Before I am banned for responding in much the same manner as those of you who respond to my post , I will examine the evidence you have provided to me.

and thank you for posting some evidence.

I have just started reading the below evidence and in the first paragraph I found this

Quote:
The alleged subsurface pressure lines are actually algal structures which often truncate abruptly at the print depression, demonstrating that the print was carved.


how do you carve a rock , and leave subsurface lines of any type?

Quote:
Glen Kuban is a biology teacher and Gregg Wilkerson is a PhD geologist who have followed the Paluxy prints for years and have written about the Burdick print here:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/paluxy/wilker5.html


I will edit this reply as I read this document / evidence.

with an open yet inteligent mind.
but for now , hopefully you can tell us how the rock can have naturally occuring subsurface lines that line up precisely with the faked depressions that were actually carved.

further down I found this remarkable find.
Quote:
At least one man is known to have carved several "man tracks" in Glen Rose during the 1920's and 1930's. In 1970 a Glen Rose resident, Wayland Adams, stood before a group of creationists and described the technique his uncle George Adams used to carve such tracks. First, a suitable-sized stone slab would be found (preferably one that already had some depressions, to save carving time), and a shady spot under a tree would be selected as a workshop. Next, the footprint would be carved using hammer and chisel. A center punch was used to simulate raindrops, followed by an application of muriatic acid to dull the chisel and punch marks. For an aged appearance (p. 73) the slab would be covered with manure for a few days. Last, the edges of the slab were chipped to give the impression of a track chiseled from the riverbed (Morris, 1980, p. 111-12).



OK.. there was a man who admitted he carved some footprints ,
still there is NO WAY he could have carved the subsurface lines in the rock shown in the cross sectional images.

below is a cross sectional image of the rock just beneath the toes.



notice the image is from a bible web site and not from a
science web site , the science web sites (those who claim the footprints are faked )dont seem to have cross sectional views of the footprints , but I only browsed around for about 10 minutes to find a cross sectional view.

Im not trying to say that the science web sites are hiding evidence that might damage evolution , just that science is data gathering , not data dismissal.

and if that man claims that he carved the footprint that the above cross sectional image was taken from , then I personaly say HE lied... could science base such an important find on the story that one man tells when faced with such evidence as this?


which brings me to the next sentence in the first paragraph I mentioned earlier of the evidence.

Quote:
Moreover, the orientation of the algal structures indicates that the "up" direction of the print is the bottom of the rock bed, providing further evidence of carving.




algal structures are formed from algae that grows on water.

http://people.ku.edu/~stalder/KS-limestone.html

Quote:
Algal Limestone - Algae are primitive plants (most seaweeds and pond scums are algae). They may live in seawater or freshwater. Like all plants, they use carbon dioxide to manufacture food thus allowing for the participation of the calcium carbonate. The resulting limestone commonly takes on the form of algae or groups of algae and may form irregular shaped and banded structures.


may form irregular shaped and banded structures.

and in this case science would have us believe that algal structures just happened to form in amazing footprint shapes underneath the stone that was to be carved out millions of years later by a man who has admitted to it?

it is clear to see that this is caused from pressure in the soil and not by a carving instrument , I would love to see any scientist TODAY reproduce this type of substructure compaction in a piece of 100 million year old limestone.


So far the evidence has not held water , in my opinion.

.......................









3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.