Pokemon vs Mortal Kombat!

Originally posted by GrieverSquall
Professor Oak created the Pokedex. And even if Westwood hasn't been presented in the games, that does not make the entries accurate. In fact, Westwood is the only reference we've got concerning the entries. And they aren't accurate. Lol.

Proof they aren't accurate?

In game, the player catches the Pokemon and the Pokedex scientifically records their abilities. Only time this is not done is when the Pokedex references myths.

Are the entries exaggerated to us? Obviously. But you can't prove them wrong by saying they appear exaggerated.

Strike 2.5.

You pokefreaks duriroll

Thats a negative, what proof is there that they are all accurate, or that even most of them are?

If their exaggerated then their not exactly fact. Just saying "their clearly correct/accurate because science did it!" does not make them undeniable.

Ditto.

Nemebro made the claim, thus he must back it up.

Originally posted by Burning thought
Thats a negative, what proof is there that they are all accurate, or that even most of them are?

If their exaggerated then their not exactly fact. Just saying "their clearly correct/accurate because science did it!" does not make them undeniable.

Good to know.

So they are accurate because they are accurate? Circular logic?

You're not particularly bright are you?

They are accurate because a scientificially advanced community created and published them through vigorous study of the Pokemon, the Pokedex intended to be used as a scientific encyclopedia.

Just because I am a genius beyond compare, truly a paragon, an intellectual heavyweight, does not mean you can simply quote arguments I have used for any occasion.

Because we all know the games must be wrong about things inside the game right? Ultimecia never destroyed the universe, the game was exaggerating right? 😮

I have my own problems with the Pokedex but none of which I care to bring up. Mostly because they're minor problems.

You're fat.

gay_rage Dark Khan solos 131

Originally posted by NemeBro
You're fat.

6'1 and 152 pounds.

Originally posted by TheAuraAngel
6'1 and 152 pounds.

You're a ****ing string-bean.

Originally posted by NemeBro
Nevermind.

You're a ****ing string-bean.

I know right? I eat at least 2 whole pizzas every week and I don't get fat. 😮

Originally posted by XanatosForever
gay_rage Dark Khan solos 131

Originally posted by NemeBro
So you have no basis in saying that are not accurate when all points to them being accurate?

Good to know.

What points them to being accurate? so far we have some sort of hyperbole that Charizard can melt any material, that already displays a fallacy, hasty generalisation so either the science is not too bright or not well studied OR, the pokedex is simply a rough source for kids like Ash to pull out and get a brief idea on what hes looking at.

No matter the suggestion, theres still no reason to belive its not fallible.

Originally posted by NemeBro
They are accurate because a scientificially advanced community created and published them through vigorous study of the Pokemon

Proof for this please. Also a canon source on what a Pokedex is designed for would also be nice. Not all publications, even those from strong sources have no errors.

Oh shut the **** up BT.

I find it questionable how 'advanced' a society can be on the subject of pokemon when they discover about 150 new species every few years, lol.

Plus the pokedex has always bugged me. You're given them to record the data of new pokemon but the data entries are already written? Why are you recording them if they already know stuff about them? Is it just bragging rights? If thats not it, where do the entries come from? I iz confuse.

Originally posted by Nephthys
I find it questionable how 'advanced' a society can be on the subject of pokemon when they discover about 150 new species every few years, lol.

Plus the pokedex has always bugged me. You're given them to record the data of new pokemon but the data entries are already written? Why are you recording them if they already know stuff about them? Is it just bragging rights? If thats not it, where do the entries come from? I iz confuse.

Well the new Pokemon are always on a new and different continent. Since Oak's Pokedex was only designed to record Pokemon from Kanto, any the Oak doesn't have a vague idea about wouldn't show up. Granted that brings up problems because Oak prepares for the possibility of long dead fossil Pokemon.

Here is what I've always assumed the Pokedex to be for. If you encounter a Pokemon it records simple data(obviously because you can't study it in depth.) When you catch a new Pokemon, one of your old ones evolve, or whatever, the Pokedex does an extensive analysis of said Pokemon which is where the entries come from.

This of course leads to one major problem I have with the Pokedex.

That can't be it because it mentions myths and shit sometimes rather than actual facts.

Which is....?

Originally posted by NemeBro
You're not particularly bright are you?

They are accurate because a scientificially advanced community created and published them through vigorous study of the Pokemon, the Pokedex intended to be used as a scientific encyclopedia.

Just because I am a genius beyond compare, truly a paragon, an intellectual heavyweight, does not mean you can simply quote arguments I have used for any occasion.

I'm jawsome.

That makes absolutely, guess what, no sense. And an irrelevant as well as baseless verbiage won't support your desired claim, I'm afraid to say. Prove Machamp can ACTUALLY perform such feats, or stfu (JK). But yes, prove it.

Westwood says otherwise. I quoted an statement from Bulbapedia, not from you, lol. And as far as Pokedex entries are concerned they has been stated to be inaccurate. Now you prove they aren't.

Pokedex is full of hyperbole, inconsistencies and shit.