Human & Dino footprints, and Dating strata & fossils?

Interesting read, but where does one find the photo that he used? I'd love to take a look at the full-sized version, but all I see are thumbnails.

Gary discusses the prints here:

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=116486&page=3

go to the bottom of the next page for a piccie. A computer guy then argues that Gary can't make his inference as the resolution isn't high enough. I think what Gary highlights looks quite clear, but the computer guy disagrees.

Lying to children for Jesus is big business.

I am certainly that these are the same people who would regard The Flinstones as a cartoon drama based on science fact, not science fiction (For a real life example of which I can refer you to Ken Ham's Creation Museum of Natural History. Unfortunately, I don't recall reading any references there to Dino or Bam-Bam.).

Cheers,

John
(aka "Jekyll and Hyde of Paleobiology courtesy of Uncommon Dissent IDiot Borg drone DaveScot Springer)

The imprint of the big toe looks strange to me, but maybe humans toes have evolved since then ...

debunking these people does not work, they will accept anything some scam artist tell them, example they are still buying into "found Noah's Ark", showing proof that scam artists have devised. Just Silly!

My favorite line from the original article:

"A technical writer for Texas Instruments in Dallas, Lines said he’s no expert on rocks, but he said he has no doubt the Delk rock is real and the prints are legitimate."

You *have* to belief testimony when it's prefaced by "he's no expert"!

In addition to Gary's excellent critique of this canard, there is an even simpler mistake made by the counterfeiter.

The center "toe" of the dinosaur footprint was an indentation in a raised soil matrix which surrounds the distal end of the digit and which extends into the central area of the "human" indentation (which by the way is a remaracably flat foot). In order to step onto an existing indentation in soft sediment and raise a mound of soil in front of the digits to the same height as the native soil on the far side (outside) of the original indentation, the foot of the dinosaur would have needed to slide forward, pushing, or bulldozing soil ahead of it. There is no evidence of movement within the dinosaur footprint, but subsequent erosion could have removed shallow grooves. However, based on the heel of the dinosaur footprint it is evident that this animal was not moving forward at a rapid rate and that the foot did not skid in the sediment. The foot was placed pretty much directly downward and lifted in much the same manner. The flat base of the dino footprint is further evidence that the animal was not moving rapidly (there are typically deeper heel and toe indentations when an animal is "running" which is also the condition in which the heel indentation has an initial strike surface which is not vertical beutwhich records the angle of contact with the ground as the animal moved forward. Under that scenario, the toe imprints are also deeper as the animal spings off its toes to maintain forward momentum.

this is the footprint of either a stanionary animal or one which was moving at a liesurly pace but the raised soil in front of the prominent medial digit would require forward movement at a rate which is not supported by the other evidence int he print.

Tom

Tom G(eologist) said: this is the footprint of either a stanionary animal or one which was moving at a liesurly pace but the raised soil in front of the prominent medial digit would require forward movement at a rate which is not supported by the other evidence int he print. Tom

I am glad you liked the discussion. I think that Tom also made a good point. However, I don't know to what extent a track could be distortied by slumping, recoil or burial, or during lithification.

My best guess without directly examining the object is that some real track has been altered to fake the "human" footprint.

The features in the newspaper photo that I see indicating a fake patina created with an acid wash are also seen in a second news photo from a slightly different angle. If creationist photograph expert "sparko" at the TWeb site were correct that these don't exist, then I must marvel that they are reproduced in two separate images.

Carl Baugh is not a total fool. He's identified the dinosaur print as probably belonging to a juvenile acrocanthosaurus. There are a lot of prints from that beastie around Glen Rose.

It looks like a print from Fred Flintstone's pet, Dino, to me.

By the way, today is the 75th anniversary of the creation of Alley Oop. Baugh didn't cite Alley Oop because the Glen Rose paper doesn't carry the strip, I'll wager.

Also, Baugh's print shows one of the worst cases of mallet toe in a human ever recorded, pre-history or in history.

Ed Darrell said: Carl Baugh is not a total fool. He's identified the dinosaur print as probably belonging to a juvenile acrocanthosaurus. There are a lot of prints from that beastie around Glen Rose. It looks like a print from Fred Flintstone's pet, Dino, to me. By the way, today is the 75th anniversary of the creation of Alley Oop. Baugh didn't cite Alley Oop because the Glen Rose paper doesn't carry the strip, I'll wager.

