Quote Originally Posted by OTorresUSMC View Post
Well that's sort of what I'm getting at I feel as tho there is already enough info out there to avoid those particular pairings. Let's face it these are genes that have been around for years and if those offspring were viable they would already exist. And I'm not saying people are doing it to see them die I'm saying they are doing it like you trying to see "welllll is it really lethal" I just personally believe there is enough info to make that call. If pearls or super spiders were viable Nerd would already be selling them for 3K a piece lol.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
The only info is the absence of records or the animal itself. Try finding records of a woma x woma pairing, most refer to hgw x hgw before people knew they were hgw and not woma. woma x spiders are claimed to be viable by many as "they have one" yet I haven't been able to find one that actually proved out to have both woma and spider gene. So there no evidence of them being lethal besides the absence of evidence. What if woma is just a dominant morph, what if spider womas are allelic. Given I feel it is unlikely looking at correlations with other neuro morphs, still the thing is we don't know, we just assume. I'm even fine with educated assuming, but what data are we assuming based off of? Almost nothing.

Pinstripes used to be in the same situation, people shouting about how they don't exist and/or are lethal. Yet there was no evidence to back that claim up either, then we had a couple people prove them out (given both poorly documented) so here we are 16 years after the gene was founded and finally have a few people that might start proving out a super pin transparently. Bad information and believing in the absence of evidence is the reason we haven't seen super pins on the market for 10 years.