>>55174228>he dodged my questionNo one is dodging your question lmao, we are just wondering why you think anything about pokemon contradicts some of them being animals
>nopeI'm just gonna stop responding lol, you are obviously stupid
>The white color, round shape embedded in the rest of its fleshy head, and the black sclera make it look like a skull.I see the skull now but its a bit too subtle and doesnt really add anything to the design
>And then you proceeded to recolor its head and ruin the idea so it looks even less like a skull than the official design does.It still looks like a skull, not in the same way the original does. Its more of a crocodile with skull eye sockets and an exposed jaw mandible, which puts the skull look at the forefront instead of just making it a subtle pattern thats also meant to look like a stage
>Your lack of self awareness here is funny.And yet you still fail to prove how a "mysterious fictional creature" excludes animals
>Yes. So not necessarily animals. Glad you agree.I never argued against this. But being not necessarily an animal doesnt exclude animals.
>Did you?Nope I have it right here. So let's take a look at what you said
>it's not an animal because its mysterious, fictional, and a creatureI never said those things necessitated being, an animal, you were making a claim that that necessitates not being an animal
which is false because animals can be mysterious, fictional, and a creature
>>55174232I'm not saying it does, he was the one who invited the comparison
