HeiseiGodzilla117 wrote:He's not a sea reptile. He's a fish. Everything about his early form is far more similar to different types of fish than any marine reptile. Especially the eyes and gills. He's very similar to eels and frilled sharks. He only becomes reptilian in subsequent forms. Hell, he had to evolve back legs to move on land.
Nope, he's a sea reptile. Supplementary material states he is a sea reptile, concept art shows him resembling a mosasaur at an early stage, and he resembles a mosasaur through form 2. His teeth resemble sea reptile teeth, which are small and conical, and looks NOTHING like the teeth of an eel or a frilled shark. Growing back legs would be easier for a marine reptile because marine reptiles still retain functional limbs with fingers and wrists. He has gills, sure. However, said Sea Reptile has had 65,000,000 years to evolve gills. Large eyes? Another adaptation for the deep sea. His body is long and serpentine with a tapering tail, unlike eels who are laterally flattened and have NO GILLS (They have sphericles) or have a single gill slit on either side of the body. If he's a fish(Which he's not), he's a frilled shark, not an eel of any shape or form.
Maki has studied Godzilla's DNA, which he extracted when Godzilla was still in the deep sea. The DNA would show what type of animal he was. Maki states he's a reptile, not a fish. The only official piece of evidence which shows him as a fish is ONE SINGLE PICTURE that doesn't even specify what type of animal he was (It has a huge pink question mark over it and the passage dubiously state shim to be a "Marine life form"). Evidence points toward him being a sea reptile, he looks like a sea reptile, so I'm calling him a sea reptile until Toho officially changes his origins from "Mutated marine reptile" to "Mutated fish". You could argue Godzilla 1954 isn't a reptile because he has gills by your logic.