Quote:
Originally Posted by grant hutchison
I think the discussion of footprints is missing a couple of important considerations:
1) Deep footprints in soft ground rebound: there's a hydrostatic effect which makes the base of the footprint rise when the weight is withdrawn.
2) Fossilized stuff gets squashed. As a thick moist layer turns into thin dry layer, the relief of any footprint is going to be reduced.
What we're reading is a poorly considered polemic, rather than science.
Grant Hutchison
|
I was going to say the same and also add that when a path is walked often it sets hard in the sun and if there was a small shallow wet bit of mud it wouldn't penetrate deep enough to give a true reading of weight.
As for mating, they haven't even put into consideration about the size of males penis, as there isn't any evidence in a fossil of this soft tissue (if you pardon the expression). It is funny how our largest land mammal the elephant can manage this task and the females back legs cope!