![]() ![]() |
Apr 14 2004, 10:24 PM
Post
#1
|
|
|
Previously known as Wildman Group: Members Posts: 4,887 Joined: 21-February 04 From: Craig, CO Member No.: 792 |
I remember reading in Grover Krantz's "Bigfoot Sasquatch Evidence" that there were two characteristics that he looked for in judging the legitimacy of a BF print, but he had never told anyone what those were. He was very confident in his ability to tell a hoax from the real deal by looking for these two things, but as of the printing of the book, he had never divulged that information.
Did anyone ever figure out what those characteristics were? He felt that he was the only person who knew to look for them, but wouldn't share that info in order to keep it from the hoaxers. Since Grover Krantz is no longer with us, it would seem that he took his secret with him. |
|
|
|
Apr 14 2004, 11:13 PM
Post
#2
|
|
|
Five toes - Saskets Group: Members Posts: 565 Joined: 7-January 04 Member No.: 610 |
An interesting question, that. I have posed it to several people who had dealings with Krantz. A couple of them offered guesses, but no one claimed to have "the" answer.
-Vern |
|
|
|
Apr 15 2004, 04:11 AM
Post
#3
|
|
|
One star - Yowie Group: Members Posts: 1,109 Joined: 13-July 03 From: Central Indiana Member No.: 270 |
Good Question! I always wondered about that too!
-Sarge |
|
|
|
Apr 15 2004, 04:50 AM
Post
#4
|
|
|
Resident Proofreader Group: Members Posts: 4,220 Joined: 4-July 03 From: Seattle, WA Member No.: 266 |
The guy from Indiana who hoaxed Krantz with a fake foot-cast he sent him said he guessed the two features were scars on the sole and toenail marks, so he included them.
|
|
|
|
Apr 15 2004, 05:47 AM
Post
#5
|
|
|
Three toes - Zoobie Group: Members Posts: 133 Joined: 27-November 03 From: Hoosier National Forest Member No.: 462 |
Don't forget about the lack of an arch, and 'dermal ridges'.
|
|
|
|
Apr 15 2004, 09:05 AM
Post
#6
|
|
|
Resident Proofreader Group: Members Posts: 4,220 Joined: 4-July 03 From: Seattle, WA Member No.: 266 |
But those two characteristics were publicly discussed ; they wouldn't have been "secret traits". Also, dermal ridges appear on less than 10% of prints--only in certain sorts of soil with the right degree of wetness--so they could hardly have been a "required-for-validity" feature.
This post has been edited by RogerKni: Apr 15 2004, 09:05 AM |
|
|
|
Apr 15 2004, 01:06 PM
Post
#7
|
|
|
Two stars - Mountain Devil Group: Members Posts: 1,803 Joined: 5-March 03 From: Vancouver, B.C., and New York, NY Member No.: 186 |
I don't think it's entirely clear whether or not the guy from Indiana _actually_ hoaxed Krantz, or whether the purported hoaxer's claim was itself a lie.
Admittedly, it's not the first time that prints that Krantz accepted have come under suspicion. I think also the 'Cripple foot' prints found in the early 70s in the Blue Mountains have been labeled hoaxes by some, though again, nobody knows for sure, and there were plenty of people who wanted to take Krantz down. -robin |
|
|
|
Apr 16 2004, 12:14 PM
Post
#8
|
|
|
Five toes - Saskets Group: Members Posts: 831 Joined: 1-June 02 From: patagonia (Bigfoot Land), az Member No.: 37 |
I made a comment back in January ....last half i think...............about the hoaxer making a footprint with a wrikled potato................the cast or mention of it appears in the Krantz book, Big Footprints..........jon
His analysis of the Cripple Foot casts....to my thinking ....was excellent. This post has been edited by jon a. larsen: Apr 16 2004, 12:16 PM |
|
|
|
![]() ![]() |
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 21st November 2009 - 12:21 AM |