Hybrid Hypothesis Dead, Done, Stick A Fork In It....

[salubrious]

http://www2.isu.edu/~meldd/fxnlmorph.html

 

To a trained tracker, what this looks like is not knowing really what is being told by the tracks. I'm not disputing that they are real- that's not the point. What is the point is that Meldrum just does not have training in tracking, else he would have recognized what these tracks are saying, which is not 'mid tarsal' break, but instead how fast and how heavy the individual is.

 

If you want to call something dead- stick a fork in it, its the mid tarsal break. It comes out of not understanding tracking and nothing more. If BF has a mid tarsal break, so do we humans, since we leave the same message in the track (although our tracks tend to be smaller). Since we don't have a mid tarsal break, its logical to assume that BF does not either, based on what the tracks have to say.

 

I hate to be the one having to dash the mid tarsal break theory, but its simply evidence that Meldrum had no training in tracking. See below:

 

 

I don't know enough about foot morphology to make any argument one way or the other, but I do have one explanation for some of these tracks.

 

I'm not an expert tracker, but I've done some here and there.  Many times I've walked carefully for a few miles and then backtracked myself to see what sign I left on different substrates so I'd better know what to look for in others.

 

I've spent way too much time walking on the beach, and there are tons of footprints left.  Lots of midtarsal breaks exhibited - but they weren't left by bigfoots, and on the way back, I've noted that I even left those types of tracks.

 

If you are casually taking your time, your foot will pretty much put straight downforce in the sand.  But if you're stretching your legs out a bit - the heel comes down in a bit of a forward motion, "pushing" a bit of sand up in front of the heel in the direction you're walking.  Then when your foot "pushes" off on the ball of the foot and toes, you "push" a bit of sand back, adding to the previous line your heel pushed forward, and you have the clear indication that you have a mid tarsal break - even when you don't.

 

Moisture content of sand will further enhance or minimize this effect.  Close to the water, more moisture content, fifty feet back, very little moisture content.  As one wanders to and fro, you'll note some areas will show a "midtarsal break" and other areas won't.

 

Patty.  Where was she walking?  Creek bottom?  Sand?

 

I personally don't put much faith in an apparent this midtarsal break routine as an indicator of an ape status - just as it's too easily duplicated inadvertently - with longer gaits.

Plussed.

[ShadowBorn]

To a trained tracker, what this looks like is not knowing really what is being told by the tracks. I'm not disputing that they are real- that's not the point. What is the point is that Meldrum just does not have training in tracking, else he would have recognized what these tracks are saying, which is not 'mid tarsal' break, but instead how fast and how heavy the individual is.

 

If you want to call something dead- stick a fork in it, its the mid tarsal break. It comes out of not understanding tracking and nothing more. If BF has a mid tarsal break, so do we humans, since we leave the same message in the track (although our tracks tend to be smaller). Since we don't have a mid tarsal break, its logical to assume that BF does not either, based on what the tracks have to say.

 

I hate to be the one having to dash the mid tarsal break theory, but its simply evidence that Meldrum had no training in tracking. See below:

Salubrious

Now I am not an expert in tracking, but the problem I find with this is . That this only fits with people who have flat feet and not people with and arch. It would take practice to create this mid tarsal break. The one way I can see it happening with out practice is when walking with tennis shoes with duck tape on the bottom. This might leave that impression but will not leave the toes, or the detail of how even the foot moves through out the walk.

 

The tracks that I find would leave a heavy toe and heel impression, but even with in the step. Other tracks that I have seen impressions off, seem to look like a up and down movement like a stomp. But I am in no way capable of determining this since I am not an expert. But The tracks I have found do seem  to show this even break between the toe area and heel area. This is just my opinion, I am sorry that I do not take castings of the tracks I find but I do not want to seem like I am studying them but an active hunter.

[JDL]

I for one am getting tired of rampant speculation absent evidence.  And the presence of sapiens anywhere in this animal is simply not supported by evidence.

 

 

 

I for one am getting tired of rampant speculation absent evidence.  And the presence of sapiens anywhere in this animal is simply not supported by evidence.

Or even the genus Homo.

 

 

Have you two actually seen one up close?

[Incorrigible1]

Reports, man. Reports!

[norseman]

http://www2.isu.edu/~meldd/fxnlmorph.html

To a trained tracker, what this looks like is not knowing really what is being told by the tracks. I'm not disputing that they are real- that's not the point. What is the point is that Meldrum just does not have training in tracking, else he would have recognized what these tracks are saying, which is not 'mid tarsal' break, but instead how fast and how heavy the individual is.

If you want to call something dead- stick a fork in it, its the mid tarsal break. It comes out of not understanding tracking and nothing more. If BF has a mid tarsal break, so do we humans, since we leave the same message in the track (although our tracks tend to be smaller). Since we don't have a mid tarsal break, its logical to assume that BF does not either, based on what the tracks have to say.

I hate to be the one having to dash the mid tarsal break theory, but its simply evidence that Meldrum had no training in tracking. See below:

I don't know enough about foot morphology to make any argument one way or the other, but I do have one explanation for some of these tracks.

I'm not an expert tracker, but I've done some here and there. Many times I've walked carefully for a few miles and then backtracked myself to see what sign I left on different substrates so I'd better know what to look for in others.

I've spent way too much time walking on the beach, and there are tons of footprints left. Lots of midtarsal breaks exhibited - but they weren't left by bigfoots, and on the way back, I've noted that I even left those types of tracks.

If you are casually taking your time, your foot will pretty much put straight downforce in the sand. But if you're stretching your legs out a bit - the heel comes down in a bit of a forward motion, "pushing" a bit of sand up in front of the heel in the direction you're walking. Then when your foot "pushes" off on the ball of the foot and toes, you "push" a bit of sand back, adding to the previous line your heel pushed forward, and you have the clear indication that you have a mid tarsal break - even when you don't.

Moisture content of sand will further enhance or minimize this effect. Close to the water, more moisture content, fifty feet back, very little moisture content. As one wanders to and fro, you'll note some areas will show a "midtarsal break" and other areas won't.

Patty. Where was she walking? Creek bottom? Sand?

I personally don't put much faith in an apparent this midtarsal break routine as an indicator of an ape status - just as it's too easily duplicated inadvertently - with longer gaits.

Plussed.

I have played around with human tracks abit and i see more of the twisting pressure disc at the ball of the foot in a human trackline than a mid tarsal break.

Although I think there are probably humans that could exhibit it if they have super flexible feet.

And Meldrum is an expert on primate foot morphology, he may not be a expert tracker but he certains understands the mechanics of the primate foot. He studies great Apes to great detail.

Edited April 19, 2016 by norseman

[Yuchi1]

Meldrum, Green, Byrne, Krantz & Dahindren all have/had one thing in common....no encounter with this entity, yet they are generally regarded as voices of authority. No wonder BF is still an enigma as (rhetorically speaking) the inmates are running the asylum. 

[southernyahoo]

There isn't any evidence that sapiens is part of this discussion.

That strikes me as extremely ironic every time I look at that face in your avatar.

[ShadowBorn]

And the presence of sapiens anywhere in this animal is simply not supported by evidence.

But yet when people have sightings of these creatures they report features of the creatures having:

1. Hands
2. arms
3. stand upright
4. walking straight like sapiens
5. They act like sapiens with the exception of not living like we do
6. also there are reports of them having a language like us sapiens

So the reported evidence at least reports that they are like us with the exception that they live in the wild. So it is foolish for us to not say that they might have some thing with in their DNA that says that they are not part human, when the way their body is built says differently. The evidence is there and has been there in the open for all to see, but the academics has refused to except it. The refusal to except this is due to that it goes against the laws of nature. Man and beast is not suppose to mix and yet we have a creature that has. This creature goes against all laws of nature that is not suppose to be broken and one wonders why science is so against this. It is this explanation that I have given that has broken the will of the powers to be of science to except the DNA of these creatures. This is trying hard  staying within the perimeters of the forum rules. I am all for to debate the issue and have no problem with this.DWA 

 

But yet the presence of sapiens is all over in this creature that cannot be denied and must be discussed among science. Answer must be found why nature allowed this to take place. Why did man and beast mix and what purpose did it serve?

