Basilosaurus molar still attached

As far as I know, non-scientific collecting in Wadi Al-Hitan, the main archaeocete hotspot in Egypt, is very illegal, and I don't know any other places in Egypt where archaeocete fossils can easily be found, let alone commercially excavated. Moreover, the coloring of the fossil strongly resembles that of the commonly commercially excavated archaeocete fossils from Dakhla (island off the coast of West Sahara, controlled by Morocco) so it is likely that it was found from there. It turns out that the rock there is older than that where Basilosaurus fossils have been found, so sadly they don't exist there. Instead, there exists similar archaeocetes like Eocetus and others. However, with a generic archaeocete-shaped teeth like that, it is very difficult to differentiate between the many Moroccan species based on teeth alone.

Dakhla teeth are almost always mislabeled as Basilosaurus isis even by some professional dealers. The reasons can vary from either the seller does not realize that the species does not exist there (most likely), or they are intentionally deceiving buyers for a quick cash grab. If a real Basilosaurus tooth ever comes in the market, it would most likely be from the US, as they have been found in the southern states there with no no enforced fossil laws regarding archaeocetes. Fortunately, they do come in the auction site at times but are bloody expensive, usually being priced up by the thousands.

Actually, I got it from someone in the US. It had originated in Africa, but there's still an almost unending supply of what was already bought from before the ban.....and yeah, I'm sure there's still MANY being sold illegally. The Morocco fossil industry isn't the most law abiding industry around, afterall. Definitely not the most scrupulous!

when is the ban from?

20 hours ago, Macrophyseter said:

As far as I know, non-scientific collecting in Wadi Al-Hitan, the main archaeocete hotspot in Egypt, is very illegal, and I don't know any other places in Egypt where archaeocete fossils can easily be found, let alone commercially excavated. Moreover, the coloring of the fossil strongly resembles that of the commonly commercially excavated archaeocete fossils from Dakhla (island off the coast of West Sahara, controlled by Morocco) so it is likely that it was found from there. It turns out that the rock there is older than that where Basilosaurus fossils have been found, so sadly they don't exist there. Instead, there exists similar archaeocetes like Eocetus and others. However, with a generic archaeocete-shaped teeth like that, it is very difficult to differentiate between the many Moroccan species based on teeth alone.

 

Dakhla teeth are almost always mislabeled as Basilosaurus isis even by some professional dealers. The reasons can vary from either the seller does not realize that the species does not exist there (most likely), or they are intentionally deceiving buyers for a quick cash grab. If a real Basilosaurus tooth ever comes in the market, it would most likely be from the US, as they have been found in the southern states there with no no enforced fossil laws regarding archaeocetes. Fortunately, they do come in the auction site at times but are bloody expensive, usually being priced up by the thousands.

Can you cite stuff about that?

i don't mean as in trying to question you on it, 

but I'm interested in reading about it.

I just came across this while looking for information on ad dakhla and eocetus. Apparently basilosaurus/ides are also well represented in ad dakhla. apparently they've discovered the timeline they attributed to there was incorrect, and either is the same, or at least includes the same Eocene period as the rest of that area of Morocco, Egypt, etc.

https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/geological-magazine/article/middlelate-eocene-vertebrate-fauna-marine-fish-and-mammals-from-southwestern-morocco-preliminary-report-age-and-palaeobiogeographical-implications/C8BBB37AA8ADFAFEB1517A8BEEF5D525

Wow, what a title!!! I guess they haven't heard of abbreviation in Cambridge.

1 minute ago, Still_human said:

Wow, what a title!!! I guess they haven't heard of abbreviation in Cambridge.

Being very specific in academic article titles is actually quite helpful in terms of finding relevant research (these are written mostly for an academic research audience). Abbreviations become problematic for international researchers who might have to rely on translation software. And, well, if it is important, it will be written out in full.  

1 hour ago, Kane said:

Being very specific in academic article titles is actually quite helpful in terms of finding relevant research (these are written mostly for an academic research audience). Abbreviations become problematic for international researchers who might have to rely on translation software. And, well, if it is important, it will be written out in full.  

Oh, no, I know it's very useful, it's just funny to me seeing all that. If it were a school essay, I could pad the heck out of a title! Just for fun I'd write the entire essay/article as the title. 

That would not be accepted by the editors. It is more than a "school essay." This is research. Once you are college age, you will hopefully see the difference!