The previous post on this blog discusses one alleged handprint left on the window of a claimed eyewitness named Candy Hicks. The photo was posted on Facebook earlier this year, and possible displays signs of palm creases. Of course, this is not definitive evidence of a sasquatch handprint.
Someone on Facebook named Steven Nadeau, who happened to see that blog post replied with an alternate explanation that seems to fit very well. This does not necessarily mean Hicks is not a sasquatch eyewitness. Rather, it suggests this particular handprint may be a case of mistaken "evidence".
The paw in the photo can be seen to match fairly well with the general shape of the alleged handprint. A big thanks to Steven Nadeau for the comparison.
There are some misgivings with the comparison. For one, the arch of the paw on the black bear's paw is inverted in the print on the window, even though the "thumb" of the paw is in the same location, lower than the rest of the digits. The shape of the palm is also less raised and more broad on the print than it is on the photo of the paw. The digits themselves line up rather well, save for their inverted arch. One is left to wonder how the fact that this print is left seemingly only through humidity affects the discrepancies in appearance.
Still, it is a more likely explanation than sasquatch. The print is largely ambiguous, as indicated several times in the previous blog post, but bears the most resemblance to, well, a bear. This does not mean it is not a sasquatch, and that possibility does not mean it is not a bear.
No comments:
Post a Comment