If I remember correctly you once inferred on your site that nearly all of the Columbians that were in the U.S. had been "mutts" for years...that just certain snakes, those that were bought by people that you knew,who knew people who personally collected the animals,who then sold them to certain people,who were familiar with certain other people, who fingerprinted those people's contacts over "there", were "pure" Columbians.So... would that make nearly everyone(including those over "here" who tend to agree with nearly every word you say)over "here" the proud but somewhat misguided owners of mutt Columbians?.Over "here",but not over "there"? Once again I guess my question is...and??????..... which is really not a question unless you raise your voice at the end,so I raised my voice at the end of and making it very question-like,even though it isn't usually,but now is.
Now,we all know that concerning the locality specific imported animals,it is really a crapshoot.That is,once again,unless it is someone that YOU know,trust or believe in over "there"... with the exception of a few over
"here" that might know someone over "there" who knows someone over "here" who believes in those few over "there".And???(voice raised).
Now,concerning the HoggIsland Boas,it is a popular concept that nearly all of the larger Hoggs have some Columbian blood in them,therefore, if I am thinkly clearly(which is indeed doubtful),then is it remotely possible that some (all,none,or any combination?)of the Hoggs over"here" might also be mutts?So,if breeder A bought a Hogg off of the internet or at a show"here" a few years ago and breeds it with a Hogg that the next door neighbor bought off of the internet,then the offspring would be "pure" Hoggs,"possible pure Hoggs", or a "damned if I really know pure Hogg" ,(but I am sure gonna bitch about one that I know isn't a pure Hogg even if the guy admits it is not a pure Hogg).Now,if the offspring are sold as pure (as far as the seller knows) and breeder B crosses them with a hypo and advertises them as just that,which one is being perfectly honest? Both..neither...either,none of the above,the one that I agree or disagree with? Once again I ask: And?????(voice raised but throat getting sore).
Concerning the message that started the thread,if what you stated is true,and the source over "there"is correct,I ask again..and???? However,if the source isn't true and the inference that Rich Isle is a marketing shyster and a teller of tales has now been posted on an internet source,I wonder if the attornies are better over "there" than over "here" and if Otto is too thrilled that his name is now involved and if an LOL after the sentence implying his dishonesy is enough to make Rich laugh out loud...and I know that was one huge run-on sentence.