image
[A 'fossil footprint' found by Alvis Delk, and sold to the Creation museum. Apparently, dinosaur feet looked like something a five year old would draw, humans had drills on the bottom of their big toes, and ancient footprints didn't distort when stepped on]
55 comments
On adjacent parts, even, the 'dino' print is over the top of the 'human' print (over the ball of the 'human' foot), but the 'human' heel is over the top of the 'dino's left toe! What were they doing, playing Twister?
Someone please tell me how much money they wasted on this... that doesn't even look like the kind of footprint you see from dinosaurs...
We should tell the creationists that dinosaurs evolved a human foot on their 'toes', just to mess with them.
Alvis Delk: 1.
Creation Museum: 0.
So this guy finds a dinosaur footprint fossil. Then he falls off a ladder and needs money. All of a sudden, mirabile dictu !, he discovers there's a human footprint there, too. So, of course, he sells it to some gullible creation museum. And the whole ToE crumbles, just like it did when they discovered a coelacanth (thought to have gone extinct when the dinosaurs did) in 1938.
John wrote:
"So this guy finds a dinosaur footprint fossil. Then he falls off a ladder and needs money. All of a sudden, mirabile dictu!, he discovers there's a human footprint there, too." Ah, no no no no!
Notice that the "dinosaur" footprint appears on top of the human footprint.
He probably stepped on the cement, then took his foot off, then pressed his wooden cut-out of a "dinosaur" foot into the cement before it dried.
"A 'fossil footprint' found by Alvis Delk, and sold to the Creation museum. Apparently, dinosaur feet looked like something a five year old would draw, humans had drills on the bottom of their big toes, and ancient footprints didn't distort when stepped on"
Ummm...goddidit?
Looks more like a person stepped on the other footprint, not the other way around. The middle and left "toe" on the obviously fake dino print are crushed in.
There aren't even any deeper indents at the ends of the toes to signify claws sinking into the ground, for crying out loud. It's just one flat print.
The fact that he sold it to a creationist museum and didn't have some real scientists examine the fossil proves that it's fake (besides being obviously fake). If it was real, he could have shown it to some scientists, become world famous for such a discovery, and become a very rich man.
In addition to everything else that's been mentioned which is wrong with this 'fossil', look at where the human left (big) toe is supposed to meet the foot. That's only possible if this guy had no left toe, and something randomly made this big ass hole in the ground right about where his toe should have been. All the other toes are damned near perfect in size, shape, position.
A fool and their money...
hahaha! The pic above this was just posted. If that was Jeff Goldblooms foot in the fossil, the price just dropped a bit.
lmao!!!!
Here is the best part:
"A domestic fall from a ladder eight months ago nearly crippled Delk, resulting in surgeries, a long recovery and expensive medical bills. He decided to try and sell some of his archeological treasurers...."
So all you having trouble paying medical bills all you have to do is get a large piece of limestone....
Do you think it's necessary to add that as almost all limestone is the remains of fossilised reefs formed off the coast on continental shelves, this fossil would not only prove that man and dinosaur at one time co-existed, but they also had gills and lived in the ocean...
...perhaps we had an octopus's garden of Eden. Sorry, I forgot, God just put the fossils in limestone to test my faith. Unclean...unclean...
Carl Baugh, the owner of the museum in question, is well known for trying to pass off fake footprints as ground-breaking evidence for creationism. AIG have described his work as nonsense and an embarassment to the creationist movement, which gives you some idea of just how much of a crackpot he must be!
Most of his "qualifications" come from a diploma mill that he is president of and the rest come from other unaccredited institutions. Somehow I don't think evolutionary scientists are going to be losing much sleep over this.
The human foot has an overly large and unusually round big toe. Also, the other toes are a bit too long.
This is a real human footprint.
image
Compare this with the photo in Alvis's post.
jp - According to the story "Dr" Baugh claims that it was subjected to CT scans, which proved that it was genuine. It seems that nobody else has had the chance to examine it yet.
Quite a lot of supposed prints from the same area have been debunked:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/paluxy/mantrack.html
http://www.mineralwellsindex.com/homepage/local_story_210093256.html
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
