Quote Originally Posted by AaronP View Post
That...is a contradiction.

We're not doing a Trial by Jury, juries can be wrong, we're talking cold hard facts.
No, it isn't. I used "make" in that sentence as "turn from falsity into truth." Your definition from MW is basically what I'm trying to get across. I used the jury example because of the phrase, "Innocent until proven guilty." I admit, it is a loose definition of "proven," and it's a rather poor example.

Here's a better one: I wore a coat today. Now, I have no proof that I wore a coat today, but just because I don't have proof doesn't mean I didn't wear a coat today.

I figure I should also mention that I am a scientist, so for me, "facts" are merely tautologies.

Quote Originally Posted by JayCee View Post
Do you assume the big breeders in the industry are complete morons and never thought to try and prove out the Spider gene ?? Do you assume the first to dabble into the Spider gene weren't in a race to try and create the first "Super Spider" ?? Do you assume these same breeders only bred 1 male spider to 1 female spider, didn't hit the Super and just gave up ??
No, I don't. However, I find it odd that no one seems willing to come forward with any hard evidence of what the Spider gene really is. All we hear about is "so-and-so said this" or "I heard that...." I have yet to see a breeder who has tried the Spider x Spider thing for several years come forward with quantitative results.