Guest Sara Love Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 Here is the shoe and picture of the print in question side by side for easier comparison: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest watch1 Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 I again sent emails to just about every contact listed on Coast to Coast requesting contact info on the person that sent the photo in to them. I am still waiting for a reply. I don't know what else I can do. It would be nice to know more about the tracks and to find out if he took more photos. This is not the first time I have ran into dead-ends. I was in the process of setting up a meeting with a man that had a fossilized foot of something that looked close to human but was not. The old man had shown it to his home health nurse and she said that you could see some of the bone structure of the foot and it was different from modern humans. A few days before I was going to go and visit the man, he became sick and was hospitalized. He then shortly after, passed away. That was surely one meeting I would have loved to have made and I would have loved to have talked with that old man and hear the story he had about that foot and where he found it. I was planning on taking photos if I had his permission. I have since tried to work on things faster and not just take things for granted and assume there will always be time to do something in the future. My own bypass surgery 2 years ago has shown me that life is not something a person needs to take for granted. Mike (watch1) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 The edges on this print look very sharp for a snow print. Almost cookie cutter-ish. Why is there no picture of the entire trackway? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest watch1 Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 One other thing to point out. There have been several Bigfoot sighting reports from that area. A search on Cheaha State Park and Bigfoot will bring up several hits. Also remember that Cheaha joins the Talladega National Forest that has sighting reports of its own. The Talladega National Forest was also the place that the Alabama Bigfoot Research group had our last outing in. The last recordings I posted came from that outing. This still does not mean that the footprints are the real thing but it is why I am so interested in them. It is my belief that there are several Bigfoot in the Talladega National Forest area. Mike (watch1) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 Mike good points. Some of us feel without the measurements, track strides, & cross sections of numerous tracks that illustrate diversity in the way ea foot strikes.. we are too limited to make an assessment. Some may be convinced it might be from a sasquatch. I would like to know much more about this. My initial thought was to blow it off because of its shape and lack of accompanying informaton. Then came the wave of similarities to the images offered to us by so many of that particular footwear. This track looks unlike most I am familiar with. To me, the print is too narrow to be considered, but that is my first initial take one which I really have not altered. Part of that reason is because of the lack of information and visuals. There are some other characteristics I look for as well and I do not see them but they may be evident in other tracks. Situations like this, showing a track and having a surge of responses help make us aware of the system of questions we should be asking. Do I personally think this is a real track? No. Could it be? I find it hard to believe but perhaps. Its the data you want to look for and if you do not get it.. just like so many other partial pieces of evidence..it sits unverified. (Verified meaning you had a chance to review characteristics from images, interviews or johnny on the spot observations all of which satisfied you so the only option is.. real deal.) I know very little about the footwear and would like to know measurements across the board because I am sure that not only will it resurface time and time again, but probably in other styles. I hope you get loads of correspondance back and additional information. Good luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 I agree with Mike on the possibility of several bigfoot being in the Talladega National Forest/ Cheaha Mtn. area. I lived in Anniston for 16 years and my ex-husband's family lived in rural locations in Cleburn County and Talladega County. I had the chance to hear about footprints and screams that never got reported. I do think this is a very good place to do some research/exploring. As Mike says, I don't know if the print is likely to be sasquatch but if the guy is wearing a size 10 or 11 boot, that print is significantly larger than any brand of "barefoot" shoes. Please keep us posted on any further information that you find out Mike. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted January 8, 2011 BFF Patron Share Posted January 8, 2011 Here is the shoe and picture of the print in question side by side for easier comparison: It seems the cut on that particular pair of vibram toed footwear angles off the front part of the foot more than the toes in the print, just my judging the pic (not doing any manipulations or rotations of pictures) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest billgreen2010 Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 hey watch1 & everyone WOW very interesting new article about a possible sasquatch footprint still looks interesting please keep me posted on other alabama sasquatch stuff info sightings etc to be continued indeedy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sara Love Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 (edited) It seems the cut on that particular pair of vibram toed footwear angles off the front part of the foot more than the toes in the print, just my judging the pic (not doing any manipulations or rotations of pictures) Once I learned (from this thread actually) that there was footwear like this, I kept trying to compare the shoes with the print and they were so far apart, I figured others were likely trying to compare as well so just brought the two closer together to make it easier to look at both. I'm actually not so happy that a pair of shoes would be out there like this. I suppose after we've all seen enough of them, we'd come to recognize them anyway so maybe shouldn't be so bothered by the fact that they exist. Edited to add: They're actually some neat shoes. It's just too bad they might at different times come into having to consider that they exist when ever we look at prints now. We didn't need that. Edited January 11, 2011 by Sara Love Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 I agree with you Sara, it's just one more thing for me to learn in order to differentiate a potentially real track versus mis-identification should I come across a trackway. There was a a very recent report on 12/04/10 from another organization of vocals heard in the same national forest: http://gcbro.com/ALcleburne0002.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 I can tell you that those shoes have become popular among the hippie set on our campus this year - so much so that the Rec Center has had to post signs warning student that they're inadequate protection for use in the weight room. It wouldn't surprise me if barefoot prints start showing up in odd places as people test these out under different conditions, e.g. trails, in snow, etc. They are marketed to people who are into hiking, eco-stuff, and other outdoorsy, earthy-crunchy pursuits. Anybody wearing say a size 12 or larger is going to be spawning many a double-take among folks who have ever in their lives heard of "bigfoot." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TKD Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 They are suposed to be the next big thing for running. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Branco Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 They are suposed to be the next big thing for running. It is pretty dang obvious that the shoes are NOT designed or suitable for running or walking in typical Southeastern Bigfoot habitat. And if someone used them for the purpose of hoaxing in those areas, the trail wouldn't be very long, or very convincing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ajciani Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 As Saskeptic pointed out, these things are going to be marketed to the outdoorsy, eco-nut, day hiker crowd, so they *should* be durable enough to be outdoors, and worn by someone carrying a light pack. Thankfully, the general shape of those shoes does not match the general shape of what are considered legitimate prints. That is, their prints should look enough like a barefoot human, so as not to be mistaken. Unfortunately, there are going to be a LOT more people seeing barefoot prints out in the parks and such, and possibly reporting them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BitterMonk Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 Some of you might find this germane to the discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts