"HOW DO YOU THINK THE SUBSOIL WAS CARVED TO REFLECT THE FOOTPRINT?"
I don't see any evidence to suggest the subsoil does in fact reflect the footprint. You seem to be looking at the evidence subjectively. You ignore the blue arrow I mentioned in your own data and talk about the effects that agree. We have the word of two people who parade false credentials about what those things are vs the opinion of a guy who really is a PhD geologist. There is no reason to accept that this features are caused by pressure. They occur in other places besides directly beneath toes. A real scientist says they were algae formations.

And we're ignoring for now the fact that the shape of the "imprint" is anatomically correct.


As for the other - evolution is a fact and a theory for explaining that fact. It doesn't explain 'everything' - nor does it have to. There are some questions it doesn't now answer - and some that it probably never will. There are many questions that it's not intended to answer.

You ask why there is nothing else like humans - there are other things "like" humans - apes and monkeys. There is a case of a chimp who actually walked upright on a regular basis, had very human facial expressions and kept trying to mate with humans. Some people thought it was a Humanzee and incorrectly called it that. Genetic analysis determined it was genetically a "pure chimp." However, the conclusion here is that a mere chimp CAN ... with the right genetic accident walk completely upright.

You ask why nothing else wears clothes - why should they?

You ask why we didn't evolve from a purple rhino - because we didn't. There is no genetic or homological data suggesting it happened. Is this intended as a philosophical question?