Creationists jumped all over the Archaeoraptor chimaera. Then they came up with this piece of carved artwork (Fig. 1, and others) they claimed was genuine. It appears on the Creation Evidence Museum website masthead. It’s a crying shame when these Christians associate themselves with acts of deception like this. They make all Christians look bad. Luckily we have scientists like Glen Kuban who fight the good fight for the rest of us.
Poor Creationist artistry is the giveaway.
The human big toe is too deep and too short. The dinosaur track has no pad impressions and extends through several layers, rather than compressing them. There is no displacement of sediment from either track.
Glen Kuban has made an extensive study of the Paluxy River tracks. Here’s his take on them. The Alvis Delk Print is reported on here. Kuban reports, “a number of its features are so unrealistic that some have described it as cartoon-like. To be more specific, the hallux (big toe) of the “human” print is exceedingly deep compared to the rest of the print. The lesser toe depressions are on a plane considerably higher than the rest of the print, and jut out at an unnatural angle. The middle three toe marks are also unusually long (or overly separated from the ball area). Also, the margin of the print lacks the “mud up-push” and other evidence of deformation usually seen on distinct prints. In the 1970’s, Glen Rose resident Wayland “Slim” Adams, explained to a group of creationists how his uncle George Adams, who carved human tracks on loose blocks and sold them to tourists during the Great Depression, usually did start with existing (but not human) depressions. George’s granddaughter recently confirmed this, as well as her grandfather’s use of acid to blur chisel marks.(Kennedy, 2008).”
Then there are problems with the purported theropod track, too. Kuban reports, “a number of the Delk print’s features conflict with those of typical “Acro” tracks. A series of odd holes appears to run down the length of the middle toe and into the main body of the track. Moreover, the digits on the Delk print show little if any indications of individual digit pads which are normally detectable on real dinosaur tracks with such a distinct outline. However, it does resemble a number of other likely carvings that were made decades ago, as well as some that have come out of the Glen Rose and Stephenville area in more recent years, and which were sold to tourists.
“Unlike real tracks that show deformational lines corresponding to the print depression, the subsurface features of these loose tracks were truncated by the depressions, strongly indicating a carved origin.”
References (from Glen Kuban’s web site)
Baugh CE 2008. Creation Museum website article: “Alvis Delk Cretaceous Footprint article here
Darrell E 2008. “Fred Flintstone waded here: Hoaxsters ready to teach creationism to Texas kids” Millard Fillmore’s Bathtub blog here.
Godfrey L 1985. “Footnotes of an Anatomist,” Creation/Evolution, Issue 15, Volume 5, Number 1 (Winter 1985)
Hurd G. Stones and Bones website blog.
Juby I 2008. “Examining the Delk Track,” August, 2008 website article.
Kennedy B 2008 (Aug 10), Fort Worth Star-Telegram. “Human Footprints Along with Dinosaur Tracks?”
Ketcham RA and Carlson WD 2001. “Acquisition, optimization and interpretation of X-ray computed tomographic imagery: Applications to the geosciences.” Computers and Geosciences, 27, 381-400.
Kuban GJ 2006. On the Heels of Dinosaurs. Website article here
Kuban GJ and Wilkerson G 1989. The Burdick Print at here.
Lines D 2008. web links here
May D 2008a Rock-solid Proof? Mineral Wells Index. On line version
May D 2008b. One Step at a Time. Mineral Wells Index. On line here
Snelling AA., 1991. Website article here. Originally published in: Creation 14 (1):28-33, December 1991.