Guest thermalman Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 (edited) Science has to work within the realms of what they know to exist. By a process of elimination, if all known animals can be proven NOT to have left the tracks, only then can one look towards the possibility of a unknown, unidentified creature might have left them. Pure and simple good science. Edited March 3, 2014 by thermalman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted March 3, 2014 Admin Share Posted March 3, 2014 ^^ And prove that an actual BF left them. Until then, the consensus would be that any other known wildlife in existence and living in MN, or humans, positively made them. Those are the facts. No duh..... Your confusing evidence with proof. The OP asked for what we thought was the best evidence. If I had proof? I wouldn't worry myself about a trackway...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 Science might make some assumptions based on what is known. As for the snow tracks above, there is a tell with the drag mark in the center of the track way. The Tail? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 ^^^Well, one of those I could go with is the law of gravity, and another is the Astronomical Unit. One doesn't re-prove those with every new piece of evidence. If one sees tracks of a known species, one doesn't immediately assume "the Amazing Whitetail Hoaxer;" one assumes deer are present. Scientists knew that okapi had returned to the Virunga National Park in the Congo because they found tracks. Same with beaver-chewed sticks and other such things known to be left by known animals. But if one can't tell what made the tracks...one doesn't assume that, well, it's something mundane doing something we can't explain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest thermalman Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 (edited) The MN tracks were not exactly fresh. Fresh snow is seen covering up the initial tracks and possibly any slight drag marks. The people there, at the time, should have exhibited due diligence in removing all other wildlife possibilities until left with an unknown explanation, and not just outright proclaim BF. The fact that FB/FB did analysis of the vid does very little to enhance the truth of it. Not a good example of an "Eureka" moment. Sure wish I could find the old thread of this trackway? Edited March 3, 2014 by thermalman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 Well, just like nobody can say "this must have been a deer," nobody can immediately announce it proof of something unknown either. It's just like one sighting report. It's one trackway nobody has explained yet, that might have been made by something for which there's no proof yet. In other words, unresolved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmaker Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 (edited) Edited March 3, 2014 by dmaker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest thermalman Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 (edited) ^^ Not unresolved. Due diligence, by process of elimination, doesn't seem to have been applied in this case. Had it had been, I'm certain the answer would have been shown to have been an existing, known animal. And not of one, yet proven to exist. It appears the process of track identfication, is severely flawed in this case. Edited March 3, 2014 by thermalman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 ^^^Well, explain the due diligence you would have used. I can handily rule out the vast majority of known animals. Even a mule deer - the only one that appears at a glance reasonable - probably wouldn't move through deep snow that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest thermalman Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 (edited) Show me visual proof of what you claim. How do you know a mule deer can make those type of tracks, while discounting all other wildlife? I have stated my due diligence- process of elimination. Until all known possibilities can be eliminated completely, one has to think within the realms of what truly exists at this time and site. Edited March 3, 2014 by thermalman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 ^^^Actually, no you haven't. What precisely have you eliminated, and precisely how? The size and spacing of the tracks simply rules out most everything we know, most especially a faker on really odd snowshoes. Visual proof? What's yours? I said it's unresolved...but that it can't be ascribed to anything known, without evidence what that thing is...that I'm pretty certain from my knowledge of animals and tracks no one is coming up with anytime soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest thermalman Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 (edited) Actually, I have answered your question of what due diligence I would have used. I wasn't there, so my method of due diligence was not applied by me. Show me evidence of how you know, "the size and spacing rules out most everything we know", and how you could "handily rule out the vast majority of known animals"? I, at least, offered similar visual snow prints, that cannot be dismissed, due to the similarities and nature of the original prints. One cannot apply the prints to something unknown. How is that even possible? The tooth fairy never once took my teeth from under my pillow or left me the money. Edited March 3, 2014 by thermalman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 ^^^One can easily dismiss the examples you provided. The bear tracks were bear tracks; the lynx tracks were lynx tracks, and nothing bipedal would make tracks with that short a stride. It's pretty clear looking at the MN pictures that the impressions are deep and far apart, ruling out a small subject. The spacing pretty much rules out a quadruped unless it's bigger than any other we know about, with unusual feet and stride to boot. Mule deer 'stot', but those are not only very far apart for that, but any deer cratering like that on every bounce isn't stotting; there are simply better ways for it to use its energy. How does one get what you're getting out of what I have said? Does the word "unresolved" not show up when you read what I typed? I personally don't care what's unproven, when thousands of people are seeing something and no scientist who thinks they're seeing known stuff says anything to give me a glimmer of confidence that he knows what he is talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redbone Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 (edited) Here is a Wisconsin report about inline snow tracks in 10 inches of snow, with 6'9" between steps, and no drag marks in between them. I wonder how big the lynx/deer/man/bear/pig would have to be to get that kind of stride?http://www.bfro.net/GDB/show_report.asp?id=43295 Sadly, print details were missing due to light fluffy snow inside of them. Edited March 3, 2014 by Redbone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest thermalman Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 (edited) ^^My examples can only be dismissed with actual verifiable BF snow prints, to which we have none of, or of another example of wildlife prints, of which to compare to. Simple and logical due diligence. You would never have known my picture samples were prints of the known animals I stated if I hadn't declared them as such. Plus, no one saw what made the prints. Unresolved, in my case, does not include BF in my repertoire of known animals. An animal, while bounding thru the snow, could easily accomplish any size of "stride". Edited March 3, 2014 by thermalman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts