This picture is the same as the one above it. I inverted the colors so that the foot prints would show up better. The big foot prints are from some sort of dinosaur and are 3 toed. The smaller foot prints are not three toed and you can tell which is the left foot and the right, and where the heal is. Human? I think so. The third toe that is supposed to be showing up as the prints age I do not see. Do you? All I see is the angle of the top of the foot that is just like the angle of a human foot print where the toes are located.
On this subject, both scientist, evolutionist and old earth creationist will argue until the cows come home (an expression of something that is never ending) and deny it and even go as far as to say: Your lying! I know because it has already been said to me. What amazes me is, I have seen evidence that science will find that will be 1/10 what this is. And they will make up a big story about what it is, where it come from, and when it was formed or what time in history it was.
Example: A tooth was found that was said to be the closest yet the scientist had to prove evolution. It was said to be from the missing link. It did not look ape or human like. And it was accepted as such a find. Later another scientist that was determined to find the missing link and prove evolution once and for all, dug up the whole area to search for any other clues of where that tooth came from. What he found was a pig! And the teeth found with that pig matched the one from the supposed missing link. Goes to show what happens when you make assumptions without all the facts. You will never here this story on any website or media. It's one that was buried. But I do know who has the news paper story on this with times and dates and names and places. But because this evidence would be destroyed by those who would rather this not be told, no source will be revealed on this.
