Jump to content

Recommended Posts

The lateral plantar would be continuous as it would be at about the same depression as the heel and the metatarsal pad; in the case of the specimen above, there is an obvious discontinuity between where the presumptive metarsal and tarsal pads would be. 

  • I found this Informative 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Desertboy said:

Why do you say that? This has only been analyzed on the basis of photographic evidence. 

 

Photographic evidence is really all we have to go on.   :unsure:

Based on that, the shape of the alleged print is wrong, the type of rock hosting the features is wrong.

 

  • I found this Informative 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

How can we say that based on photographic evidence? Becuase the photo shows all the things that show that it isn’t a footprint Plus the fact that the “toes” would be longer then most peoples fingers…..

20E95EE0-B5C8-4490-BD40-4E21723FD82F.jpeg

Edited by Randyw
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...