopunny, Pikachu, etc. had the dumb typing slapped onto it, then you would think those are legitimate dragons as well while still arguing against Charizard.
