Bigfoot believers debate alleged footprints of juvenile discovered in the Alaskan wild. Pic credit: Sage Sully via Bigfoot Believers/Facebook
The photos split the members of the group. While some believed the barefoot prints proved the existence of the elusive creature, skeptics dismissed them as human footprints. Others said a prankster or hoaxer created them.
The skeptics provoked the ire of believers, who pushed back angrily, leading to a heated exchange.
Young Bigfoot roaming in the Alaskan wilds?
“Here are some prints from a friend in Alaska,” Sage announced.
The photos seemed to show barefooted humanoid prints with toes pressed into the muddy soil. A measuring tape placed alongside the footprints indicated they were about 11 inches long from the tip of the big toe to the heel.
Compared with previous claimed finds, 11-inch Bigfoot prints aren’t impressive. Paranormal Papers reported alleged 17-inch Bigfoot prints preserved in mud in Murfreesboro, Pike County, Arkansas.
An 11-inch barefoot print falls within the range of the size of the foot of an average human male standing 5 feet 10 inches to 6 feet tall.
Bigfoot prints in the Alaskan wild. Pic credit: Sage Sully via Bigfoot Believers/Facebook
However, many Facebook users pointed out that although the footprints fell within the human range, they looked weird. The observation led some to suggest they could be the footprints of a juvenile Sasquatch.
“Not to be skeptical, but I have an 11.5″ footprint,” one user commented. “I think these are human prints.”
“Sasquatch don’t start out massive,” another member responded, implying they were juvenile Sasquatch prints.
A third member agreed that they likely belonged to a young Bigfoot.
“They gotta be little at some point,” the user wrote. “Assuming they’re mammals, that would make for one very unhappy momma squatch if they weren’t!!”
“People don’t run around barefoot in the Alaskan wild”
Believers kicked against suggestions that the prints were human footprints by arguing that people don’t go barefooted in the Alaskan wild.
” I mean, not many people out in Alaska barefoot outdoors. And multiple prints!” a believer commented.
However, skeptics argued that anyone could hang out alone in the woods barefooted in summer weather.
“Understandable,” the believer conceded, “but it’s not like you’re hanging out at the beach in Alaska lol. While it may get warm, there’s not much reason to be barefoot.”
Sasquatch prank or hoax?
Unbelievers alleged that the prints were a hoax.
Some noted that the photos showed only one foot, suggesting the alleged creature was “monopedal.”
“Why [aren’t] there two footprints, right foot, left foot?” a skeptic inquired.
A believer countered, saying that each stride was several feet apart and that the photos did not capture them in one frame.
“If something was 12ft tall, the distance between each footstep would be at least 1 meter,” the believer said.
Another believer suggested that only one side of the path was muddy, so the other side did not have footprints.
Multiple users pointed to one photo that seemed to show the impression of shoe heels. They claimed the alleged hoaxer exposed themselves when they forgot to “fix the heel.”
Believers clashed with skeptics
A believer expressed displeasure with skeptical group members who accused the poster of faking the photos to get attention.
They lashed out at the skeptics, saying it was unfair of them to accuse other members of faking evidence, and wondered why they joined the group if they did not believe in Bigfoot.
According to the believer, many joined the group to hear other people’s stories and share theirs. Thus, people who joined the group only to inject “negative vibes” spoiled the atmosphere. The believer wondered why the skeptics didn’t join the “Non-believers in Bigfoot” Facebook group instead.
However, a skeptical member responded by saying they never claimed to be skeptics but only wanted to refute claims they thought were not authentic.
The exchange between the two members split the group, with some supporting the believer while others backed the skeptic.