JDL Posted June 8, 2014 Share Posted June 8, 2014 what if the soil was wet when the tracks were initially made? Wouldn't that account for the depth? Yes, and sorta kinda. Track depth depends on soil composition, including moisture. A track from a 200 lb individual will be different in wet vs dry sand, for example. Track depth isn't linear with weight, though. There's a weight threshold where you get just heavy enough to overcome the friction in the soil and you cause it to fluidize, shifting out from underneath and away from the foot instead of compressing under the foot. So a 300 lb individual can leave a track that is twice as deep, or more, than that of a 200 lb individual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mesabe Posted June 8, 2014 Share Posted June 8, 2014 I took some photos of 2 tracks found in wet peat/mud next to our irrigation ditch. (a link to them is in BigTex's thread "in the Field") I was looking for bear tracks, due to some suspected bear activity, based on our dogs barking etc. I didn't find bear tracks, but did find these, with no claw marks. They measured 17.5" long, and 8.5" wide, five toes visible. They may have expanded slightly. I noticed they were about 2" deep in some spots, my own tracks in cowboy boots, and my rott/pyrenees cross dog sunk about 1.5". I was 200lbs. dog close to that. lol I also noticed that deer sink way deeper, probly due to less weight distribution on a smaller track. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDL Posted June 8, 2014 Share Posted June 8, 2014 Exactly, each soil is different, and it can vary within a few feet. A heel imprint, or the imprint of the ball of the foot will be deeper because all of the weight is concentrated at that point when the heel or ball of the foot strikes. In a normal stride, as the foot is placed and rolls across the ground, the heel will strike first, and more deeply, then the arch will leave a more shallow impression, and then the ball of the foot will leave a deeper one as it is used to push forward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incorrigible1 Posted June 8, 2014 Share Posted June 8, 2014 If the bigfoot creature has the mid-tarsal break, as theorized by Dr. Meldrum and others, the whole ball striking first and push-off with toes scenario flies out the window. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MIB Posted June 8, 2014 Moderator Share Posted June 8, 2014 Only true on flat ground without obstacles. Climbing up or down steeply you'd still get a partial track. Further, just as a percentage of humans turn out to have a mid-tarsal break, it would be equally reasonable to consider the possibility some BFs lack that break. Ever see two dogs? Ever see two horses? Ever see two cows? Were they EXACTLY identical or did they have individual variations? You're essentially demanding every bigfoot be cut from the same identical cookie cutter pattern or they can't be real. Nature doesn't work that way. MIB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted June 8, 2014 Share Posted June 8, 2014 (edited) ^^^Precisely. There is no area of this topic where the skeptics put their ignorance on display quite like where they say: that would never happen...and they are describing something that is repeatedly reported, over and over, by scientists, hunters, naturalists and other tireless workers in the field. For the animals we know about. Edited June 8, 2014 by DWA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted June 8, 2014 Share Posted June 8, 2014 (edited) Not to mention how long - and how many Ph.Ds, and how many foot doctors and how many surgeons and how many shoe stores etc. - it took us to "find out" that our feet aren't all precisely alike. The mechanism of the sasquatch foot hasn't been studied. It's only been speculated upon. Because...we don't have a specimen. But no. Hallucinations, swamp gas, lies, campfire stories, and seeing-cow-thinking-bigfoot are all much more logical than simply getting that specimen. More fun too. O-kay. Edited June 8, 2014 by DWA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 8, 2014 Share Posted June 8, 2014 Yes, and sorta kinda. Track depth depends on soil composition, including moisture. A track from a 200 lb individual will be different in wet vs dry sand, for example. Track depth isn't linear with weight, though. There's a weight threshold where you get just heavy enough to overcome the friction in the soil and you cause it to fluidize, shifting out from underneath and away from the foot instead of compressing under the foot. So a 300 lb individual can leave a track that is twice as deep, or more, than that of a 200 lb individual. right I didn't watch the episode because I try to prevent my head from exploding. I just can't really imagine a probable scenario that would allow a researcher to accurately figure out the weight of a subject. I would think that one would almost have to witness the tracks being made and then directly proceed to test that exact area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDL Posted June 8, 2014 Share Posted June 8, 2014 If the bigfoot creature has the mid-tarsal break, as theorized by Dr. Meldrum and others, the whole ball striking first and push-off with toes scenario flies out the window. Actually, I had human locomotion in mind when I wrote that. I leave the bigfoot locomotion to Krantz (rip) and Meldrum. I would think that one would almost have to witness the tracks being made and then directly proceed to test that exact area. Exactly. A little drier, or a little wetter and the soil will behave differently. Wind, sun, and precipitation all change things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 8, 2014 Share Posted June 8, 2014 (edited) I for one find the episode norse is talking about to be interesting. a conclusion of 800lbs sounds like more than just the dirt or sand being a little wet giving it more depth. if im not mistaken, wasnt the track also in the middle of nowhere? so someone was barefoot in the boonies or a hoaxer was hoping someone would randomly fimd the fake print someday? haha, Edited June 8, 2014 by ItsAsquatch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted June 8, 2014 Share Posted June 8, 2014 Well there are lots of track reports which, if they were faked, the only thing one can think is "well, it takes all kinds of experts in primate foot anatomy to make a world." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 8, 2014 Share Posted June 8, 2014 Can you rephrase that? i dont understand Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted June 8, 2014 Share Posted June 8, 2014 If they were found where they were, and if they appear the way they do...then it wasn't some casual faker who went out there and faked them. Meldrum has numerous casts like that, taken from enough places that if they're all faked, well there is either one well-traveled person or a number of them out there capable of fooling somebody who's made a good enough living out of studying primate foot anatomy that he can carve out tons of free time to look for sasquatch. I'm kind of not placing a load of money on that bet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 8, 2014 Share Posted June 8, 2014 Right. some secret society of track hoaxers that make tracks in extremely remote areas somftimes just hoping they will be found. yea, not likely Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted June 8, 2014 Share Posted June 8, 2014 ^^^Never mind the family guild of professional suitmakers, whose craft exceeds anything Hollywood or the U.S. military has even dreamed of. Or whatever mental illness causes thousands of people to call on their inner wildlife biologist. to hallucinate a completely plausible biological profile for a temperate-zone omnivourous primate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts