"Footprints tell story of woman carrying toddler while dodging sabre-toothed cats"


"Prehistoric footprints of a woman carrying a toddler while dodging sabre-toothed cats and giant sloths are the longest set of fossilised human prints ever found, scientists have said.

"The prints, which stretch for almost a mile and were discovered in the White Sands National Park in New Mexico, USA, date back 13,000 years."

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/10/16/prehistoric-footprints-woman-carrying-toddler-dodging-sabre/

Are they *sure* the footprints aren't Jaredite survivors dodging cureloms and cumoms?

She was probably practicing dance steps while holding a bucket of fried chicken.

the tracks clearly show ~



she was just walking the beach ~



with her big pu$$y ~


(•_•)/
<)/)
/-\


also the tracks show ~


she was clearly left-handed ~


and walked with a limp ~



\(•_•)
(\(>
/-\


as for the infant ~



wearing a limestone diaper ~



no teats to suckle ~



(•_•)
<)-)>
/-\


just a single mom ~



with her giant pet pu$$y ~



walking down the beach ~



(⚆_⚆)



Jaredite maiden ~




dodging cureloms and cumoms ~




nothing to see here ~



(▀̿Ĺ̯▀̿ ̿)

That would be a great action sequence for the next temple film.

I think Jesus was carrying the child. Cureloms are ancient sloths and cumoms are mamoths I'm sure.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/incredible-details-of-10-000-year-old-trek-revealed-in-fossil-footprints/ar-BB1a44ay

There is probably something Clovis in this as well. All good for RfM.

How do they know she was carrying a toddler from footprints?

I don’t know this for a fact, but if you had two sets of prints, walking together, one larger than the other and the small set intermittently disappeared then reappeared, either the infant was picked up when he/she got too tired, or the infant could fly for short periods of time. Probably just picked up by mom when tired...like would happen today when in a hurry.

Well, crap. The abstract of the original Quaternary Science Reviews article at

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0277379120305722#!

doesn't mention saber-tooths, only sloths and mammoths, and she wasn't "dodging" any predators. It looks like the cats' presence were invented by The Telegraph to make it sound more exciting.

"Despite giant ground sloth and Columbian Mammoth transecting them between the outbound and return journeys, the human tracks show no changes indicative of predator/prey awareness."

A little embellishment here, a little sabre-tooth cat there, soon your talkin' real Mormonism.

I blame Lucifer. Never trust a younger brother.

Spoken just like an oldest sibling.

I'm a younger brother and a prodigal. Takes a Lucifer to know Lucifer.

https://www.nps.gov/whsa/learn/nature/lake-lucero.htm

Imagine travelling through the ice to find a totally new place full of strange animals and almost devoid of other humans for hundreds of miles except you and your tribe...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/18/2020 09:57AM by anybody.

When someone puts a link to a British tabloid here and insists it's credible...

They know the woman was carrying a toddler because...

Sorry, my "visualization abilities" don't extend to time travel.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/19/2020 11:52PM by SL Cabbie.

The tabloid made up the cats for dramatic effect, not the toddler.

The science journal abstract has this:

"An adolescent or small adult female made two trips separated by at least several hours, carrying a young child in at least one direction… The human footprints are morphologically variable and exhibit left-right asymmetry, which might be due to child carrying. We explore this morphological variability using methods based on the analysis of objective track outlines, which add to the analytical toolkit available for use at other human footprint sites."

The full article is hidden behind a paywall, but the National Geographic writeup from MSN adds these details:

"The trackway consists of more than 400 human prints, including several tiny child prints, as described in a new study published in Quaternary Science Reviews.…

"The child, however, was carried only one way. During the northbound trip, the tracks of the left foot are slightly larger, which may be the result of carrying the toddler on one hip. Among the northbound tracks, there are also instances of the trekker’s toes sliding on the muddy surface, the foot dragging to create a banana-shape print. Yet in the southbound return, this size difference in tracks is not apparent, and the slippage much less frequent, suggesting the walker was unencumbered.

"Researchers had previously suggested that differences in right- and left-footed prints could be evidence of carrying a load, but it was often speculation. The new study offers a bit more evidence: 'In this particular case, you see the footprints of a child suddenly appear partway through,' Hatala says."

Since tiny child prints don't suddenly appear and disappear by themselves, a reasonable inference can be made (even without British tabloid intervention) that the child was being carried most of the way by whoever was making the larger footprints.

Here's the story in the local newspaper.

https://www.alamogordonews.com/story/news/2020/10/09/white-sands-national-park-fossilized-human-tracks-longest-world/5937926002/