It’s a relatively small step forward, but one thing has become certain about the intersecting footprints contained in a piece of North Texas limestone – they were made by stepping into the rock when it was soft.
At least that’s the opinion of a local radiologist who independently reviewed imagery data of what is steadily becoming a well-known and controversial slab of rock.
“Something compressed that rock,” said Dr. Charles Myers, head of the radiology unit at Palo Pinto General Hospital, who on Thursday reviewed CAT scan images – digital high-tech X-rays – of the stone. “Displacement caused by stepping, I totally agree with that. I think that is conceivable.”
But that is all that can be said at this point with any certainty.
For myself, I find it a little odd to read how David May, editor of the Mineral Wells newspaper writes this article.
The areas of higher compression and density appear brighter in the images, while areas of less density – essentially the absence of solid material or presence of softer material, appear darker.
Proof that the prints were not made – in whole or partially – by means of tool or chemical etching tosses out some of the debunking theories that are already circulating the Internet by proclaimed evolution experts who have quickly judged the rock a fake on the basis of nothing more than seeing the stone’s photograph online.
It isn't only that what the two doctors have done in a medical lab is not proof, and that the Delk stone ought to be sent to a real gealogist/paleontologist at an accredited place of research for a relevant opinion, it is that Mr May wrties the article AS IF THIS CONSTITUTES PROOF and therefore anyone who wants to see a scientific examination by necessity has that idea *tossed out*. Is this an editorial from Mr. May? Surely not news, because his own opinion is in there, but where is the label to say that this is his opinion or an editorial? Perhaps the fact that he wrote it with his name on the article should indicate that this is just his opinion and is not based on facts but conjecture.
Once again, the way to prove this once and for all... and please don't give Carl Baugh a dime of your money until he does this, is for him to TAKE THE STONE to a reputable geologist who specializes in fossils for a complete examination. Heh, or like the moonshiners did, go hide the fake when Smithsonian comes calling.
I have been working and writing on the Paluxy tracks and Baugh's claims for many years, and have written a preliminary critique of the Delk specimen, which is at the following URL. I welcome comments and corrections before I add it to my Paluxy website menu (the second link below). Thanks. Glen Kuban
If anyone accessed my draft of the Delk critique earlier today, please visit the site again. I've made some corrections and additions. In particular I want to point out that I had inadvertently identified Zana Douglas as Delk's granddaughter, from a misreading of a newspaper article. Ms. Douglas is in fact not a member of the Delk family, but is the granddaughter of George Adam's, who is the man known to have carved prints in Glen Rose decades ago. Delk's daughter expressed skepticism of the Delk print, but as far as I know no one in the Delk family acknowledged his carving prints. I apologize to the families involved for this mistake. I do still believe that the totality of evidence points strongly to the "human" print being carved or heavily altered. Thanks. The URL of my draft again is http://paleo.cc/paluxy/delk.htm
You! Leave a Comment! You Know you Want To! You must be a registered member to comment on the blog.
Your first post is held pending approval to make sure you're not
a spammer bot
New poster comments are moderated,
meaning they won't show up until approved... or not. Be patient-we
have lives outside this blog, so it might take awhile You want to be rude?
totally stupid? inappropriate? Racist? Bigoted? Flame war baiter? Your
post may be deleted. Spammers or people posting pretend interest comments
but really wanting to hawk their latest book or sell stuff or govt
propaganda flacks won't see their posts published. Comments do not
necessarily reflect the viewpoint of the site owner(salon).
If you have a problem with logging in or registering, please speak up
right away. Love your comments. Oh, except spammersMore on commenting