>>51469422>The fact that somehow you can't describe a Pokemon with animal name that's not in some arbitrary "species name".Because otherwise your "argument" doesn't work.
First,we have to assume that, by mentioning a species of elephant they weren't refering to said species of elephant(which everyone but you would call actual mental gymnastics).
Second, if the IE was ever a pokemon then that entry doesn't relate at all to the existence of animals in the setting, even during Gen 1, as it was refering to just another (unnamed, teased, according to you), pokemon, which makes this discussion(and basically any other instance the entry is brought up) moot.
Third, if it was a reference then not by species name, then you have to prove this to be the case and yet you only bring up the case of Mew, a mon that's always refered to as a pokemon AND by name, so it doesn't match your scenario.
The other time animals are linked to their pokemon inspirations are their species name, which is the logial next step. But, according to you this isn't the case. Well,
You claim there's others but haven't been able to provide an example. Plase do bring the allaged multiple cases of a mon being refered to by mentioning its animal basis.
