monsterenergytwink:

monsterenergytwink:

bogleech:

tammiwulf:

dzamie:

adobe-outdesign:

you know how IRL scientists are always ready to throw hands over certain topics? what I want to know is what kind of stupid arguments Pokemon scientists get into fights over. a heated battle starts in the middle of a conference because someone asked if Slowking’s Shellder could be considered its own separate species or not

*scientist steps onto the stage*

*a photo of a Flygon appears on the projector screen*

*she hits the screen with a pointer stick*

“Bug.”

*entire auditorium erupts into furious shouting*

DEFINITELY BUG

I should clarify I agree that this would be a debate in canon because it is in the fandom, however, flygon is a reptile c:

Flygon is a living pun based on **dragon**fly. He has traits of both insects and reptiles. That being said he’s a big bug! He evolves from a pokemon based on a termite and one on a literal dragonfly. He is a bug in the shape of a dragon!

Correction: Trapinch is based on a different bug and I guessed species wrong. But point still stands that the flygon line should have been part bug! Bug/Dragon makes more sense than Ground/Dragon!

My best guess is that the taxonomy of pokemon is determined by their strengths and weaknesses. while logically flygon SHOULD be a bug/dragon, his weaknesses indicate ground/dragon. of course this means the entire classification and typing should be overhauled due to the limiting labels people put on it, much like our own world in regards to what exactly a reptile is and why birds should be reptiles but turtles shouldnt.