<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: For The First Time: Color 1962 Nape Photograph</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.cryptozoonews.com/nape-1962/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.cryptozoonews.com/nape-1962/</link>
	<description>Posts by Loren Coleman</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 19 Apr 2025 21:38:19 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Loren Coleman</title>
		<link>http://www.cryptozoonews.com/nape-1962/comment-page-1/#comment-58330</link>
		<dc:creator>Loren Coleman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Nov 2013 16:12:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cryptozoonews.com/?p=65189#comment-58330</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Dear Mandors

Thank you for your comment.

While one complete imprint was photographed, evidence of two partials were found in a trackway that went from one bank to another through a small creek bed.

I&#039;ve explained this before, but it is a detail that appears to need repeating. Nevertheless, as Mandors notes, finding one track should not be, in and of itself, grounds alone for exclusion of such a piece of evidence.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dear Mandors</p>
<p>Thank you for your comment.</p>
<p>While one complete imprint was photographed, evidence of two partials were found in a trackway that went from one bank to another through a small creek bed.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve explained this before, but it is a detail that appears to need repeating. Nevertheless, as Mandors notes, finding one track should not be, in and of itself, grounds alone for exclusion of such a piece of evidence.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mandors</title>
		<link>http://www.cryptozoonews.com/nape-1962/comment-page-1/#comment-58329</link>
		<dc:creator>mandors</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Nov 2013 15:39:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cryptozoonews.com/?p=65189#comment-58329</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[There is often criticism in the cryptid community that finding only a single print is suspicious. I have recently considered that there might be a very good reason for such finds, as opposed to the more &quot;accepted&quot; trackways.  Assuming Bigfoot exists, perhaps the leaving of a single print is a territorial act, intended to be found and sending a message. The single prints like this Illinois print are often, but not always, deep, even deeper than what a very heavy creature might produce, and sometimes appear to have been ground in the soil.  Perhaps these are all signs of a volitional behavior, instead of just chance.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There is often criticism in the cryptid community that finding only a single print is suspicious. I have recently considered that there might be a very good reason for such finds, as opposed to the more &#8220;accepted&#8221; trackways.  Assuming Bigfoot exists, perhaps the leaving of a single print is a territorial act, intended to be found and sending a message. The single prints like this Illinois print are often, but not always, deep, even deeper than what a very heavy creature might produce, and sometimes appear to have been ground in the soil.  Perhaps these are all signs of a volitional behavior, instead of just chance.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
