Comments on: Rocky Mountain Bigfoot Investigation

By: things-in-the-woods

things-in-the-woods — Sat, 17 Mar 2007 10:15:09 +0000

silvereagle- now there are sub-dimensions of the 4th (invisibility) dimension!- man, you gotta give me some sources to read up on this…

By: silvereagle

silvereagle — Sat, 17 Mar 2007 04:58:43 +0000

Bigfoot in a subdimension of the 4th, exert very little pressure on the soil, or in this case snow. Thus resulting in very slight depressions in soft snow. Two Bigfoot walking single file, Indian style, then could theoretically make that large double print in soft snow without sinking in.

By: Jeremy_Wells

Jeremy_Wells — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 20:12:33 +0000

In some of the tracks in the first photo you can see what appears to be a second track directly overtop of the initial track, which to me says “quadruped” right away. With drifting snow, they could very well be distorted ’squatch tracks, but then again, with drifting snow, they could be pretty much be anything.

By: mystery_man

mystery_man — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 16:05:22 +0000

Well, I would have to say inconclusive. Snow can do weird things with tracks, so I’m told. I’d be willing to put forth the theory that those human tracks are not paced as far apart as this person claims they are and if he was up to his knees, then why is there obviously ground at the bottom of the Bigfoot tracks? This aspect of the account does not add up to me. Those human tracks used for comparison seem to be pretty averagly spaced to me when compared to the length of the foot.

By: captiannemo

captiannemo — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 07:47:35 +0000

My dog and I have left similar tracks in the snow.

By: wareagle

wareagle — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 03:22:59 +0000

Mule deer like to bound, unlike whitetails, they would land with front and rear hoofs together. In deep snow their tracks would look not alot different from that pictured, at least for a short stretch.

By: joppa

joppa — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 02:44:40 +0000

Tracks without a sighting = waste of time.

By: springheeledjack

springheeledjack — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 02:05:10 +0000

The thing I wish people would start doing is start measuring things…like if you don’t have a ruler or tape measure, you can use your arm and hand and foot as measurements…at least that provides scale or gives you something to roughly measure when you do get back to civilization with measuring equipment.

And he could have taken a few shots of the prints straight down (like Mike said) once he followed the line as far as he did…no reason to keep from disturbing the evidence if he was not going to come back or take any further measurements or photos…could have given us more info to make a better judgment…

Iffy at best!

SHJ

2ndly, would appreciate a rough idea of how far the tracks went on (10 yards, 50?, 100?)…in snow that went up to the knees, a hoaxer would not be able to keep up a long gait like that for very long…versus perhaps the real BF…

and from looking at the tracks…I am not an expert on four legged things making tracks versus two legged things… so am not sure if the supposed BF tracks are akin to 2 footed strides or not…

My third thought is that it could very easily be two sets of human tracks with one person walking in another set of already made tracks…which could add to the size of the odd tracks

By: Mike Smith

Mike Smith — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 01:02:04 +0000

It’s to hard to tell, looks like a four legged animal print to me. Did he take a picture looking down on any of the prints?

By: DWA

DWA — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 00:21:30 +0000

I don’t know.

They look pretty anomalous. But snow’s that kind of medium.

Couldn’t tell ya.