Jump to content

Leaderboard

  1. Troodon

    Troodon

    Regular Members


    • Informative Content

      10

    • Content count

      6,223


  2. doushantuo

    doushantuo

    Regular Members


    • Informative Content

      4

    • Content count

      4,817


  3. Nimravis

    Nimravis

    Regular Members


    • Informative Content

      4

    • Content count

      1,180


  4. oilshale

    oilshale

    Collections Curator


    • Informative Content

      3

    • Content count

      2,525



Popular Content

Showing most informative content on 12/12/2017 in all areas

  1. 4 likes
    Posted are a few concerns I found wandering through the internet. These are but a few examples of the type of issues you may encounter. I send this out as a reminder if you're shopping for fossil presents of any kind. Sellers mis-identify material simply through lack of knowledge but it's up to the buyer to know what they are looking at. Don't hesitate to post interests BEFORE you buy. BUYER BEWARE when it comes to fossils of any kind. Seller wants huge money for this Saurolophus osborni lower arm from the Two Medicine Formation. Looks like a nice arm but some of his facts are incorrect. This species is not found in the Campanian of the Two Medicine Formation but the early Maastrichtian age of the Horseshoe Canyon Formation. Another key point is that it's very difficult to determine taxons from post cranial bones of Hadrosaurs especially in an fauna where multiple species exist. Nice lower arm from somewhere and from some unknown Hadrosaur. What's this seller thinking the "2 Medicine Man Formation" really attention to detail not one of his strong points. Someone tell him its the Two Medicine Formation. Maybe he watches lots of Westerns Seller describes this as Pachycephalosaurus in my opinion it's Thescelosaurus Seller is properly describing this beautiful jaw as Ornithischian but in detail description adds that it was discovered where many Pachycephalosaurus fossils were found giving one the impression it's Pachy. In my opinion it's Thescelosaurus. Teeth of these two species look similar inquire before you buy. I see a lot of these being offered or sale, nice Christmas gift. For those of you that are new to collecting the only thing real here are the crowns. Nice gift Seller is offering this Claw and Identifying it as Velociraptor from the Hell Creek Formation. It's a very worn Anzu wyliei hand claw.
  2. 3 likes
    Thanks if it's South Dakota its Hell Creek. I'm leaning towards Nanotyrannus not because of the length of the tooth but because of the overall shape, the curvature. Here is a photo of the Nano "Jane" and you can see the morphology is similar to yours. Your serrations on inside edge also appear very fine. Can you take a close up of them and also an overall photo of the outside serrations. Thanks
  3. 3 likes
    Barasaurus and Claudiosaurus are quite common in the Sakamena Formation. Never saw a Nothosaurus from Madagascar. Thomas http://rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/293/1066/315
  4. 3 likes
    Today when I arrived home I found a nice boxes of fossils waiting for me from Texas- Thanks @KimTexan , it is much appreciated. Here are the pics: Exogyra / Petrified Wood / Matrix with fossils - (North Sulfur River near Cooper, Texas) Texigraphaea Oyster (Woodbine Formation / Arlington, Texas) Pennsylvanian Hash Plate (Jasper Creek Formation / Near Bridgeport, Texas) Bag of matrix / Brachiopods ans Graphaea
  5. 2 likes
    If you are in Scottsdale in Arizona, you could go to Tucson at the end of January and beginning of February to talk to fossil dealers at the Rock and Mineral show to get a good idea of how much it is worth. Or just poke around and see what others like it are selling for, or at least how they are priced. But you will have to go in there convinced that you will not sell it.
  6. 2 likes
    Not sure the accuracy or completeness of this document but here is another trissac exposure in madagascar and there also the Isalo Fm. Not sure if these are just terrestrial exposures.
  7. 2 likes
    From what I can see, I would say they are fossils! This looks interesting too. It doesn't look shiny enough for a ganoid scale, but it does have potential
  8. 2 likes
    Oh snarge I am baffled by this one. The extensive sutures scream baleen whale to me, but I can't really make much sense out of it. It's definitely an isolated, bilateral skull element from an immature whale - no other mammals have a combination of expansive mortised sutures like this and dense bone. It could be an alisphenoid or other element in the basicranium.
  9. 2 likes
    so shale wouldn't be sedimentary? Underneath:A strictly morphological classification of fish scales.
  10. 1 like
    This contains some comparative morphology of several species,amongst which is PRASOPORA. NB: large download (and possibly already present in Fruitbat's,Abyssunders,or Coco's Library) Macroscopical aspect in Paleozoic bryozoa CAN be a poor pointer to systematic affinities,As Peat rightly points out
  11. 1 like
    possibly Prasopora sp. ?
  12. 1 like
  13. 1 like
    Thanks @piranha. Much, much help. Do have a few questions though. The images of Isotelus hypostomes that I checked on line all seem to have wrinkly lines running through them. This hypostome is relatively smooth and has 2 definite, though hard to see in this photo, depressions where the chips in my specimen are, very similar to the Basiliella pictured. How can I understand how to tell the two apart?? Isotelus ? Basiliella barrandei
  14. 1 like
    It matches the morphology of Thesc so that's what I based it on. Very little is published on Pachy so I do not know what the bones look like. “Sandy” is the most complete Pachycephalosaurus individual ever found, with about 50% of the skeleton intact, but unfortunately a technical description of this this specimen has yet to be published. So hopfully someday we will have a glimpse of the toe bones that were with specimen but the feet were far from being complete.
  15. 1 like
    No mate that was a Spinosaurus .
  16. 1 like
    It looks like it. But I understand this species is now referred to as Mesonacis fremonti. This may have changed again, I'm sure someone will soon be along to correct me if I'm wrong. Nice find, and a very warm welcome to the forum, Adam. And you have a most excellent name.
  17. 1 like
    Thanks Frank. Great advise this time of year as well as any other time.
  18. 1 like
    I agree with Eric. Sawfish centra don't have foramina. Your centrum is a posterior scyliorhinoid type centrum. Your tooth does look like an A. grandis. Marco Sr.
  19. 1 like
    Jack, The shark tooth does look like Alopias grandis. The centrum is from a shark. Sawfish centra don’t have the paired holes.
  20. 1 like
    Macro,you're right.Closer inspection of your post makes me think i totally misunderstood it.We're all human,right? BTW:your enthousiasm is infectious
  21. 1 like
    Thaleops ovata Thaleops cranidium ceraurid sp. Isotelus sp. Basiliella barrandei Anataphrus vigilans ceraurid sp. Isotelus sp. Ectenaspis homalonotoides / Failleana indeterminatus Ectenaspis beckeri Ectenaspis beckeri
  22. 1 like
    My most recent and most exciting acquisition, a giant partial vert from a tyrannosaurus rex from the hell creek formation of Montana. Nearly went into cardiac arrest that I was able obtain such a large specimen from t rex, so I thought I would share. It really fills up the dinosaur collection and feels like it weighs a ton, I think the dimensions are somewhere around 6.5 inchs or so long and 10.5 inchs tall if I remember, would've been alot taller if the process was still intact and I like how the giant pores are visible cause of the damage. Super massive piece, I was worried about it collapsing my shelve but it fits fine so far.
×