# Creation "Science" and human footprints **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [January 27, 2005, 12:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creation-science-and-human-footprints/286844 "2005-01-27T00:11:08Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 12\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Aaron\_Koing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/7ea924/32.png) [@Aaron\_Koing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aaron_Koing)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2005, 12:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creation-science-and-human-footprints/286844/1 "2005-01-27T00:11:08Z")
I do not believe in the claims of creation “scientists”, but some human footprints and artifacts found in [http://www.angelfire.com/falcon/megaraptor/human\_footprints\_and\_dinosaur\_tr.htm](http://www.angelfire.com/falcon/megaraptor/human_footprints_and_dinosaur_tr.htm) and [http://www.angelfire.com/falcon/megaraptor/forbidden\_archaeology.htm](http://www.angelfire.com/falcon/megaraptor/forbidden_archaeology.htm) trouble me ince I haven’t seen any refutation of them. How does science explain the tracks and artifacts? -Gerhard ---
**Author:** ![bonzer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/45deac/32.png) [@bonzer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bonzer)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2005, 12:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creation-science-and-human-footprints/286844/2 "2005-01-27T00:18:29Z")
As usual with such matters, [talk.origins](http://www.talkorigins.org) is a good insight. Particularly, [these pages](http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/paluxy.html). [I’ve been to the Paluxy site and I recommend visiting the park, but you won’t find any human tracks.] ---
**Author:** ![Musicat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/musicat/32/20189_2.png) [@Musicat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Musicat)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2005, 12:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creation-science-and-human-footprints/286844/3 "2005-01-27T00:23:19Z")
[Like this.](http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CC/CC101.html) > [@](#): > > The footprints reputed to be of human origin are not. ---
**Author:** ![Aaron\_Koing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/7ea924/32.png) [@Aaron\_Koing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aaron_Koing)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2005, 12:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creation-science-and-human-footprints/286844/4 "2005-01-27T12:49:13Z")
But what about the Permian tracks? They look pretty real to me. And the Carboniferous footprints? Although they do look like cartoons, had any paleontologist invetigated them. If so, did they determine which animal made them? And what about artifacts like the Cretaceous Hammer and the silver object in an ancient, 600 million year old rock? Also, note that the author of the webpage does not believe in the Paluxy tracks. ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2005, 1:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creation-science-and-human-footprints/286844/5 "2005-01-27T13:01:08Z")
> [@Aaron Koing](#): > > But what about the Permian tracks? They look pretty real to me. And the Carboniferous footprints? Although they do look like cartoons, had any paleontologist invetigated them. If so, did they determine which animal made them? And what about artifacts like the Cretaceous Hammer and the silver object in an ancient, 600 million year old rock? > > Also, note that the author of the webpage does not believe in the Paluxy tracks. [The Cretaceous Hammer](http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CC/CC130.html) at talk.origins. ---
**Author:** ![bonzer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/45deac/32.png) [@bonzer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bonzer)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2005, 2:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creation-science-and-human-footprints/286844/6 "2005-01-27T14:36:25Z")
> [@Aaron Koing](#): > > Also, note that the author of the webpage does not believe in the Paluxy tracks. Er, no. They begin by being sort of cautious: > [@](#): > > One of these is the Paluxy River Tracks. These tracks are purported to show man and dinosaurs walking together. However, there are major problems with the Paluxy River Tracks, which can be seen here. Many of these tracks are probably eroded dinosaur tracks, and others may have been faked. More research needs to be done in order to find out whether or not the Paluxy River trail is human. However, they immediately go to claim that it “cannot be true” that one of the Paluxy prints was carved and suggest it may have been made by “a Yeti or Bigfoot”. This “Burdick Print” is [duly discussed on the TO site](http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/paluxy/wilker5.html), as already linked to. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2005, 2:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creation-science-and-human-footprints/286844/7 "2005-01-27T14:42:25Z")
