The way I see it... Marvel's science of what constitutes a Mutant is kinda funny sometimes. I get the whole born with the X-Gene thing, sure... but the way I see it, if your biology and genetics are altered or mutated to give you some odd power that separates you from normal humanity.... you are a mutant. I always thought it an odd differentiation that Cyclops , a guy with the physical ability to shoot lasers from his eyes IS a mutant, but Spider-Man, a guy with the physical abilities for a spider is not. If you were a Sentinel, and you were measuring the Human Norm scale when evaluating detecting Mutants.... wouldn't a wall crawling Spider Guy or a water breathing guy with Shark attributes read as a mutant?
As to the Tigershark thing... I wanted somebody to fit the "Wolverine" role without resorting to Wolverine or Sabretooth.
Yeah. This is why the X-men just don't make any sense to me. How can people be okay with characters like Thor & She-Hulk, but not Wolverine or Cyclops? I mean, what DOES really make them so different, other than "The X gene"? It really doesn't help that these days, the comics pretty much treat the X-men & the Brotherhood as practically one & the same, & now constantly refer to themselves as "homo superior". It's like the whole "good mutants/bad mutants" aspect just went right down the drain in order to have mind bendy, convoluted plot lines involving killer robots, parasitic aliens & sexy vampires. I mean, haven't mutants in the marvel universe had some kind of civil rights movement by now(& I don't think the X-men really count)?
There was a story arc a while back, in the 90's I think, where there was a new breed of sentinel that didn't care much to make the distinction. So there was an issue of X-Men where spider-man was actually the main character who came under fire from the sentinel threat while the X-men were basically "afk". So yeah, you make a good case.