[hurly]

The footprints reputed to be of human origin are not. For example:
Some of the footprints are dinosaur footprints. Processes such as erosion, infilling, and mud collapse obscure the dinosaurian features of some footprints, making them look like giant human footprints, but careful cleaning reveals the three-toed tracks of dinosaurs (Hastings 1987; Kuban 1989).
Some of the reputed prints are erosional features or other irregularities. They show no clear human features without selective highlighting.
Some of the prints show evidence of deliberate alteration (Godfrey 1985).


The Paluxy tracks are illustrative of creationists' wishful thinking and of their unwillingness to face evidence. Although some creationists have repudiated the Paluxy claim, many others still cling to it (Schadewald 1986).

Research is our friend.

[Doctor Stochastic]

I saw those footprints a couple of weeks ago. I also recommend Hammond's BBQ for good, reasonable priced BBQ in Glen Rose (my bona fides.)

The park at Glen Rose is nice. The paleontologists have used forensic techniques (just like on "Forensic Files" or "Cold Case Files" or in the textbooks) to analyze the footprint evidence. One can see the tracks of a hard of vegetarians running from some carnivores.

No blood-spatter nor blunt objects or shell casings though; just footprints; none of them human.