As far as this realting to who has the most paid for education and the most years in breeding, I may nit have as much as some people here, this does not make my knowledge any less relevant. I have been following ball pythons since the 90's. I remember when pieds were being sold for 50k. I have talked and do talk to the biggest breeders. People who have created the world firsts. I have owned ball pythons (pied hets being the very first) for several years and have been breeding them for 6. That does not give me the most experience, but I do have experience.
One gene can influence others. I have said this before. Normals can and do look other than normal. Does this make them other than normal? Loik at Brents prospects for example. He goes through thousands of animals. How many of those actually end up being anything but? I bet a large majority. Again if a couple het pieds are put in a group of 20 or 30 "unusual" normals, I bet you that they could not 100% correctly be pulled out.
These experts have also failed to answer my question. I can pull out our het lavs from possible het and het breedings. Does this make them non recessive?
So little is actually know about the ball python mutations. We can guess all we want. I can tell you as theory based on my knowledge that the homo pearl and the spider sable probably suffer from a leathal frame shift mutation. One that causes damage to an esential function of a protein. Spiders probably suffer from a damaged protein that affects the nervous sytem.
I am not saying that nothing can change. What I am saying is that just because you think your right that it has to be because you have a phd or you know more than everyone else. Why confuse everyone else with your thoughts? Why muddy things up more. Prove out your theory dont just rock the boat.