>>55617067>Peer review doesn't magically solve things like >>55616680It certainly solves attaching a raptor to a stegosaurus as with exposed muscle tissue.
>It becomes nonsensical Only because you can only envision your pokemon existing in a snapshot of time between their discovery and someone discovering Cara is a retard and refuse to acknowledge any of the ideas presented to you.
>No uAnon, that's just pathetic. Did that take you two hours to come up with?
>If the correct ones exist at all then the whole concept makes no fucking senseSo the fact that the correct interpretation of a t-rex exists means this one
>>55616680 makes no sense? I mean, you see that picture right there, bro. Clearly a badly postured t-rex as a concept didn't get chronally erased because we learned better.
>Technically we don'tYes we do. Don't be an idiot. You're not a three year old, you know she's wrong, and the game wants you to know she's wrong. Them being as ridiculous as they are is to make that obvious to young children.
>The scientist with the machine would know about themIf the fossils are newly uncovered, why would she know about them? Why would she know about the correct reconstruction before experimenting with them? How do you miss that her name is Cara Liss and she's purposefully characterized as a dirty lazy retard?
>It completely destroys the pointThe point is that they're wrongly constructed fossils to spoof how early paleontologists weren't very careful or scientific in their reconstructions. Adding MORE wrong reconstructions and letting you discover the proper reconstruction doesn't hurt this concept at all, it extends and enhances it by now referencing how later science corrected our misunderstandings.
Like I said before, you just want to deny people the chance to have the proper pokemon out of spite, even within a concept that allows you to keep your freaks.
