 |
| Comparing a REAL Bigfoot track to a fake one. |
Bigfoot: A Very Important Point About Footprints!!!
What Is An Ichnologist?
By Dorraine Fisher
In the bigfoot world, footprints are a big source of contention. People that live outside the body of knowledge about these creatures believe that all bigfoot footprints are faked. And bigfoot skeptics too. Because the so-called “authorities” said so around 20 years ago. And therefore, according to them, there is absolutely no evidence to support the idea that sasquatches exist. This is an outsider’s view that could NOT be further from the truth.
Because we have a branch of science on our side known as ichnology. And ichnology is the scientific study of animal traces. Ichnology seeks to determine animal behavior and movement based on the traces they leave behind. And a big part of this is the footprints.
An ichnologist is a type of offshoot of a paleontologist, and is a true scientist who is required to have as much education as any other similar scientist. So, these people really know their stuff when it comes to the evidence left behind by animals. They study small details in the landscape. And any ichnologist can walk into the woods and tell you a lot about what’s been going on there based on tiny traces.
And they must know their footprints. They are the supreme experts in the field of footprints. They can tell you what’s been walking through an area and approximately how long ago. They can tell you how big it was and what was following it. They can often tell you what it was doing or what state of health it was in, and an amazing array of other details about it. But most importantly, they know a faked footprint when they see one.
And here’s where the absurdity comes in.
Authorities will nearly always accept the word of scientists when they tell them something. And ichnologists are usually no exception. They are often called in to determine the activity in an area for purposes of conservation or historic record and are taken at their word. And this is because they really do know what they’re talking about.
But the crazy thing is, if ichnologists are called in about a 16-inch bare footprint found in the mud on a cold morning in the woods and everyone’s whispering about possibilities of bigfoot, it seems their knowledge is suddenly not respected any more. If they say, “Yep, it’s a real footprint.” Suddenly they don’t know what they’re talking about. They’ve been right about everything else pertaining to their chosen branch of science, but suddenly they’re wrong about THIS.
A real print is easily spotted...by a trained eye. A living, fleshy foot makes distinct marks in the ground. The movement of dozens of bones, ligaments, and tendons come into play and move in a fluid motion and create what is known as compression lines in the inner edge of the track. And then there are dermal ridges, that are like the fingerprints of the feet, come into play here also. These lines on the bottom of the feet that look just like the type of lines on our fingers cannot be faked. In conjunction with the sequential movement of a real, fleshy foot, these tell the real story experts can interpret.
Fake prints are the result of a solid object like a wooden or plaster “foot” pressing down onto a surface. And they produce what is known as impact ridges which are ridges created on the outer perimeter of the print from the solid object, with absolutely no give at all, pressing against the surface and pushing out. No sequential movement of the bones or muscles inside the foot can be detected in the print, no dermal ridges can be seen, and the prints are basically identical.
In essence, a real fleshy foot gives way to the uneven surface of the ground underneath it whereas a wooden or plaster foot does not. It’s like the difference between a shoe print and bare foot print. The faked print has more clear characteristics of that of a shoe print than a real bare foot print. And the real experts in this field joke that they can teach these characteristic differences to a child.
But people still say the experts, the ichnologists, the scientists trained in the study of animal traces, are wrong. They’re the experts and they’re right about everything else, but when it comes to any prints that might be bigfoot, they’re wrong about THOSE. Just those.
But are there fake prints? Absolutely, yes. But are all the hundreds or even thousands of prints fake, everywhere in North America that have ever been found? Absolutely not, as the ichnologists will tell you.
Bigfoot footprints are still the clearest REAL evidence we have of bigfoot’s existence. But skeptics will continually try to argue the point...with literally no leg to stand on. Hey, if you won’t take the word of scientists, then you’re just not interested in the facts.
****************DF
This Post By TCC Team Member Dorraine Fisher. Dorraine is a
Professional Writer, photographer, a nature, wildlife and Bigfoot
enthusiast who has written for many magazines. Dorraine conducts
research, special interviews and more for The Crypto Crew. Get
Dorraine's book The Book Of Blackthorne!
This post sponsored in part by
(Interested in sponsoring a story? then send us an Email!)
Posts
