“t is clear that there is a machlokes as to the color of techeiles: Rashi and various others say that Techeiles is ???? ????? yet the Kli Yakar says clearly that it is not ???? ?????.”
??? ??? is actually saying over ??”? ???? ?”? ?”?.
In addition to your claim “Rashi knew of the word ????”, it doesn’t seem ???? was a color but a colorant, therefore there was no word for blue other than ????.
“But that is a chiddush which other meforshim may not agree with.”
I went to great length to show you it’s not a chidush, tell me what’s shver and i’ll explain. Besides you can’t just w/o basis reject a ???? ???? based on “maybe someone who we didn’t find yet might argue.”
“And this is all besides for the fact that the actual murex trunculus isn’t even green.” The green is stuck on to it, how else should you describe it?! I the ?? ???? colored?
See ??”? ??”? ?-?
?? ??? ????? ????? ??? ???????? ???? ?????? ??? ?????? ???? ??????? ??? ??? ?????? ????? ??????? ????
How can something be called ???? if it’s only a coating that can be washed off and not ???? ?????
“who cares that the yam shel shlomo was not such a fan of him?”
It was a reference to “?? ??? ??? ??????”, being that the ??? ???? was coming from Chazal on this point, there’s no reason to count him against the ???? ????? on this point. The “letter from the Rambam” (besides for being ????? ?????) is referring to pshat not ?????.
“it is possible that ??”? is saying pshat in ???” ???? ????”. I.e. he is saying that when the mishna says ???? it means chilazon.”
Then he’d clearly be arguing on the Rishonim and ???? ????? ??????.