It's extraordinary that this fossil just happened to turn up near the museum, and it was found by a guy who needed some cash.

Also, what does this say about gaps in the fossil record? If humans lived in the Cretaceous, then it proves that a species can live for tens of millions of years without leaving any known fossils. Geez, no wonder there are so many gaps!

My hypothesis: It's Doctor Who's footprint.

But Doctor Who wouldn't have been barefoot. ;)

(Geek Rant On)

Nnnnnggggggaaahahhhhhh!

The character is named "The Doctor", NOT "Doctor Who"

(Matherly's brain asplode)

(Geek Rant Off)

Jason Wise said: My hypothesis: It's Doctor Who's footprint.

I just listened to the excretal 10 minute lecture about paleontology by Dr. Ron Carlson. With Hovind in jail, Carlson has a real chance to break into the lead as the biggest living liar in creationism. Go to Joe Meert’s site. He was a hero for sitting through the whole thing. (I had to take several breaks and two beers).

Eric said: Ok serious question - what sort of dinosaur? I'm curious (about the original track, not the creo blather)

Did they get so caught up in fakery that they forgot that they didn't need to fake the human foot? I mean, I can see why you'd need to fake the dino print, but as for human feet, last time I checked all most people have to do is look down and, what do you know, there are two of them!

(The Doctor and the Tal Shiar in the same thread? i feel like a kid on Festivus morning!)

but i think comparisons with the Obsidian Order are more apt. there are FIVE lights, after all

Gary:
In response to "I am glad you liked the discussion. I think that Tom also made a good point. However, I don’t know to what extent a track could be distortied by slumping, recoil or burial, or during lithification"

The middle dino toe has raised matric at the leading and lateral edges, but the left toe terminates into the heel of the "human" print at the same depth. Can't be!!!! Also, distortion by slumping occurs on the inside of fossile imprints, not on the outside. Moreover, no other part of the print is distorted.
Burial would cause no distortion because preservation of a print of this type and quality occurs requires that the original sediment is hardened sufficiently prior to burial to maintain its original shape.
Lithification (induration) can not accoujt for that kind of distortion - at least not if the counterfeiter wants to maintain a claim that X-Rays and MRIs prove that induration did not distort compression features in the matrix below the prints. A rock in which such features are preserved can not have undergone post-depositional deformation of the type which would be required to create the disparate features on the hand-specimen scale.

This is not even a good fake - it violates the principle of superposition on two accounts.

Tom

Cool, Tom. I was trying to find any out for Baugh, if only to seal it closed. Would you mind mirroring you comment to Stones and Bones, just to keep everything in one place?

Done

I apologize up front for the completely off-topic question, but I'm hoping PT folks know more about this than I do: for the Comer v. Scott case, I thought the Texas Education Agency's 'Defense answer to complaint' was due at the end of July. Have they submitted it yet? Has anyone seen it? Has there been a delay in the case?

Jason Wise said: My hypothesis: It's Doctor Who's footprint.

Did they get so caught up in fakery that they forgot that they didn’t need to fake the human foot? I mean, I can see why you’d need to fake the dino print, but as for human feet, last time I checked all most people have to do is look down and, what do you know, there are two of them!

Eric said: I apologize up front for the completely off-topic question, but I'm hoping PT folks know more about this than I do: for the Comer v. Scott case, I thought the Texas Education Agency's 'Defense answer to complaint' was due at the end of July. Have they submitted it yet? Has anyone seen it? Has there been a delay in the case?

You know, of course, that nuts claiming to find human footprints in old strata is nothing new. For example:
http://s8int.com/phile/page56.html
Anything that vaguely resembles a footprint is claimed to be big trouble for "evolutionists", whoever they are.

Patrick said: Interesting read, but where does one find the photo that he used? I'd love to take a look at the full-sized version, but all I see are thumbnails.

Just read Gary's blog entry and the comments. Man, that Frogger guy is really a credulous moron, isn't he?

Remember Baugh the next time some creatomoron starts some Piltdown dribble. Fake religious artifacts have been famous since Geoffrey Chaucer wrote "The Pardoner's Tale." These wonderful lines will forever define the pious fraud:

"Thou wouldest make me kiss thine olde breech,
And swear it were a relic of a saint,
Though it were with thy fundament stained by your shit
But, by the cross which that Saint Helen found
I would I had thy testicles in mine hand,
Instead of relics, or of sanctuary.

