Click here to view CMI's position on climate change.
This article is from
Creation 43(1):50–51, January 2021

Browse our latest digital issue Subscribe

Thunder lizard handstands

Sneak peek of a powerful article from the latest Creation magazine


Main image - Heritage Museum of the Texas Hill Country in Canyon Lake, TexasDinovoetafdrukken-in-Texas

More than 60 well-preserved footprints appear to show three sauropod dinosaurs ‘walking’ in water, using their forelimbs only.1 Discovered in a limestone quarry in the Glen Rose Formation, Texas, the Coffee Hollow dinosaur tracksite consists of three parallel trackways heading in the same direction.

The tracks are shallow—only a few centimetres deep. Amazingly, these dinosaurs left tracks in the mud only with their forefoot (manus, Latin for ‘hand’). They left no trace of any print from their hindfoot (pes, Latin for ‘foot’). The dinosaur prints on the outer two trackways were up to 70 cm wide—25–35% larger than those in the middle. The middle tracks were also particularly faint.

The research team discussing the find1 believes the layer was under water when the footprints were made. The layer directly above, which also filled the footprints, showed ripple marks. These in turn must have been buried soon after, to cement them in place before they could be erased.

Two options

The researchers gave two explanations for the forefeet-only trackway. The first involved the centre of mass of the dinosaur being closer to its front. The researchers believed that this led to greater pressure being exerted by the forefeet leaving footprints, and with less weight on them, the hindfeet did not. Think of the famous WW2 Supermarine Spitfire fighter plane, its heavy engine, weapons, and the main landing wheels all towards the front. The small light landing wheel at the rear of the plane supported very little weight.

Spitfire – Wiki CommonsSpitfire-mk11-pl965-arp

However, the sauropod dinosaurs which possibly made the tracks “may have been 25 metres or more in length and weighed 15 to 78 tonnes”.2 At this size and weight, they did not exactly have a light rear end. The other major flaw in such a proposal is that “in presently known sauropod trackways from the Glen Rose Formation that consist of both manus and pes prints, whether faintly/shallowly registered or deeply impressed, the manus prints are not more deeply impressed than pes prints.” 3

The second option makes more sense: the dinosaurs were wading in water up to their shoulders. They used their forefeet to ‘punt’ themselves along, leaving the shallow impressions in the mud as their forefeet just touched the bottom. Indeed, a number of previous studies have highlighted that “the location of the centre of buoyancy relative to the centre of mass in certain sauropods … would cause the hindquarters of a wading dinosaur to lift off the bottom while the forefeet were still pushing against the substrate. Such a punting sauropod might then be able to glide with its body supported by the water … this might also result in shallowly impressed manus prints.”4 In other words, the sauropod body plan would force them to do handstands in deep enough water as they tried to move forward.

Large and small sauropod ‘punting’ in deep water, leaving footprints with the front feet only. The footprints would not be preserved unless another sediment load buried them within a short time. Redrawn with modification after the illustration by R.T. Bakker in ref. 1.

The best explanation

The trackways fit well with the dinosaurs pulling themselves through the waters of the Noahic Flood some 4,500 years ago while trying to find dry land. The smaller sauropod in the middle was struggling to keep its head above the deep water and get a foothold. This explains why its prints were fainter. Shortly after leaving their forefoot impressions, these were covered quickly by another layer of sediment, preserving the sauropods’ watery interaction. Another layer soon followed.

References and notes

  1. Farlow, J.O. and 8 others, Thunder lizard handstands: Manus-only sauropod trackways from the Glen Rose Formation (Lower Cretaceous, Kendall County, Texas), Ichnos 27(2):167–199, Apr 2020; published online 13 Dec 2019. Return to text.
  2. Barras, C., Giant dinosaurs may have crossed water using just front feet, New Scientist, 1 Feb 2020, p. 16. Return to text.
  3. Ref.1, p. 22. Return to text.
  4. Ref.1, p. 28. Return to text.

Helpful Resources

Dire Dragons
by Vance Nelson
US $32.00
Hard Cover
Flood Fossils
by Vance Nelson
US $32.00
Hard Cover
Exploring Dinosaurs with Mr Hibb
by Michael Oard, Tara Wolfe, Chris Turbuck, Gary Bates
US $17.00
Hard Cover

Readers’ comments

Jason M.
Excuse my head-wrapping around this please. But what does the Flood have to do with the findings?. Couldn't landslides and other environmental factors like volcanic activity, enable the sedimentation too?. It's not the Flood I question here.
Philip Robinson
Jason, the trackways are found in Flood sediment, and everyone agrees were formed in water, as was the layer directly above. As the article points out - "The research team discussing the find believes the layer was under water when the footprints were made. The layer directly above, which also filled the footprints, showed ripple marks. These in turn must have been buried soon after, to cement them in place before they could be erased." I hope that highlighting this point answers your question.
Steve B.
Could these giant animals with very large tails have used them to help propel themselves through the water. seems this would cause the rear of the body to float up while the front legs guided their direction. Just thinking out loud.
Gilbert B.
Thank you for such an interesting article. I was impressed by the simple explanation, and by the Related Articles you listed. I began looking them up. The article on dinosaur footprints found in China was helpful to me, because it led me to look at a juvenile dinosaur fossil graveyard found in China. I noticed that the juvenile skeletons were found intact. They were buried suddenly and together. No eggs and no large adult forms were there. Several years ago, our family visited Dinosaur National Monument in Utah. They were dinosaur bones, alright, but very disarticulated, except for a few spinal columns. I also saw that they were identified as Stegosaurus based on the hipbone shape which linked them to European fossils that were associated with the Stegosaurus dorsal plates. These giant dinosaur bones must have floated for a long time in the Flood waters, and as the carcases rotted, the plates floated away. The remaining bones then were jumbled by repeated inundations. I remember that for the year-long flood there were two high tides every day. That would explain the mixed nature of the bones, in contrast to the graveyard of juvenile dinosaurs found in China. This reminded me of a visit our family had at Gingko Petrified Forest State Park in Vantage, Washington. There, I noticed that the petrified wood on display in the Visitors' Center had what looked like many marine worm holes in them. That would indicate that the wood of the trees had floated for some time before being covered by sediment and buried in the Flood. Gingko trees were assumed to be extinct for millions of years, but some have been found living wild in China, and now the trees are are cultivated across the world. The Flood had tremendous effects, but the living fossil Gingko trees survived.
Yvonne R.
What I cannot understand are the footprints, pawprints, raindrops, ripple impressions and so much more that are observed after the Great Flood and thousands of years on, remain imprinted in now hardened rock. We know that sea water will wash away any impression in the sand. With the Great Flood causing turbulent upheaval, varying rapidly in an irregular torrent, how did the prints remain. We know that leaves due to being water ladened then covered by mud, survive as fossils. Please explain the chemical qualities we can only attribute to GOD about how these prints remain.
Philip Robinson
Thank you for a good question. If you look through the linked related articles and further reading you will find that these address some of these issues. In particular In relation to dinosaur footprints in particular I would suggest creation.com/dinosaur-footprints-in-britain and creation.com/dinosaur-skin-traces (looking at the readers comments for the latter as well).

Comments are automatically closed 14 days after publication.