These anomalous artifacts are nearly always presented completely devoid of context (i.e. as 'here’s a piece of rock with a human footprint that is the same age as the dinosaurs, honest! No, I can’t tell you where I found it…"); those that are presented in context are always transparent fakes or wilful misinterpretation of the evidence. I know of no exceptions to this. ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2005, 5:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creation-science-and-human-footprints/286844/8 "2005-01-27T17:40:15Z")
Another cite for it being a hoax: [http://www.skepticfriends.org/forum/showquestion.asp?faq=4&fldAuto=49](http://www.skepticfriends.org/forum/showquestion.asp?faq=4&fldAuto=49) > [@](#): > > In addition, many well-defined, fossilized human footprints were sold around that site, but scientists quickly saw that those were fakes. During the 1930s, when the dinosaur tracks were first discovered, a bunch of Glen Rose residents sculpted fake footprints and sold them to tourists. > > Six years later, John Morris acknowledged this dilemma in the ICR’s January 1986 “Impact” newsletter called “The Paluxy Mystery.” This is significant because the Institute for Creation Research almost never admits to errors. > > Yet on February 25, 1996, Charlton Heston hosted a pseudo-documentary called “In Search of Human Origins” that resurrected the Fred Flintstone hoax all over again! It is my opinion that many of the people making these claims today are not believers but are using deliberate disinformation to trick the credulous. As **Mangetout** says, it is all fake. There is not one single scientific claim to be made in favor of creationism. ---
**Author:** ![Twoflower](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/twoflower/32/22_2.png) [@Twoflower](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Twoflower)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2005, 8:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creation-science-and-human-footprints/286844/9 "2005-01-27T20:14:44Z")
The #1 fallacy of all the “creation science” BS is the idea that if only they can somehow poke a hole in evolutionary theory that this will somehow prove biblical creation as the only viable alternative theory. This is nothing less than an utter and complete failure to understand what science even is and how it works. So what if there \*was \*a real, bona fide fossil find which linked humans and dinosaurs in the same time? (There isn’t, of course, as well debunked elsewhere in this thread.) It would certainly send a lot of paleontologists into a tizzy to try to figure it out – not sure what they might come up with, but I guarantee they wouldn’t suddenly decide that genesis was litereally true. \*Way \*too much other contradicting evidence. real science = the evidence doesn’t match your theory, so you go back and adjust your theory until it is consistent with the evidence. creation “science” = the evidence doesn’t match your theory, so you you keep trying to refute, deny or change the evidence. And pretend that disproving another theory is all that’s required to prove yours. You’ll notice that not a single one of these so-called fossil finds is discussed in a valid, peer-reviewed scienctific publication. The bs-ers always claim that the evidence is being supressed or something. But come on … if any one of these “fossils” was legitimate, there would be tremendous scientific stir and discussion. For example, the idea that the dinosaurs were wiped out by a meteor strike was widely scoffed at until Alvarez found the enriched iridium layer at the K/T boudary, worldwide. The Big Bang was a second-tier hypothesis until Penzias & Wilson accidently stumbled onto the cosmic background raditation. Dramatic, theory-changing evidence doesn’t get supressed. It gets discussed publicly and at great length. Heck there’s even “cold fusion” — turned out to be bogus because no one else could reproduce the results, but it sure as hell got press & plenty of attention from the scientific community. Bogus “science” gets rejected and ignored precisely because it is bogus. ---
**Author:** ![gytalf2000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/ac91a4/32.png) [@gytalf2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gytalf2000)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2005, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creation-science-and-human-footprints/286844/10 "2005-01-27T20:24:05Z")
These “footprints” give us hope and proof that we will indeed eventually master the art of time travel! Just imagine having the chance to go back in time to cavort with the fabulous beasties of the Mesozoic! Just kidding, of course! ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2005, 8:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creation-science-and-human-footprints/286844/11 "2005-01-27T20:33:03Z")
**Twoflower** , while I can sympathize with your passion, there is a specific question in the OP with a factual answer. Editorial comments (particularly those that do not even mention the OP in passing) should be left in the other _discussion_ fora, not dragged into **GQ**. Thanks. [/Moderator Mode] ---
**Author:** ![Twoflower](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/twoflower/32/22_2.png) [@Twoflower](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Twoflower)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2005, 3:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creation-science-and-human-footprints/286844/12 "2005-01-29T15:59:26Z")
Sorry about that. My intent was to answer the “it bothers me” part of the \*\*OP \*\*with reasons not to be bothered. Does kinda look like I gota bit carried away for GQ… ::tucks tail between legs, slinks out …::