- IJ
128: Human Footprints in Sandstone
By know you will know we found a long fossilized human bone in the infill that came from a time long before the the Polynesians got here. When you talk fossilized bones (animal) everyone immediately says millions of years, but when we show a fossilized (human) bone in NZ the same people say 'it could happen in hundreds of years'. Talk about selective science! But hey, I understand the reluctance, we need more evidence right?
On the subject of old evidence, you will likely have seen the recent story surface of the perfectly preserved moa foot prints in sandstone discovered in an Otago riverbed. They are 'millions' of years old we are told. Quite likely as they couldn't possibly be 200,000 years old could they? (cynicism intended). Regardless, the point remains. So these Moa foot prints in sandstone must be millions of years old we are told. They might be, but hold onto that thought a bit longer and try fathom this...
Moa prints aren't the only thing seen in sandstone in this country. One of the other ones (there are three) are dinosaur prints (but they are inconclusive or at least vague).
In Whanganui Inlet, west of Pakawau in Golden Bay, there have been recent headlines about dinosaur prints being found in the sandstone layers at low tide. One needs to carry buckets of water and brush away the sediment to find them. Many have been found, they aren't perfect impressions, nor easily identified, but they have been classified as dinosaur, so that's exciting. The photos though, are less convincing.
the dinosaur prints
But at the northern end of the same inlet is something even more remarkable - and less inclined to be talked about by archaeologists. They are the human footprints found in the sandstone/mudstone layers. Obviously not as old as Dinosaur prints but much older than even 5000 years. And they are easily identified.
Yes, you read that right - the third type of footprints prints are human footprints and in the same level of sandstone/mudstone as the dinosaur prints! We've been saying, as others have, that Polynesian were not here first. We've also been saying that a race older than those they call Waitaha existed here for millennia and probably came here via the Zealandia land bridge.
So why haven't these footprints been publicised? We think the answer is obvious. They were first found in the 1950's when many thing first reported that challenged accepted history disappeared from record. No archaeologist or iwi representative want to see anything like this... ever!
Are they still there? We hope so and might find out soon! Here's the story
In 1912, the Otago Daily Times published a remarkable document called 'Nomenculture of Nelson and the West Coast' by William Henry Sherwood Roberts, a well renown Otago pioneering surveyor and literary man who had other extensive histories of Otago and Southland to his credit. What exemplified Roberts' work was his incredibly painstaking field research and attention to detail. One one of the author's visits to the inlet on 22 March, 1956, he was wandering along a bed of wave worn sandstone rock left dry at low water, near the northern corner of the inlet where the "Maori Trail" came down from Pakawau Saddle. "I noticed the perfect impressions of eight naked feet, plainly embedded, like fossils, in the solid sandstone rock, which must have been soft when the humans walked over it. "They were a short distance from the Maori Track up the Whanganui brook, and a few chains below high water mark. There are six adult footmarks with narrow heels and wide spread toes, and two child's footmarks, all equally perfect."
Like most old articles, photos or artifacts found after 1880, that challenge 'accepted' history, are conveniently hidden or never mentioned again. We research many things; identifying two artifacts in NZ museums that they had no information on. Could those footprints have been made in softish mud which later dried out and were mistaken for stone bedrock? We doubt that as WHS Roberts had a unique understanding of geology and rock types in all his works. He was no amateur. He knew what he was looking at.
But the article above, as sent to me, is wrong. It was in fact the 8th March 1911 that the Otago Daily Times printed the story, and it was 22nd March 1856 that the prints were found by Roberts. That is 163 years ago. They will still be there, if that is the case, as it is likely no one even knows exactly where they are now. If they were found in 1956 it is likely they would have been covered cover or destroyed. Now we know it's 1856, we can be certain they are still there.
When in 1990, the footprints of 70-million year old dinosaur was found on the other side of the inlet it made big news nationally and internationally as well. They were the very first dinosaur footprints to be recognized in New Zealand, not to mention providing the first ever evidence of dinosaurs in the South Island. Now we have some really nice Moa footprints from Otago, also the first... Guess what might come next?
The human prints that Roberts records are far more intriguing and far more enticing that a bird and a dinosaur as they change known history. Once we find our skeletons and the world accepts what we find, these prints, along with about 35 other things that need investigating, will be hunted and exposed for all to see once again.
POSTSCRIPT: 8th Jan 2021 - We now have proof (photos) that these human footprints do in fact exist. Can scientists deny what it takes to get human footprints in sandstone. They were right where they were meant to be and 100x more convincing than the dinosaur prints.
