Re: One more mantrack clarification

[paleo@ix.netcom.com (Glen J. Kuban )]

Just one more clarification on the Paluxy "man tracks" recently
asked about by Klaus Richter...

Nick Pharris replied that it looks like many are theropod tracks
where the dinosaur made a heel impression but impressed the toes
only lightly.  He is partly right.  Many of the alleged human tracks
are due to theropods that impressed their soles and heels 
(metatarsal or entire metapodial segments), leaving an elongate
"heel" that can resemble a human track when the digit marks
are not clear.  However, the inidistinct digit marks are usually NOT 
due to slight digit impression.  In fact, none of the publicized "man 
tracks" around Glen Rose reflect this.   Like most tracks in the area,  
they were made in relatively soft sediment, resulting in generally deep 
tracks (at least in their original condition).  However, many are 
"mud-collapsed."  That is, the soft mud did not hold its shape, but 
partly collapsed back into the print depression, narrowing and often 
obscurring the digit marks more than the larger metapodial segment at 
the rear--resulting in the human-like shape.  In other cases (such as 
on the famous "Taylor Site" often hailed by creationists) the tracks 
were partially or largely infilled with secondary sediment that 
hardened into the depressions, especially in the narrower digit marks, 
again leaving mainly the wider metatarsal segment at the rear to take 
on a somwehat human-like form.  In both cases close inspection reveals 
traces of the orignal digit marks, either by virtue of the different 
color and texture of the infilling material, or the imcompleteness of 
the infilling, or (in the case of mud collapse) by remnants of the 
digits marks where the collapsed mud met.  Also, one can often follow 
the same trail to see other tracks in line with them which show clearer 
dinosaurian digit  marks.  Last, erosion (ancient and/or modern) often 
acted alone or in combination with the above factors to foster the 
indistinct nature of the digit marks.  Thus, combinations of three main 
factors (mud collapse, infilling, and erosion) account for the 
indistinct digits on many of the metatarsal dinosaur tracks mistaken 
for human tracks near Glen Rose.  Of course it is possible that 
metatarsal tracks with simply poorly impressed digits could also leave 
human like marks, but none of the many alleged "man tracks" I have 
examned and mapped in the Glen Rose area (which includes all of the 
ones publicized by creationists) appear to be due to slight digit 
impression. 
     I'll try not to say too much more on the topic, but I did want to 
make this clarification to Kick's reply.  In case anyone missed my 
recent post on this, there is a summary on the topic in the 
talk.origins archive at Web site:

http://rumba.ics.uci.edu:8080/paluxy.html

and a broader menu of origins-related articles at the same address
minus the paluxy.html suffic. 

Thanks.

Glen Kuban
paleo@ix.netcom.com