Quote Originally Posted by OhhWatALoser View Post
talk to kevin directly if you want to hear him say it. I would also disagree that that it would make it a most likely scenario, just because something looks similar doesn't make it the same. your using another gene to make the comparison, I don't see that as evidence at all... by your logic how can spider + hidden gene woma be fine? looks like champ has a better chance of being the issue.
champ + spider = not good
spider + hidden gene woma = good
champ + hidden gene woma = not good
the evidence is no more of a stretch, than its completely normal gene and we just haven't had one proved out publicly.

anything else I have to say has already been said, this argument goes round and round. want to skip to the bottom line there is no proof of any theory, so why not wait until there is something worth talking about to come out? you use words like definitely when there is nothing definite about this entire subject......
Absence is not proof but it is evidence as we would expect to see homozygous spiders. The long the absence persists the stronger that evidence becomes. As for woma hidden and champain, are these allelic? That would explain alot. Regardless the reason we continue to talk about this instead of waiting for proof is the community has members who are considering a spider x spider pairing. If this gene is lethal then a clutch of 6 viable eggs could have been 8 if bred to normals with the same odds at 4 spider hatchlings either way. What if a homozygous spider has a much worse wobble. A spider x spider pairing could result in selling a problem animal as a pet. Not everyone has no vested interest in this topic.