Guest DWA Posted June 23, 2013 Posted June 23, 2013 Hello All, The assumption here is a walking gait. What if it were not? http://www.arkive.org/verreauxs-sifaka/propithecus-verreauxi/video-06b.html Well, I'm not saying it's doing precisely that. But I think it may be moving at a faster than walking gait. Running would certainly make an 8' stride feasible.
hiflier Posted June 23, 2013 Posted June 23, 2013 (edited) Hello Saskeptic, LOL nahhh. But the video wasn't meant to be literal anyway, just tossing ideas out. I was running in snow this past winter, or should I say what past for me as running at my age. I was in a hurry and only had to go a hundred feet or so. I found that quite naturally I fell into a mode I've used pretty much without thinking since I was a kid. I jumped off my dominate leg (right) and landed on my left foot which was then followed by my right, planting it next to my left and repeating the motion of pushing off with my right. This looked like a much longer stride in snow than my normal and, depending on knee angle, left a fairly clean hole in 6 inches of snow. It was almost like the skip motion that a kid might use with what we use to call a "horsey stick" Hello Norseman, Try it with your couch. Seriously, Give yourself a running start using the air-horse routine and plant a foot at the couch then plant the other foot in the same place and jump off. My guess? you'll have your six feet with a few inches to spare. Edited June 23, 2013 by hiflier
hiflier Posted June 23, 2013 Posted June 23, 2013 Hello All, Shall we keep going here? The report post by "UPs" about the BF hunting the hogs. the hunter/witness said that the SSQ sprang from all fours in the attack. Does that the creature isn't ALWAYS bipedal? A short inseam might say yes to that question. In snow, leaping off of both feet, landing on hands, planting feet again behind hands and leaping again? Sorry, just throwing out ideas.... as bad as they may sound.... just throwing out ideas. I'm thinking strong, agile, and in really good shape- especially a juvenile.
norseman Posted June 24, 2013 Admin Posted June 24, 2013 If your ten feet tall and have a (roughly 50%) 60 inch inseam I could see you making an eight foot stride. I just tried it with a 36" inseam next to my 6 foot couch and my step was over half the couch. I'm sure though if trying to step straight down that distance would be shorter. Okay, but you just gave your imaginary bigfoot a much longer inseam than anything in Travers' collection, the sketch of the William Roe bigfoot, Patty, or me. On what did you base your assumption that a 10' bigfoot has a 60" inseam? Next, you went about 40" with your 36" inseam, and this is, I assume, a toe-to-heel measurement that was comfortable for you to do, i.e., not a "giant step". The measurement seems too long to be toe-to-heel, however. My pace is just under 1m [~38"] toe-to-toe, but toe-to-heel - the distance measured between impressions in a trackway for measuring stride length - you need to subtract the length of your foot. This gives me a stride length in the neighborhood of 25 - 27", and I'd suspect yours would be not 40", but probably closer to 30". You state that this was without "post-holing" your steps. For me, post-holing reduces my stride length by about 25%, and I suspect it would for you too. That would give you about 23 - 25" for a post-holed stride length measured toe-to-heel with your 36" inseam. We'll be generous and say 25". Here's where the algebra comes in. If your 36" inseam gives you a 25" post-holed stride length, then what would a 60" inseam give you? Spoiler alert: the answer is 42"; well short of the observed 96" stride length, and this is with an inseam far longer than our best information on bigfoot proportions would predict even for a 10-footer. Now we could do some hand-waving about "biomechanics" and "allometry" that these crude approximations aren't capturing, but the fact remains that we're not even close to the observed stride lengths in the field. Being the redneck I am........I just split him in half.......... And I made a big step with my couch measurement yes, I'm sure that my normal steps are less than say 40 inches. But I think we should forget about the post hole stride length for the eight foot stride, and the reason is, is that what I observed was post holed in about three feet of snow...........but we didn't measure the stride and there fore I have nothing precise to give you, but they certainly were not eight feet apart. The Keller track on the other hand that I posted pictures of, that are eight feet apart, I have no idea how much of that is foot and how much of that is wobbled out. He says the foot length was 23.5 inches long. Assuming that not all of that is actually foot. How tall would say a man with 21" feet be? If this is a hoax..........I still am having difficulty working it out in my mind. I wasn't there with the Keller track way, I did talk to the man thru an email briefly and he confirmed that it was him that made the report. This is his website: http://larrytheanimalguy.com/
norseman Posted June 24, 2013 Admin Posted June 24, 2013 Hello All, Shall we keep going here? The report post by "UPs" about the BF hunting the hogs. the hunter/witness said that the SSQ sprang from all fours in the attack. Does that the creature isn't ALWAYS bipedal? A short inseam might say yes to that question. In snow, leaping off of both feet, landing on hands, planting feet again behind hands and leaping again? Sorry, just throwing out ideas.... as bad as they may sound.... just throwing out ideas. I'm thinking strong, agile, and in really good shape- especially a juvenile. That track way is not a quadrapedal track way. Either it's something walking on two legs OR it's something bounding like a pogo stick on four legs and for whatever the reason the four hooves look like one giant oblong foot. The only thing on the Colville Indian Reservation that bounds like that is a Mule deer. You can see Mule deer bounding about 13 seconds into this video: I just looked up Shaq's shoe size.........it's a 23, which supposedly is 16 inches long.
Drew Posted June 24, 2013 Posted June 24, 2013 I think the animal depicted in this photo: Is a hare or rabbit. The tracks were made in fresh powder, the tail scooped out that narrow U shape on the back of the track. http://culter.colorado.edu/~kittel/WEcol_Handouts/MammalBasicTrackPatterns_SOlson06.pdf Go to page 292 at the top. you will see this track looks similar to the rabbit bounding in snow, right down to the tail scooped out at the back.
Guest Posted June 24, 2013 Posted June 24, 2013 Being the redneck I am........I just split him in half.......... Heh, heh. . . . what I observed was post holed in about three feet of snow...........but we didn't measure the stride and there fore I have nothing precise to give you, but they certainly were not eight feet apart. Right - the deeper the snow the more difficult it is to posthole (unless there's a crust on top, in which case it can be hard to do anything but), so the stride length has to shorten as the snow deepens. Without specific details (e.g., measured stride length, postholed or not) there's less we can do, even if what we doing is pure speculation. The Keller track on the other hand that I posted pictures of, that are eight feet apart, I have no idea how much of that is foot and how much of that is wobbled out. He says the foot length was 23.5 inches long. Assuming that not all of that is actually foot. The degree to which the impressions are not post-holed is important for two reasons. First, it lengthens the stride length for a bipedal walker closer to the maximum stride length. Next, it increases the probability that a bipedal walker was actually running or bounding as hiflier described (incidentally, one of my favorite things to do in the snow when I was a kid). How tall would say a man with 21" feet be? If Shaq-proportioned, a little more than 9'. If built like one of these guys, not that tall.
norseman Posted June 24, 2013 Admin Posted June 24, 2013 I think the animal depicted in this photo: Is a hare or rabbit. The tracks were made in fresh powder, the tail scooped out that narrow U shape on the back of the track. http://culter.colorado.edu/~kittel/WEcol_Handouts/MammalBasicTrackPatterns_SOlson06.pdf Go to page 292 at the top. you will see this track looks similar to the rabbit bounding in snow, right down to the tail scooped out at the back. Drew I understand its just a picture but what your describing is bunnyzilla. It's the scale that is way off and if its something bounding its a mule deer and not a bunny. Sas, what makes you think those drawings are accurate? Not being a jerk of course but do you know something I don't?
Guest DWA Posted June 24, 2013 Posted June 24, 2013 Not a bunny. Look at those craters. Every time I've seen rabbit or hare tracks in snow, no crater; four feet and that's it. Rabbits just aren't that heavy. It also looks as if the tracks were made with the snow in the conditions the photo was taken: partially melted and consolidated. In that light from where that photo was taken, it would be hard to even see rabbit tracks.
WSA Posted June 24, 2013 Posted June 24, 2013 Wait, wait...this just in... http://www.cryptomundo.com/bigfoot-report/fossilized-bigfoot-skull-found/comment-page-1/#comment-89590 Nevermind.
Guest DWA Posted June 24, 2013 Posted June 24, 2013 ^^^Makes ya want to joy-buzz somebody. [holds head]
Guest Posted June 24, 2013 Posted June 24, 2013 Sas, what makes you think those drawings are accurate? Not being a jerk of course but do you know something I don't? Travers' or the guys from Warner Brothers? If the former, one of his projects is to provide a sketch service for alleged eyewitnesses. Some of those accounts inform his artwork, but I think he is biased toward top heavy bigfoots in his drawings.
Guest DWA Posted June 24, 2013 Posted June 24, 2013 I agree absolutely that every bump or howl in the night being accredited to Bigfoot is not critical thinking.......... That's NOT what is taking place here. bigfootencounters.com refers to this as a "five-toed" trackway. It didn't, however, have any pictures of individual tracks. Anyone know whether we have those anywhere? If this is a known animal, somewhere in this trackway should be at least one footprint of that animal.
Guest DWA Posted June 24, 2013 Posted June 24, 2013 I think the animal depicted in this photo: Is a hare or rabbit. The tracks were made in fresh powder, the tail scooped out that narrow U shape on the back of the track. http://culter.colorado.edu/~kittel/WEcol_Handouts/MammalBasicTrackPatterns_SOlson06.pdf Go to page 292 at the top. you will see this track looks similar to the rabbit bounding in snow, right down to the tail scooped out at the back. More about this not being a bunny (the pic is actually at the top of page 291): note the indentation at the front of the rabbit impressions. Not seeing that in these. From the way things look here, this rabbit would be cratering up to its ear tips from the depth of the impressions. Given that this trackway looks as if it was made in the conditions we see in the photo, and not melted out, probably not a rabbit. And "several hundred yards" sounds like a long way to go for a rabbit cratering to its ears on each hop.
dmaker Posted June 24, 2013 Posted June 24, 2013 ^ Not if it was a Bigfoot pretending to be a rabbit cratering up to its ears on each hop. Just kidding. I have no track reading skills, so all I can offer is crappy humor Carry on....
Recommended Posts