bipedalist Posted January 4, 2011 BFF Patron Share Posted January 4, 2011 (edited) This is so ironic....My son is a big enthusiast for distance running and has those foot shoes in a size 15. I've often told him, jokingly, that his prints might be mistaken for bigfoot at some point in time. They need to put a brand name on the bottom of those shoes just for our convenience. Well if the snow hadn't been at that particular melt point the little yellow vibram emblem should have made it's mark (not to mention the sole design/indentations for traction....some of which may be visible on enlargement) if it was a hoax and the toed brogans laid them down/fit. The mention of a trackway and presentation of only one print (could it be there were some other good partials of at least toes and heels and maybe vibram sole labeling?) makes things rather incomplete. Definitely sounds like BF territory just a matter of getting some more information about the trackway. Were there no more pictures? Edited January 4, 2011 by bipedalist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ajciani Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 From this one image, I'd have to say it wasn't the Vibram product. The general shape looks wrong, as the outside edge of the Vibram sandal(?) is nearly straight, but this print seems to flare out to the inside and outside after the arch. BTW, it does appear to have an arch. The outer two digits also appear to be too small for the Vibram. This may be the Gist product, which from pictures seems to have smaller outer digits, a chiseled little toe, flares out on the outside, and has a narrower heel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 Hey Watch1 some things to think about are how deep the tracks are, individ differences and how far apart the tracks are fr ea other. We did not see much with regard to those things plus a lot more. I would suggest you get yourself some books on the subject and read up. You are going to want to know as much as you can on the subject if you are going to take it seriously. Good luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sara Love Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 (edited) This is so ironic, I was driving past Mt. Cheaha and on through the Talladega National Forest on I-20 on the 27th at about dusk. As I drove through I thought to myself that this was ideal bigfoot country and if one jumps out in front of my car I will die hitting the two inches of ice on either side of the road. So I slowed down to about 45 miles an hour, much to the consternation of the other drivers, and kept my eyes peeled. Sorry to say, I didn't even see a deer but the snow was still deep and beautiful in the forest. It would be cool if you could find out where the pic came from and to see if there are other pics. Cheaha is known for bigfoot sightings and it isn't out of the realm of possibility that one could be there, I'm looking forward to hearing what you find. My son is a big enthusiast for distance running and has those foot shoes in a size 15. I've often told him, jokingly, that his prints might be mistaken for bigfoot at some point in time. They need to put a brand name on the bottom of those shoes just for our convenience. Oh man, wouldn't you just like to slap the person who invented those foot shoes? Just what we need to add confusion to the subject. I'd almost have to say that was the intention. Edited January 6, 2011 by Sara Love Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wheellug Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 The pics of the running shoes are interesting for sure. Two things I would have to think about. Would a person really wear them in the snow? They appear quite thin and look like they would get soaking wet. Not something you want when trekking about. Secondly the soul is still unique enough to leave a specific and identifiable print. Perhaps someone who has a pair could produce a pic of a track. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted January 6, 2011 BFF Patron Share Posted January 6, 2011 Good points, I would think someone with a pair or someone willing to bite the bullet and buy a pair and test in powder and wet/slushy snow both...... could upload some data/pictures to the forum maybe to hold in an online type museum of how to not attribute this particular print to BF. Double-edged sword I know giving people that want to hoax ideas, but hey knowledge is power and all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ajciani Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 I did some barefoot walking in the snow. My arch is not particularly high, but in shallow snow, it was very noticeable. I also did some walking on only the ball and toes. The results were rather interesting. They looked very much like a the hind print of a bear, except that the toes were slanted and different sizes. The outside of the arch actually contacted the ground, and made what looked like a narrow heel. If someone less experienced with prints had seen them, I'm sure they would have concluded that a bear walked through, on its hind legs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 Guys some good ideas.. aj think I will try that too. It would be neat to get some shots on here of those babies in action in snow.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 Well if you ever get any information on this picture I'ld like to know how big that guy's foot is that is used for comparison. I'm not sure about using those shoes to run in snow, they do make them that come with ankle support with tops looking more like a booty. They are designed for barefoot runners who don't really want to run barefoot (go figure). The largest size they make was the size my son bought and had to order, they don't usually stock those sizes of specialty shoes in the stores. Here is a link to the shoe company and you can see that the largest shoe they make only measures 12 1/4 inches long, they do not make them longer than that. http://www.citysports.com/assets/images/sizecharts/Vibram_sizechart.gif The snow there was about 4 inches when it fell on the night of 25th and early morning of the 26th and this pic was taken on the 28th. The track looks relatively fresh since I would think the toes would have become more mushy/melted and the edges more ill defined had it been there any length of time before the thaw hit. If I had to guess, the track was probably made the same day the pic was taken considering how fast the snow melted from that winter storm. The vast majority was gone the next day on the 27th but there was still a good bit on the ground in that area when I drove through on that day. The snow would probably have hung around longer on the mountain in shady areas. Can you tell that I want there to be a bigfoot wandering around on Mt. Cheaha? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 Jodie, thanks for the comments on that variety of footwear make.. I think there are some conclusions we can make in differentiating it from what we are looking for.. but I am not going to add to potential hoaxers THINGS TO IMPROVE ON list.. Also I would think you were hoping for A BUNCH of sasQ TRACKING WITH AUTHORITY working Mt Cheaha lol Semantics.. I tell ya Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Branco Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 From this one image, I'd have to say it wasn't the Vibram product. The general shape looks wrong, as the outside edge of the Vibram sandal(?) is nearly straight, but this print seems to flare out to the inside and outside after the arch. BTW, it does appear to have an arch. The outer two digits also appear to be too small for the Vibram. This may be the Gist product, which from pictures seems to have smaller outer digits, a chiseled little toe, flares out on the outside, and has a narrower heel. You are right. Don't know what made the track, but it was not the Vibram product. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted January 7, 2011 BFF Patron Share Posted January 7, 2011 (edited) I noticed the discrepancy in the flaring of the print and arch as well making me think it was probably not the vibram, good catch. It seems that particular toed sport shoe pictured in the thread has a semblance of a curved mid-step though unlike traditional boots. Edited January 7, 2011 by bipedalist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WV FOOTER Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 Those are some wild footwear. Just more reason for indisputable proof. Hoaxers have better equipment at their disposal. Footprints look little thin to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest fenris Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 From this one image, I'd have to say it wasn't the Vibram product. The general shape looks wrong, as the outside edge of the Vibram sandal(?) is nearly straight, but this print seems to flare out to the inside and outside after the arch. BTW, it does appear to have an arch. The outer two digits also appear to be too small for the Vibram. This may be the Gist product, which from pictures seems to have smaller outer digits, a chiseled little toe, flares out on the outside, and has a narrower heel. melt and refreeze can change all kinds of things Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Branco Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 melt and refreeze can change all kinds of things It is obvious from the photograph that the track was made shortly before the photo was made. The snow had melted somewhat before the track was made, and had melted only slightly after the track was made. The track had not been subjected to refreezing after it was made. What made the track? We don't know, because it is a single track. Had there been photos and measurements made of successive tracks, the stride of the human/hominid that made them might offer a clue. A single track photo is in itself tells nothing. Man's foot, made made "barefoot imitation" shoe, or Bigfoot. Who knows from the evidence? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts