I'm serious.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/paw

Look up the definition of a paw. I think you have a sort of mixed up definition of what it is. Possibly a different definition used among your "bat expert" friends.

And I quote (again):

   Paw: the foot of a quadruped (such as a lion or dog) that has claws
   broadly : the foot of an animal

Both the broad and technical definition of paw fits what the bat has. Bats have paws.

The thing you are referring to is likely are these soft pads that are often on the paws, sometimes called paw pads.

Also, I don't know if you noticed.

But this nuance in the definition of the word paw was addressed by chatGPT.

Well, if you're looking for my opinion, I don't think they're trolling. But I do think both of you were (intentionally or unintentionally) goading each other from a disagreement to an argument with your rhetoric (eg, where you said, "let's assume that's a reasonable source", or when they said "you obviously sourced this it just didn't match your point so you discarded it" - that brings up the temperature of the conversation).

This is a good analysis, thanks. He just told me that bats are quadrupeds...

Reminds me of: https://www.gocomics.com/calvinandhobbes/1989/11/03

Bats are quadrupeds. When they walk they walk like a pterodactyl with the elbow of the wing. They don't stand on their hind legs. See the vampire bat.

The person you queried mentioned "intentional goading." Which is what you're continuing to do with that Calvin and Hobbes link. I think this, the flag and accusing me of trolling is taking it too far. A little goading is ok during a debate, I returned the goad (which I shouldn't have), but ultimately I didn't have a problem with it. I think, now though, it has escalated now past the point of no return. I think I'll be exiting this thread. Farewell.

It does bring up the temp, I apologize for including you in that. I appreciate your reply.