Thread: Bigfoot prints found in Whiteriver

SD....is it me...or does the trackway look to be the same size and the guys feet. They don't look to be all that far apart...and there are also intermingling of other footprints. The other tracks also look the same.

One other thing is why they never mentioned what state the trackway was in....I only figured it out because I know where the apaches were located.

SD, thanks for the link.
CB, your right, they don't add up in any way. If you look at them and see how the creature would walk from the way the prints are, it's just not right. And they would be bigger. The way it looks like, limping, injured or something, if it was real but I highly highly doubt it.
What state is it?
Oy.

Originally Posted by KelliAli627

SD, thanks for the link.
CB, your right, they don't add up in any way. If you look at them and see how the creature would walk from the way the prints are, it's just not right. And they would be bigger. The way it looks like, limping, injured or something, if it was real but I highly highly doubt it.
What state is it?
Oy.

kelli...the Apache reservation is in New Mexico. IMO this is simply a human trackway.

Originally Posted by Castle-Bravo354

kelli...the Apache reservation is in New Mexico. IMO this is simply a human trackway.

The article states that before someone had been there and put there foot marks beside them and inside them for comparisons they figure. That would explain why they do not look very good...also the photo is at a bad pespective. Could they be still be simply human footprints?...yeah if the whole article is simply an outright lie.
No one that claims to know bigfoot could be that stupid, not to know the difference.

Originally Posted by SOUL-DRIFTER

Could they be still be simply human footprints?...yeah if the whole article is simply an outright lie.
No one that claims to know bigfoot could be that stupid, not to know the difference.

SD....there are such articles that are outright lies.....but bear in mind that yes people can be that stupid. to not know the difference.

Originally Posted by Castle-Bravo354

SD....there are such articles that are outright lies.....but bear in mind that yes people can be that stupid. to not know the difference.

Is that your assumption or have you actually met a bigfoot researcher that couldn't tell the difference?

Originally Posted by SOUL-DRIFTER

Is that your assumption or have you actually met a bigfoot researcher that couldn't tell the difference?

SD...I never said researchers can't tell the difference....I said people can't tell the difference. You appear to be assuming this man is a researcher that knows the difference....as the tracks do not bear up to the statement.

You do agree people lie, are stupid and/or do not know the difference don't you?....

I do believe in bigfoot....but the burden of proof is not on me in this case...but the people that have alleged evidence....so I can question whoever I bloody well please. As I expect to be questioned if and when I find "evidence" on the bigfoot hunt I'll be going on in NY this spring.

Actually I have met bigfoot hunters that have little knowledge of tracking.

For all I know CB...maybe you had met one, there are some green researchers that do not seem to know squat...so do not get angry!
As popular as the subject is...hardly any CB!! But then I do not test them to find out either. But I do not believe there are as many liars or stupid people as you seem to suspect. Yes they are around, but I refuse to become cynical or paranoid because of it. I did not say you couldn't question the story. I just like to understand the reason for some responses...maybe I agree...maybe I do not, it adds to the discussion and can be enlightening...positive and negative, but hopefully the former. If that upsets you then I will no longer post follow-up responses or comments to yours.
The area is known for bigfoot reports so I do not find the story unlikely...