Brian

Hand prints

22 posts in this topic

1 hour ago, Brian said:

So I ask why there are not more hand prints found ? and after 272 views no one has left an opinion why ? So the pictures were distracting. I should have left them separate ! Anyway somebody comment on why thy do not think they are more hand prints left ?

 

Sorry Brian, there could be 5000 views but as with most thing BF related most likely we just don’t know why.  It’s a good question though, one I never considered.  

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, WSA said:

Valid point, yes, but maybe that would not lend itself to full-hand, or even partial-hand prints.  I'd think what you'd see more of is finger tip drag marks, and watery substrates like those found along shorelines and creek banks are not going to hold prints for that long a time.   

 

That aside, I seem to recall at least a few BFRO reports that describe or document with photos suspected hand or finger imprints. Have you scoured that database for those? Some members may even have those at their (ahem)...fingertips.

Not to stir up sleeping beasts either, but the Skookum cast I believe had a suspected hand imprint, if I recall correctly.

My point was that when I found the foot print I did not see it so maybe we are missing them!

2 minutes ago, Twist said:

 

Sorry Brian, there could be 5000 views but as with most thing BF related most likely we just don’t know why.  It’s a good question though, one I never considered.  

Thanks for your thoughts! Think about it !

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, WSA said:

I can answer that with a question of my own Brian: How many handprints do YOU leave on a typical walk through the woods?

That is a very good answer with a question. :D

Perhaps,it is easier to fake footprints also . Or to go even further  human tracks mistaken for man apes are likely not to contain hand prints since as you said we don't put our hands down strolling in the woods. 

If the creatures do exist then perhaps the ones with hand prints  are more likely to be authentic. :rolleyes:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A few thoughts for you:

  • Almost looks like a midtarsal break in the handprint.  
  • What are all of the other prints in the original photo?  Almost looks like a knee print behind the foot.
  • Roughly where and when did you find these?  I am not looking for GPS coordinates, just a rough area so I can determine the chance it was a kid wondering around barefoot.
  • As to your main question of why so few hand prints, I am guessing it is because they walk 99% of the time on their feet like us and only use their hands when they are stalking or perhaps startled in to a quick full max run.  

What do you folks think of this video?

https://sasquatchchronicles.com/topic/bigfoot-chasing-on-all-fours-video/

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As to why there are not more hand prints found, I would say, how many human hand prints do you see? I can't recall ever seeing a human hand print that was not done intentionally like a kid or some such. Given that you might only find one or two definite sasquatch footprints at a location, I think that finding a handprint there would be even rarer. But, there are hand prints and hand print casts, so it is not as if they are totally unknown.  Some of the hand prints found are from likely places too like a steep, muddy, river bank where the creature would naturally put his hand down for balance.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, NCBFr said:

A few thoughts for you:

  • Almost looks like a midtarsal break in the handprint.  
  • What are all of the other prints in the original photo?  Almost looks like a knee print behind the foot.
  • Roughly where and when did you find these?  I am not looking for GPS coordinates, just a rough area so I can determine the chance it was a kid wondering around barefoot.
  • As to your main question of why so few hand prints, I am guessing it is because they walk 99% of the time on their feet like us and only use their hands when they are stalking or perhaps startled in to a quick full max run.  

What do you folks think of this video?

https://sasquatchchronicles.com/topic/bigfoot-chasing-on-all-fours-video/

 

I'm not sure what to think of that. It doesn't look bulky enough for what I'd imagine a BF to look like...and definitely not how I imagined a BF to run on all fours.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/16/2018 at 8:31 AM, NCBFr said:

A few thoughts for you:

  • Almost looks like a midtarsal break in the handprint.  
  • What are all of the other prints in the original photo?  Almost looks like a knee print behind the foot.
  • Roughly where and when did you find these?  I am not looking for GPS coordinates, just a rough area so I can determine the chance it was a kid wondering around barefoot.
  • As to your main question of why so few hand prints, I am guessing it is because they walk 99% of the time on their feet like us and only use their hands when they are stalking or perhaps startled in to a quick full max run.  

What do you folks think of this video?

https://sasquatchchronicles.com/topic/bigfoot-chasing-on-all-fours-video/

 

Mid tarsal break in hand print ? Footprints yes but Jeff M said not all have them ? This is by water and has a lot of traffic by foot and jeeps and all. its also a junk drop spot ! So yes it could be a kid but if so he has flat feet. I would never walk around barefoot but there are people who are that crazy! I use to play in creeks when I was a kid but I always had on old shoes and I didn't have snakes or gators to worry about ! If you go to google maps and look at Tampa zoom out and look at big green areas some places to get from one to another you have very narrow areas to cross under roads 8 lanes so I look for places like that and check them as much as i can. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites