Martin 458 Posted July 30, 2017 Share Posted July 30, 2017 (edited) Bigfoothunter, It's weird that your recollection of conversations are in direct conflict with the photographic record. Your track record of being a unreliable source is telling. I'll stick with the pictures. Edited July 30, 2017 by Martin Link to post Share on other sites
PBeaton 2,913 Posted July 30, 2017 Share Posted July 30, 2017 47 minutes ago, Martin said: Bigfoothunter, It's weird that your recollection of conversations are in direct conflict with the photographic record. I'll stick with the pictures. I almost spit my beer out ! Link to post Share on other sites
Martin 458 Posted July 30, 2017 Share Posted July 30, 2017 On 7/29/2017 at 5:11 PM, OldMort said: Ill let the record speak for itself Pat. Have fun pretending. Link to post Share on other sites
PBeaton 2,913 Posted July 30, 2017 Share Posted July 30, 2017 As you should...like John said...."Deep dust stirred up by the road equipment was the only material the tracks would show in, and it was so soft that human tracks would sink in it to almost equal depth." When you don't Martin, you contradict what John said an photographed...talk about direct conflict... Link to post Share on other sites
Squatchy McSquatch 845 Posted July 31, 2017 Share Posted July 31, 2017 That's a fake track, Pat. Link to post Share on other sites
PBeaton 2,913 Posted July 31, 2017 Share Posted July 31, 2017 I've said it just recently Squatchy McSquatch, I don't have a problem with your opinion on the matter. I'm sure when you show your trackway recreation, stride an depth etc. will be takin' into account, because you know it will be judged. If it was as easy as folks claim, folks would post recreations all the time, I'm guessin' you've found it a tad more tryin' than a simple stroll in stompers. It's like the supposed crappy suit...should be easy to replicate ...yet... Did you notice the difference from what Martin claims as opposed to the photo an what John said about it ? That is what I was addressin'. Whether you think them fake or not, clearly there is a difference in depth in the photo by John in which he actually comments about the depth difference...that Martin...somehow...refuses to not only see, but tries ta maintain John doesn't provide any evidence of the noticeable difference in track depth ! Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Bigfoothunter Posted July 31, 2017 Share Posted July 31, 2017 2 hours ago, Squatchy McSquatch said: That's a fake track, Pat. A response without a detailed explanation is a fake response. Link to post Share on other sites
PBeaton 2,913 Posted July 31, 2017 Share Posted July 31, 2017 (edited) He leaves less of a impression than the human tracks alongside the 13 inch track... Edited July 31, 2017 by PBeaton Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts