norseman Posted March 4, 2014 Share Posted March 4, 2014 The only fluffy assumptions are from people saying that the snow prints are of BF nature. And one doesn't have to be a scientist to figure that they're not! BTW, you haven't answered the previous questions: Does your track book have pictures of BF prints in the snow for trackers to identify with? Show us some pictures of BF tracks in snow, from someone on your authorization short list. We're all waiting. It would go a long way towards your credibility if you are able to back up your beliefs with solid or comparable evidence. Better yet? Strap some stompers on and film your self floundering around in the snow!!! That would be awesome. You continually ask for some sort of be verification with the trackway, and denounce it because of your comparison to patty!? So where is your North American field manual with a picture of patty in it? Maybe the trackway is real and patty is a hoax? This is a extremely hypocritical stance on your part...... Boiled down to brass tacks? We don't know. But I do know this much. I could track my cousin anywhere, although he is the same species as me he walks bow legged, with his toes pointing out 45 degrees from line of travel. I've tried to copy his gait and my knees start aching in short order, and yet this is his natural gait. Some things to ponder; Was patty walking in snow? Is patty a male or a female? How old is patty? Does a bulge appear on Patty's thigh while walking? Is it safe to assume gaits will vary within a species? Could the Minnesota trackway be something else? Sure. I wasn't there, but I've encountered one like it myself and I find it very compelling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salubrious Posted March 4, 2014 Moderator Share Posted March 4, 2014 First off, Patty is the ONLY example that we have, with what is widely accepted as a BF walking gait. All else is speculation and assumption. Patty is no runway model and doesn't walk like one. Fourthly, there seems to be a contradiction of claim on your part,- "If you viewed the video, you also saw a human walking beside the tracks. That photo showed that the snow was so deep that a human could not have possibly made the tracks". Albeit, difficult, but not impossible. There is no contradiction. Evidently you did not look at the photo; hence your comment (the snow was so deep a human literally has to wade through it, leaving a swath rather than clearly defined tracks). See below about gaits: Is it safe to assume gaits will vary within a species? Could the Minnesota trackway be something else? Sure. I wasn't there, but I've encountered one like it myself and I find it very compelling. ^^ This. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted March 4, 2014 Share Posted March 4, 2014 Yeah, come on. "This has to be some Known Thing" is a mindset that would ensure we never made it into caves, much less out of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NathanFooter Posted March 4, 2014 Share Posted March 4, 2014 Deer and many other ungulates can't run or lope for long distance { no farther than several hundred yards nonstop }, they simply are not endurance built. I can't remember what month the MN track way was found but wouldn't bear be in hibernation ? Even if not, bear can't lope long distance either from what I gather and certainly not without breaking stride. I have not heard much about distance running in wolves and cougars { UNLESS !! ,,,,, MEGA Rabbit !!! } witch seem like the only other possibilities, someone should dig into what their capabilities are in this area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted March 4, 2014 Share Posted March 4, 2014 Something else interesting as well for me that ties patty to a snow trackway like Minnesota. Her tracks were in sandy soil in a creek bottom with a long stride and deep impressions, the film subject it one thing......maybe it was a man in a suit? But coupled with that trackway? It becomes virtually impossible as a hoax. You can pull a guy with your horse down a trail with concrete stompers OR you can dress him up as an ape and have him walk past your camera with a fluid gait. But you cannot do both at once. Nor can you strap stompers on and walk through three feet of snow and leave behind the trail of a giant. We simply lack the size to do such things. But it both cases it's the morphology of the trackway that impresses me the most, other than the fact it's shaped like a human foot and has five toes! Does it exhibit characteristics outside the scope of human scale? How long are the prints? How deep are the prints? How deep is the substrate? Do the prints step over obstacles? How big? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salubrious Posted March 4, 2014 Moderator Share Posted March 4, 2014 The trackway was found on the Minnesota/Canada border at the beginning of March. Too early for bears... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WSA Posted March 4, 2014 Share Posted March 4, 2014 This evidence stands. What the evidence tell us to say is, "We don't know yet for sure what made these tracks." I think we all should be O.K. with that uncertainty, which really is a kind of outcome, when you think about it. If some are not, I think it says more about them than what it says about the evidence. If you clamor for an answer, all well and good, but keep the idea afloat that uncertainty is an answer in and of itself. Enjoy it as it might be all you get in this lifetime, on this subject. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted March 4, 2014 Share Posted March 4, 2014 (edited) The trackway was found on the Minnesota/Canada border at the beginning of March. Too early for bears... Even if it was? Was it walking bipedal over rough terrain for over a mile bipedally? And what would be the stride length of a bipedal walking black bear? Edited March 4, 2014 by norseman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted March 4, 2014 Share Posted March 4, 2014 This evidence stands. What the evidence tell us to say is, "We don't know yet for sure what made these tracks." I think we all should be O.K. with that uncertainty, which really is a kind of outcome, when you think about it. If some are not, I think it says more about them than what it says about the evidence. If you clamor for an answer, all well and good, but keep the idea afloat that uncertainty is an answer in and of itself. Enjoy it as it might be all you get in this lifetime, on this subject. Exactly. Far too many people expect far too much far too fast when it comes to this. Including every single piece of evidence needing, very very badly, to be either proof or trash. Cut.It.Out. The most compelling thing about it, by far? ^^^That. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WSA Posted March 4, 2014 Share Posted March 4, 2014 Roger that Norseman. I can also say with some certainty it is not a track left by a man on a bike. We could go on, and on, and on...but plenty of us here can skip that exercise entirely. "Bipedal" is the only dog that will hunt here, and in many other examples we could name as well. If you want to show me a photo of a track of a 4-legged that even comes close to this, I'm certainly not going to not look at it, but I've never seen one that even makes a casual case on all key points. Wishing it were something it obviouisly isn't does not help me in the least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest thermalman Posted March 4, 2014 Share Posted March 4, 2014 (edited) Norse: "You continually ask for some sort of be verification with the trackway, and denounce it because of your comparison to patty!? So where is your North American field manual with a picture of patty in it? Maybe the trackway is real and patty is a hoax? This is a extremely hypocritical stance on your part......" Nothing hypocritical of my stance. Patty is the only entity we have in order to compare other BF evidence to. Plenty of books, links, videos, forums and websites available with a breakdown of her posture, gait, gender, etc. "Boiled down to brass tacks? We don't know." WSA: "This evidence stands. What the evidence tell us to say is, "We don't know yet for sure what made these tracks." I totally agree with your comments, but the proponents love to jump on any fluffy assumptions as legit BF evidence. Sal: "There is no contradiction. Evidently you did not look at the photo; hence your comment (the snow was so deep a human literally has to wade through it, leaving a swath rather than clearly defined tracks)." You're correct, I did not look at the photo, but instead watched the video. The snow was about knee high on a human, which is possible to walk through, albeit not easy. The trackway was found on the Minnesota/Canada border at the beginning of March. Too early for bears... Based on what evidence? Bears are known to prowl about in the winter, if the temperatures rise to spring like warmth. Edited March 4, 2014 by thermalman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted March 4, 2014 Share Posted March 4, 2014 (edited) ^^^^^^ We also have a man claiming to be her.....so again what field guide do you point to for the film's validity that we don't point to for the tracks???????? Hypocritical. And nobody claimed humans could not walk through that snow! The claim is is that a human could not have left that trackway! Which stands. Edited March 4, 2014 by norseman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest thermalman Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 (edited) Not hypocritical from my stand point. Because I'm allowed to think different from you about Patty. A human could indeed have left that track way. I have done so myself in order minimize the workload on the body and legs, especially at knee deep or less of snow. (Lift up--step over--plant foot), with each step, instead of the push and plow method. We're forgetting about how deep the previous snow might have been, and how old the prints might have been, before the fresh snow blanketed the prints. We are only shown the discovery day video of the prints. Edited March 5, 2014 by thermalman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indiefoot Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 I see three choices, bear, Hss, unknown bipedal with a human like foot. I can't imagine a way a bear could have done it. Is it possible that a human could make that trackway? How? Are we left with unknown bipedal at the end? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 Here is a link to a video of fresh bear tracks in 2 feet of snow http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=gGHZ0umfGEE This one the snow is not as deep but there are still some drag marks between steps http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=nESV6WcFTQc The third one looks kinda bigfootish except for the claw marks http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OUfLOtmNeBY I don't know the fancy way to embed video so I hope links are okay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts