Baugh Sites Examined
In my study of Baugh/McFall sites in 1982 and 1983 I found that none of the "man tracks" there closely resembled real human prints. Some were mud-collapsed and/or poorly preserved specimens of metatarsal dinosaur tracks. Several in striding sequence were dinosaur tracks with partial metatarsal impressions; these Baugh had identified as human tracks overlapping dinosaur tracks. Others were long (and sometimes curved), incompletely cleaned grooves which occurred near dinosaur trails. These may have represented intermittent impressions of the dinosaur's tail, snout, or other body parts. Other "man tracks" were vague, shallow, often isolated depressions (not in striding trails), with only a remote resemblance to human footprints. One set of "toe marks" were composed of an invertebrate burrow system (made by ancient worms or crustaceans). Other alleged "toes" were small notches or grooves at the margins of vague depressions, formed by selectively abrading or pushing into firm marl (limy clay) left at the margins of incompletely cleaned depressions, or gouging at friable portions of the limestone. Often this was done under the pretense of "uncovering" toes; such misconduct by Baugh was repeatedly witnessed by Alfred West and others present at the site, and can be seen in one of Baugh’s own video tapes (Baugh, 1982).
Despite Baugh's creative efforts, none of the markings on his excavations closely resembled real human footprints. Many of the print outlines, alleged toe marks, and other features showed unnatural shapes, sizes, and positions. When critical observers visited the site, Baugh would often state that the prints were perfect when first found, but that the toes had "eroded away quickly." Indeed, they did often deteriorate quickly--much more quickly than real features in rock, because such toes were typically composed of marl or clay incompletely or selectively removed from the substrate. Real track features generally remain recognizable for years or even decades.
