Human & dinosaur crossing trackways authenticated

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tranquility Base:
I'm aware of that. But I came across the report on sectioning I posted above and it's for a print that is definitely human if it is not fake. My contact is an Australian archeologist (ie not a paleontologist).

---

I'm no paleontologist, but I don't think it looks like a natural footprint at all. Not very convincing TB. I used to think that the prints were simply misidentified as human, but now it looks more like a hoax. How about some peer-reviewed literature on this?

In the past, it has been common practice to paint features in the rock to make them more visible. I have seen this in some of the dinosaur beds in the Morrison Formation. From what I can see, take away the black paint and the humanness of the print is gone.A couple of items:1. Would be easy to eradicate evidence of tool marks. After all, these were abraded sand grains comprising the sedimentary rocks and a season of running water would soften artificial tool marks to the point of disappearance.2. This track does not look human to me at all. I walked on a beach a couple of weeks ago and I saw thousands of tracks, but zero that looked like this. The depression in the sediments is simply that: an elongate depression (with toes painted on).