Why do people keep trying to weaponize things that can wipe out the human race?

I know, right? It's like he doesn't into mad science.

Congratulations, you and everyone you know are dead because you dont have the first fucking clue how genetics works.

Even assuming that your only goal is genocidal racewar, its fucking inevitable that the virus will jump back to you because there is a whole genetic spectrum of people between you and the target for incremental changes and jumps.

Because if they can wipe out the human race that means they're obviously pretty effective at killing doesn't it? Come on, this is pretty intuitive.

>because you dont have the first fucking clue how genetics works.
If I'm a geneticist working on bio-weapons in this hypothetical I'm pretty sure I do.

That kind of negative outlook is exactly why you'll never be hired for my bioweapon R&D team user.

> Yes, but there is literally no way to do so without hitting yourself.
>Suppose you unleash a zombie plague
President of Madagascar seems to disagree with you.

>Yes, but there is literally no way to do so without hitting yourself.
Yes, and?

The general idea of viral development is that your guys have an inoculation or antidote

That's first law of bioweapons, yes. "Blowback" for bioweapons is kinda binary. Either you can handle it, and are almost entirely fine, or you can't and are pretty fucked. Hence, no messing about with shit like that mosquito sterility plague they've cooked up over in the Imperial College London because ecosystems are fiddly. CRISPR is awesome and also a little scary.

It's a gene drive, so it's inherited by a far greater proportion of offspring than the usual 50% (I think this is ninety-something, actually) and only sterilizes the females. They estimate the species would be gone in about a year if it was released properly.
I don't envy the ethics team who'd be processing that application.

>Considering any alternative for mosquitoes other then complete and utter annihilation.