Comments on: Finding Bigfoot: Footprint Evidence From NC

By: Opalman

Opalman — Thu, 16 Jun 2011 01:25:19 +0000

C = П x D
or D = C/3.1415

C = 3.1415 x 45.84 = 144″ , 45.84 = Big dia. tires? But I believe Kahil has solved this one.

By: DWA

DWA — Mon, 13 Jun 2011 14:08:12 +0000

No more reason to say these are hoax (or not prints) than that they’re real. Although circumstances make hoax the last thing I would think.

But of course nobody’s going to find anything looking at prints, comparing prints, and trying to imitate prints. How do you compare when there’s no type specimen to compare to? Gotta find the ape; and that requires actually following the prints until they lead someplace.

By: j stewart

j stewart — Mon, 13 Jun 2011 07:07:35 +0000

Just from these pictures it seems no one could say with any level of certainty if they are, or are not. genuine. A person would need to have been there to study them first hand. Pictures don’t allow you to get a look at a 3D image or its surroundings.

By: korollocke

korollocke — Sun, 12 Jun 2011 15:55:39 +0000

Looks like someone used a pair of 1954 novelty crazy feet slippers (they even have dermal ridges bigfooters so highly prize in tracks on there soles!) to make these. Foot prints are like snow flakes no two will exactly the same but these are. Fake.

By: Redrose999

Redrose999 — Sun, 12 Jun 2011 13:32:19 +0000

Please correct me if I am mistaken, but isn’t NC the place where the waving Knobby hoax took place not long ago? And if so, could these two events be connected? My time line sense is off this morning so, forgive me if the question is, well, off base.

And it does to me, with the smudge, (and it seems to be repeated with each track) look like a rolled out fake track way, or like a rubber block print (with an artifact for flaw in the rubber that left the smudge). We used to make stamps all the time it wouldn’t be that difficult to make large tracks with them.

By: norman-uk

norman-uk — Sun, 12 Jun 2011 10:27:45 +0000

Very interesting prints though I am hoping for all the pictures and further analysis. I am inclined to think they are genuine. It is not generally appreciated that the evidence for bigfoot is very good if not conclusive and against this background it would not therefore be an impossible stretch to accept the prints as real bigfoot prints!

Well done ‘Finding bigfoot’

By: Kahil

Kahil — Sun, 12 Jun 2011 05:27:36 +0000

watch it just be that it was a fortunate splotch of mud on a large tire that stamped a foot like pattern as it rolled.

By: jstevens2154

jstevens2154 — Sun, 12 Jun 2011 04:26:58 +0000

@flame821–Too wide for “toe shoes” from a kid or adult human. That’s it.

Solving the other print that is directly above the “big toe” is the key to solving the mystery. What is it? It’s in each picture.

By: EastTexan

EastTexan — Sun, 12 Jun 2011 03:59:15 +0000

@ flame821
I noticed the spots, too, and wondered about them. Don’t know what they are. It would be interesting to compare these footprints to other, well-known, prints and the stride to that at other locations and see how they measure up (no pun intended).

By: Hapa

Hapa — Sun, 12 Jun 2011 02:27:02 +0000

Pretty interesting, but not a body. Just another group of footprints to add to who knows how many have been found so far, hoax or possibly legit.