Edited April 19, 2016 by ShadowBorn

[norseman]

^^^^^

The not living like we do part is huge. Unless we want to throw out what we do know about the genus Homo? Then we need to make some exclusions.

[WSA]

I have always thought our opinion on what is sapien, or not, is informed much more by our own self-serving criteria than anything else. Do winners get to write the history? Well, in all probability we sure did. So, the definition of  all non-sapiens as "anything not us" is a handy but completely useless classification, in my book.  The first casualty of a BF confirmation is going to be this idea. 

 

We can't help it though. We do it by classification of our own superficial racial characteristics and convince ourselves such a division is meaningful.  I suppose it makes us feel some better, on some level, but it sure gets in the way of seeing things clearly. 

[ShadowBorn]

^^^^^

The not living like we do part is huge. Unless we want to throw out what we do know about the genus Homo? Then we need to make some exclusions.

Norseman

I do not know what tracks it was that you saw that kept you on your quest, but yes the not living like we do is huge! How is it possible that a creature that resembles like us has been able to evade a species like us Humans. Unless it did not have some form of Human in it's DNA which made it possible. But it is this mixture of the strands between man and beast that defy's the law. This just does not happen over night but takes time, a lot of time. Am I wrong on this or am I right?

 

IF some one was to create a tree between man and beast, and of this tree there ore two branches named man and beast. Under man we have male and female, two branches now braking off. This is now the pure seed, not mixed with nothing. On our second branch we have now beast which also has two branches breaking off named male and female, the beast seed.

 

A pure seed male now mates with a beast seed female and creates a male half breed which now mates with a female beast seeds . This now starts the process of what has been staring at us in the face. This has been going on for years and when the species starts to dwindle, a pure seed female or male is needed so that the species may live on. Now this is theory but very plausible. DNA will prove this but to kill one of these creatures there is a price to pay. I have asked once if there is a curse to whom ever kills one of these creatures. The only way to find out is through history and the person who might of had knowledge of this on this forum has passed away a long time ago. Maybe Gumshoe might be knowledgeable of this.  

[FarArcher]

Meldrum, Green, Byrne, Krantz & Dahindren all have/had one thing in common....no encounter with this entity, yet they are generally regarded as voices of authority. No wonder BF is still an enigma as (rhetorically speaking) the inmates are running the asylum. 

 

Odd that the leading authorities have no close, personal observation of any kind or duration.  

 

Never seen them run.  Never seen how fast they run.  Never seen their stride. Never seen the odd knee and ankle structures that cause the odd way they run - or should I say "ski."  Never seen them running toward them, never seen them passing by them, never seen them running away from them.  Never seen their face.  Never seen their eyes.  Never seen how they lean forward, never seen their unbelievable mass, and never seen their skin and hair.

 

But they're the experts.

 

I want my aircraft mechanic to have never turned a wrench, never wired anything, and whose only experience is considering reports of planes flying over others.

[salubrious]

Salubrious

Now I am not an expert in tracking, but the problem I find with this is . That this only fits with people who have flat feet and not people with and arch. It would take practice to create this mid tarsal break. The one way I can see it happening with out practice is when walking with tennis shoes with duck tape on the bottom. This might leave that impression but will not leave the toes, or the detail of how even the foot moves through out the walk.