Let us cut them off, I will thee help them carry;
They shall be enshrined in a hogge’s turd."

Gary Hurd said: "Thou wouldest make me kiss thine olde breech, And swear it were a relic of a saint, Though it were with thy fundament stained by your shit But, by the cross which that Saint Helen found I would I had thy testicles in mine hand, Instead of relics, or of sanctuary. Let us cut them off, I will thee help them carry; They shall be enshrined in a hogge’s turd."

Wolfhound said: Just read Gary's blog entry and the comments. Man, that Frogger guy is really a credulous moron, isn't he?

Remember that the human foot has evolved--you'd need a foot that had not been confined by shoes to make any kind of credible print.

clerihew said: Remember that the human foot has evolved--you'd need a foot that had not been confined by shoes to make any kind of credible print.

Maybe its just me, but both prints appear to be the same depth. Wouldn't a much heavier dinosaur leave a deeper impression? It was actually, more likely a flying dragon, which as we all know, are much lighter. Just fits the evidence better. David

Torbjörn Larsson, OM said:

Jason Wise said: My hypothesis: It's Doctor Who's footprint.

But then why isn't Who's on first, What's on second, and I Don't Know there's a third?

John Kwok said: Dear Torbjörn, You mean to tell me that the Flintstones played baseball way back when:

John Kwok said: here's the "proof" for Klingon Cosmology:

And presumably, those ancient humanoids seeded the Klingon home world, as well. lol.

Torbjörn Larsson, OM said:

John Kwok said: Dear Torbjörn, You mean to tell me that the Flintstones played baseball way back when:

Dear John, as you say in your proof of Klingon Cosmology, the Flintstones is on television, and we know what's on television is real, right?

John Kwok said: here's the "proof" for Klingon Cosmology:

Well, I'm convinced! But I'm afraid I have to split off a new religion dissenting with your Kwok-Roddenberry Intelligent Design (KRID) hypothesis; the New Generation says it was the ancient humanoids that seeded Earth, not Klingons.

Henry J said: And presumably, those ancient humanoids seeded the Klingon home world, as well. lol.

(OOPS, sorry. Wrong science fiction television show.….).

YOU EVILUTIONISTS never shy from Blasphemy, The Vorlons are our one true GOD!! He revealed himself to captain Sheridan and those who receive a Vorlon into his heart will be spared the fires of Z'hadum!!
Repent now! It's not too late!!

Here's an interesting/funny report from Baugh's museum which is well worth reading:

http://home.houston.rr.com/bybayouu/Paluxy_trip.html

It's a pity Jon Stewart's piece on Baugh isn't still available on Youtube (it was removed for copyright reasons). It was really funny.

Draconiz said: YOU EVILUTIONISTS never shy from Blasphemy, The Vorlons are our one true GOD!! He revealed himself to captain Sheridan and those who receive a Vorlon into his heart will be spared the fires of Z'hadum!! Repent now! It's not too late!!

Peter Henderson said: It's a pity Jon Stewart's piece on Baugh isn't still available on Youtube (it was removed for copyright reasons). It was really funny.

Dear John,

It depends on what they say when they first meet you, is it

"Who are you?" or "What do you want?"

Honestly I think the DI people are more like the Drakhs, crude imitators and recycled tired old technologies are pretty good indications.

Don

Jasper said:

Peter Henderson said: It's a pity Jon Stewart's piece on Baugh isn't still available on Youtube (it was removed for copyright reasons). It was really funny.

I think I found that video here.

Draconiz said: Dear John, It depends on what they say when they first meet you, is it "Who are you?" or "What do you want?" Honestly I think the DI people are more like the Drakhs, crude imitators and recycled tired old technologies are pretty good indications. Don

I did a bit more reading on X-ray CT of geological specimens at the University of Texas, Austin. The so-called compression density changes are an error caused by incorrectly calibrating the difference between air, and rock. This caused the image software to outline the open "track." This is particularly a problem with beam energies that are too low for the sample material. Medical CTs use a beam of less than 140 kev, geological material should be examined well above this, even as high as ~400 kev.

The phoney "compression density" is really the density difference between air and rock.

I would guess that UT, Austin is close enough to Baugh that they might wander over there for a confirmation.

This isn't proof, but it does give me reason to question this so called evidence's authenticity.

The toes on the human foot print seem off to me. I drew lines through the middle of the toes and extended them down the length of the foot. What I noticed was this:

First some definitions. 1 width (W) equals the width of the foot from side to side at the center of the heel of the foot. Toe 1 (T1) is the big toe and Toe 5 (T5) is the little toe with the toes in between being labeled T2, T3, and T4. The point that I'm measuring to is the intersection point of each toe line with a line that is tangent to the bottom center of the foot and the bottom center of the foot itself.

1. Toe1 (T1) lines up slightly to the right of center of the back of the foot. its distance is about 0.1W to the right of center

2. T2 has a distance of about 1.3W to the left of center

3. T3 has a distance of about 1.1W to the left of center

4. T4 has a distance of about 1.3W to the left of center

5. T5 has a distance of about 0.6W to the left of center

6. T1 and T2 have a pretty large gap between them

I then took off my shoes and socks, stood up and looked at my toes and observed this:

a. Imaginary lines extending from each of my toes to the back of my foot lined up within about 0.2W to the left or right of center. This is inconsistent with observations 2,3,4, and 5

b. The toes on the right lined up slightly to the right of center. This is inconsistent with observations 4 and 5

c. The toes on the left lined up slightly to the left of center. This is inconsistent with observations 1 and 2

d. The toe in the middle lined up in the center. This is inconsistent with observation 3

the only way I could get any of my toes to even begin to point as far left as are indicated in the fossil was to stand on the inside of my foot. The problem is that I still couldn't get them to point as far left as the fossil shows, and T1 and T2 were always forced together (inconsistent with observation 6).

Feel free to try this at home. Tell me what you find.

It is important to keep in mind that human feet that have never seen shoes are shaped very differently than ours. Their toes and metatarsels will spread much farther apart from years of walking around unencumbered. Any supposed prehistoric human track that looks anything like a modern industrial era foot is clearly fake.

This has entered round two with the publication today of a new promotion of this fraud by the Mineral Wells Index.

They are not pretending to be unbiased, which is a surprising honesty.

This has entered round two with the publication today of a new promotion of this fraud by the Mineral Wells Index.

They are not pretending to be unbiased, which is a surprising honesty.

Gee, credulous morons in a lickspittle backwater of Texas? Say it ain't so!

Hello, IANAGeologist, but from what did this stone form? Calcite sands? I can't think of many things that are soft and squishy and turn into limestone. Sandstone, mudstone, shale, yes. But are there many foot impressions in limestone? (Yes I know I should research before posting. Maybe next time...)

I added an update:

http://stonesnbones.blogspot.com/

I am trying not to point out that Baugh has made a living by promoting obvious fakes.

HaHaHaHa!!!

Just saw a "Creation in the 21st Century" where "Drs." Baugh and Jackson said the first cell could not possibly have formed because the precursor chemicals would have instantly *BIO*degraded before having a chance to form a cell. (hehehe always entertaining)

Oh, maybe someone could add that to talkorigins. Spontaneous and UV degradation are there but not bio. (ha! I'm still laughing)

"We look for things to make us go." -- the aforementioned 'doctors'.

There are some new photos posted on a website by Baugh supporter David Lines.

One in particular showed that I was mistaken about the bubble pattern in the "dinosaur toes." Ironically, at the same time the bubbly pattern of a fake acid applied "patina" was more clearly seen than before in the ball of the "human foot print."

Additionally, when examining these same photos, it is even more obvious that there was no "compression" or distortion of the natural stratification of the original rock. The only possible way these marks were made was by removal, and not by impression. I looked very carefully in the weird pit claimed to be the "human big toe" and there is obviously additional disturbed matrix. A deep root mold? It sure aint a toe.

There will be, I suppose, more events to follow. Someone called "froggy" who seems to be connected either to Baugh, the small town newspaper, or both, keeps promising new revelations on my personal blog, Stones and Bones.

This "Delk footprint" is just the latest example of many Cretaceous "man tracks" and other dubious objects Carl Baugh and associates have promoted over the years. For my review of it please see:
http://paleo.cc/paluxy.htm

One thing I really like about blogs is that they spark an idea in my brain. When that happens, I feel like I need to provide feedback expecting it may be pleasant to some people. Considering the fact that there are lots of weblogs with completely different points of view, they encourage your thinking. It really is at these moments when you have fantastic insignt other people may not have had, along with the blogger him/herself. I find myself coming back to your site simply because you have many brilliant insights and you have been at this a while, that is very inspiring and tells me you know a lot. Keep sparking imagination in other people!