It is always interesting when people will try to second guess what you find while out investigating.  I have found tracks of prints in the same location about 1-2 months apart.  The tracks found were in the human size range but the characteristics of the prints pointed to Big Foot instead of human prints.  Instead of looking at the evidence and asking clarifying questions, the naysayers have an automatic answer to the prints found. 

I am aware that there are shoes that have toes.  Whenever I encounter prints in the human size range I will look for the tread marks and stride pattern.  When found in mud or powdery soil it is easy to detect.  When I have found prints that could be either I am incline to think human.  I have nothing to gain if I use misleading or false evidence.  I don't have time or the interest to do this.

I would like for you to look carefully at the 2 pictures of prints that I have found over this past year.  Can you tell which is human and the other is Big Foot?

 

 

I am a person who is trying to prove the existence of Big Foot.  Using false and misleading evidence will not help my endeavor.  I already know they are real and out there.  I'm just backing up my knowledge with my evidence. 

 

In case you don't know the answer to my question, the top picture is the human print.  When you compare and can see the difference then it is obvious.  If you are not able to then it probably is not.  But in this case you can see the differences.

 

The only problem I have with people second guessing me is the attitude of "It must be false because there are shoes with toes" without really looking at the evidence.  An automatic mindset of this nature is never a good measure of a person's persona.  Close-minded people have made this world small and dark.  Our world is full of color, wonder and mystery just waiting to be discovered.  I hope I am the type of person who is willing to open my mind to the possibilities of this world.