 

The tracks that I find would leave a heavy toe and heel impression, but even with in the step. Other tracks that I have seen impressions off, seem to look like a up and down movement like a stomp. But I am in no way capable of determining this since I am not an expert. But The tracks I have found do seem  to show this even break between the toe area and heel area. This is just my opinion, I am sorry that I do not take castings of the tracks I find but I do not want to seem like I am studying them but an active hunter.

 

 

I have a substantial arch, but no worries getting a dish in my own tracks. No practice needed. The dish simply tells you that the individual that made the track was going above a certain speed. Of course the amount of dish varies with speed and also with the substrate. It is important to note though that all substrates behave the same way and only varies according to degree.

 

What you are looking at in your second paragraph is something I've seen as well- in both humans and in BF. In humans its caused by a gait called foxwalking, where the toes lead the heel as the foot sets down. Its a natural way of walking if you don't have shoes on and can't be looking down to where you are setting your foot. This allows you to keep your eyes on your environment which can be essential for survival (and also stealth). BTW, foxwalking results in a nearly linear trackway identical in appearance to how BF trackways look (the difference being the size of the foot and length of stride). 

[Guest DWA]

 

There isn't any evidence that sapiens is part of this discussion.

That strikes me as extremely ironic every time I look at that face in your avatar.

 

All apes have eyes.  We don't consider them all sapiens on that, do we?

 

WSA speaks above about assumptions that to say the least add no clarity.  That can cut both ways.  Bobbie Short said that their feet are just like ours, ergo, they are people with souls.  Um, not only are their feet not precisely like ours, but physical characters don't convey that way.  Birds are bipedal, but we sure don't think they're people.  Yet suddenly these are?  (Never mind that the known apes are far more bipedal than most seem to think.)  We shouldn't assume "ape," we shouldn't assume "human," we should make no assumptions except those warranted by the evidence.  ("Probably primate" appears safe.)  Right now, putting sapiens anywhere in this discussion not only muddies the waters but muddies them beyond the tolerance of the people whose time and funding could start dealing with this enigma...if they didn't think it loony.  

 

I find most of our assumptions about ourselves vis-a-vis other life unseemly arrogant, at best.  How about keep the things that don't add clarity out of the conversation?  I am really not seeing what sapiens is adding to this...that taxonomy wouldn't, and then some, but won't, until people get involved enough to finally bring taxonomy to bear on the matter.

 

(BTW:  the witness who supplied the artist the description resulting in my avatar said he couldn't use the word "ape" to describe what he saw.  "Scarily human," for what that's worth, he also said.  OK, fine, he saw it - and I am convinced, having both read the report many times and heard him retell it in person, that he did see it - and I didn't.  But that's not taxonomy.  That's an opinion based on a brief childhood encounter.  Science knows what to do with those.)

Edited April 19, 2016 by DWA

[norseman]

Meldrum, Green, Byrne, Krantz & Dahindren all have/had one thing in common....no encounter with this entity, yet they are generally regarded as voices of authority. No wonder BF is still an enigma as (rhetorically speaking) the inmates are running the asylum.

Odd that the leading authorities have no close, personal observation of any kind or duration.

Never seen them run. Never seen how fast they run. Never seen their stride. Never seen the odd knee and ankle structures that cause the odd way they run - or should I say "ski." Never seen them running toward them, never seen them passing by them, never seen them running away from them. Never seen their face. Never seen their eyes. Never seen how they lean forward, never seen their unbelievable mass, and never seen their skin and hair.

But they're the experts.

I want my aircraft mechanic to have never turned a wrench, never wired anything, and whose only experience is considering reports of planes flying over others.

How many scientists have been to Mars? And yet they can land a rover on the surface and take soil samples, and send back the data.

Ive watched shuttle launches too.....but that doesnt make me an aeronautical engineer.

I'm not attempting to belittle your experiences, far from it. But we should be rejoicing that scientists like Krantz and Meldrum take your sighting seriously and are attempting to understand it. Versus discrediting them because they are not eye witnesses.

(Krantz - RIP)

Edited April 19, 2016 by norseman