...Do bears generally have the same number of toes, regardless of their location?...
Yes, but all their toes may not appear in a footprint, and they have been known to loose toes in fights with other bears.
...Do some bears have four toes, others five, while still others three? When individual bears leave tracks, are they similar to other individual bear tracks of the same species? Why such a physical difference in track appearance?....
For example, one set of oddball "three-toed" tracks debated on BFF were described by one participant as alligator prints, and his argument sounded pretty good when looking at the photos of the prints.
Some of the four-toed tracks could be like the Bossberg prints, where there were foot injuries.
Some of the odd-ball prints could be hoaxes.
Some of the odd-ball prints could be poor prints interpreted poorly.
Could be lots of explanations.
...Coleman describes some distinct variations in his book, including 'Napes' -- long, swinging arms, humanlike ears, hog-like eyes, and a footprint complete with an opposed big toe. (page 56)....
Why couldn't a footprint with an opposed big toe be the escaped ape the skeptics try to paint all of sasquatchery with?
Napes? How many sightings of a creature like that? Are they continent wide? Shall we dismiss all of sasquatchery because a couple of oddball reports are submitted in Moonshine County?
If I (an admitted sasquatch believer) can admit that perhaps 75% or more of all sighting reports are hoaxes or misidentifications, can we throw the oddball reports in with the 75%, or must we haggle over them, too?
Do they total 2% of all reports?
If so, I'll surrender another 2% of all reports, and say that 77% or more are false.
Fair?
...The 'Nuk-luk' is described as a, "rather small, dark, upright, hominid creature covered with black hair on its head, upper body, and legs. It had a black head, slightly pointed at the back, and a light brown face with a small black nose. Though it, too, had a very long, brown beard that went down to its waist, the creature wore some kind of ankle-high boots and a piece of moose skin around its waist, and it carried a stone club." (page 52)...
I wouldn't call that description a "sasquatch".
Let's call it a "gnome", and start another thread.
...The 12' Pitt Lake Giant (British Columbia) has only 4 toes, its arms reached below the knees, and its yellow hands were the shape and size of canoe paddles. (page 44)...
That description in no way resembles the description of the estimated 12' sasquatch reportedly seen by two men near Pitt Lake, BC, in the Green database. Where Coleman got that I have no idea.
And that's why I'm not interested in his book.
My understanding is that he is a "cryptozoologist".
I prefer a specialist; one who is focused on sasquatchery, and not other "mysteries".
Many on this board are intolerant of anything that doesn't present itself on a stainless steel table in front of them. I'm a bit more forgiving. I accept sasquatch because I have seen tracks myself that I believe were left by such a creature, and have learned that lots of other such evidence has been found.
I retain the judgement and right to discard or set aside claims which don't fit the model and pattern as hoaxes or misidentifications just as some here discard the whole kit and kaboodle.
