Your cowboy boot with foot bones is just that. No one says that some mineralization cannot occur quickly in the right conditions. Your human footprints with dinosaur tracks are not human footprints.
The only alleged finger I have previously encountered on these threads looks more like a coprolite, but as it was not backed by such claims as you are making ("with fossilized bone, tendons and epidermis") feel free to present it in more detail.
Ken Ham and AiG are just another set from the same cloth, only upside down. The nicest thing I can say is that sometimes they walk away from some of the sillier stuff the other organizations commit. From Arguments we think creationists should NOT use:
‘Paluxy tracks prove that humans and dinosaurs co-existed.’ Some prominent creationist promoters of these tracks have long since withdrawn their support. Some of the allegedly human tracks may be artefacts of erosion of dinosaur tracks obscuring the claw marks. There is a need for properly documented research on the tracks before we would use them to argue the coexistence of humans and dinosaurs. However there is much evidence that dinosaurs and humans co-existed—see Q&A: Dinosaurs.Not that I don't think that AiG is a bunch of charlatans. Don't get me started on their presentations of Ambulocetus and Pakicetus. However, even they can see through Carl Baugh where you have failed to do so. Your own investigations may have been "honest," but you were an honest all-day sucker....
Many of Carl Baugh’s creation ‘evidences’. Sorry to say, AiG thinks that he’s well meaning but that he unfortunately uses a lot of material that is not sound scientifically. So we advise against relying on any ‘evidence’ he provides, unless supported by creationist organisations with reputations for Biblical and scientific rigour. Unfortunately, there are talented creationist speakers with reasonably orthodox understandings of Genesis (e.g. Kent Hovind) who continue to promote some of the Wyatt and Baugh ‘evidences’ despite being approached on the matter (ed. note: see our Maintaining Creationist Integrity, our response to Hovind’s reply to this article).
I have to leave asap for a (formerly Tuesday noon) dental appointment which was suddenly moved to this morning in less than an hour, so I will just comment briefly right now. I do want to look at your information and comment back. You have provided quite a bit of information. I noticed you have quoted yourself quite extensively.
If you will notice in my post, I stated that I had seen Mr. Ham (who I am aware does NOT support Dr. Baugh's claims) twice and have spent MANY hours viewing his organization's DVDs. I do find that AiG's use of PhD GEOLOGISTS adds significant credibility to their argument. I would HOPE that a PhD in ANY subject would tend to know "their" subject matter VERY well.
On the other hand, if you will also recall, I stated that I had gotten some materials of Dr. Baugh's a WEEK ago and that I had so far only read ONE-HALF of ONE of Dr. Baugh's books and viewed ONE [actually ONE SECTION of ONE DVD] of three DVDs intended for non-Christians and have not viewed ANY of the other 2-DVD/VIDEO set intended for Christians.
I am in the PROCESS of HONESTLY investigating Dr. Baugh's claims. I HAVE SEEN SOME of the items (and/or replicas) of the items he claims support his conclusions.
I have to get ready now or I will be late to my new appointment day/time. I am printing your information out as I have been writing this post and will look at them as time permits today.
Thanks again for taking time to answer my post and provide your information.