Search the Community

The past few weeks at the Tucson Fossil I ran across a few fake Spinosaur claws but also was surprised how many good ones there were on the market. I also understand the issues with online claws so decided to put this topic out to help collectors gain a better understanding of them since they are very expensive. These are my opinions and welcome others since no one person as all the answers. There is no bullet proof approach you can take to insure you have a claw that is not totally fake or composited. There are some things you need to consider. - First try dealing with what I call preferred Moroccan merchants, those are typically found at big shows and a few have online or FB sites, ones that specialize in Moroccan material are the best. They typically know what to look for and can point out issues with claws. Makes life a bit harder to get one but you want a good claw don't you. This does not take you off the hook its still YOUR responsibility to know what you are buying. - Unless you are an expert never buy one from Auction site. If you see one that interest you see seek assistant from an expert, not a collector friend, or post it here on the forum we have lots of opinions here. - 2D photos are not always the best to see what is going on with a claw, I prefer handling one. Composited claws can be good and photos don't show you all the issues. - Good preservation and quality are key for making life easy in deciding if its a good claw or not. There is where it pays to focus on the better claws. Claws that are deformed, partial, compressed, beat up or have matrix on them are very difficult to insure you have a good one and especially hard for experts to positively say its good. It always best to save and wait to buy a higher end one. - As a general rule try avoid claws that have matrix glued on them or have seams with matrix. The matrix is there for only one reason to hid trouble. Matrix is a red flag, just tread carefully when looking at one of these. Ask yourself why risk it and buy a potentially problem claw, there are plenty out there that are clean. PRICE = Preservation (Quality) + Size - Repairs - Real claws are expensive, simple as that. So if you see inexpensive big claws there must be a reason unless its the deal of a century and they exist. Most of the claws I show are in the 1-2K range for 4-6 inches. Here are a few from the Tucson show to give you an understanding what real ones look like. Focus on shape, the articulation end, blood grooves and preservation. These two are clean no matrix, no compression may have been broken and reattached, reasonable preservation. Nice claws for any collection Higher Grade - Fatter, nice surface finish, good preservation, few if any repairs. Couple of more examples. Honest merchant shows, some repair and resto. Excellent high end claw around 7 inches very very expensive Fake Claws These two were laying in the box and the merchant said he just had them fabricated. They look pretty good to a novice both reasonable size and configuration. Probably copied from a good one. Red Flags : Check out the graining its does not follow the curve of the claw but is straight. Uniform Color and looks too clean. Finish is flat with no hit of sheen seen on bone. Super long ones are the most suspect, here are two in a box. Unusually long and thin, usually the dorsal curvature is not smooth to the tip has kinks, the preservation is odd, hard to see bone, lots of surface repairs. These may be composited, faked or combo? Who knows to risky to find out. Off an auction site - terrible fake easier to spot- 6.9 inch claw One of the hardest items to replicate is the blood groove that is on either side of the claw. The groove is the widest at the articulation end and slowly tapers to a point to form a channel at the tip that extends outward beyond the dorsal surface. Here is an example of a perfectly preserved one. Here is the tip of the claw from above and you can see the blood groove is just a channel in the claw. Another Characteristic on these claws is that when looked at from the top or bottom they are shaped like an isosceles triangle. Much bigger at the articulation end than the tip. Preservation may affect this but most should be tapered. Like most theropods, hand claws vary depending on digit so there will be variations depending on that and the number of different Spinosaurids that exist in Kem Kem. This is a big unknown and we believe these type of claws all belong to the Spinosaurid family. But here are a couple more you can check out the blood grooves, articulation and shape More Examples of Fake Hand Claws: Bottom side is not a smooth curve, blood groove changes size, surface finish is odd not bonelike Carved but with an very poorly shaped deep blood groove Carved in multiple sections and shape is off, front end should not be that curved Photo provided by Jim Kirkland Carved, Composited etc Badly carved claw The following are all carved, examine how poorly the blood grooves are made.

There is quite of bit Kem Kem dinosaur material coming on the market and some of it quite good. Will try address the identification issue on some items so at least you will know what your bidding on. This appears to match quite well with a Spinosaurid ilium, seller calls it a pelvic bone. Looks quite nice, complete with a concern are the areas circled in white. Not sure it's bone or matrix. Seller does comment on filled fractures and some are visible but that should not detract from the piece. What the seller is offering here is a Spinosaurus phalanx and claw toe bones. What I believe you have here is a Spinosaurid foot claw and a carpal (hand bone). So think about this listing as two separate bones not associated in any way. This is a listing of a Spinosaurus complete finger with claw. What I believe you have are 3 carpals from a Spinosaurid that are completely unassociated and are not a good match as a composite. Hard to say much about the claw other that it appears to be a foot claw of what cannot determine with photos provided. Again like the one above if you're interested in this bid it as 4 separate items. Seller has this as a Spinosaurus phalanx toe bone. I find it difficult to call this one since its a partial but looks more like a carpal. I dont think you can ID this to any specific critter, not much diagnostic and we know so little. Seller is offering these as 4 Spinosaurus phalanx toe bones. The two on the left look like carpals, probably from a Spinosaurid. The one on the far right is a phalanx but it's hard to determine from what dinosaur. The second from the right to fragmented to say. Seller here has 4 Spinosaurus phalanx toe bone for sale. They are toe bones and may be from Spinosaurid but who knows there are lots of other theropods in this region and identifying isolated bones is very difficult. If interested they should be identified as theropod indeterminate. Being offered as a Spinosaurus phalanx toe bone. It might be from a Spinosaurid but have same comments as above

A very important question to discuss I think. What are your opinions on this? https://www.quora.com/Did-the-close-proximity-of-Morocco-and-the-United-States-on-Pangea-play-a-role-in-the-two-countries-to-have-a-long-history-of-friendship

Hello everybody brothers and sisters!! I have a new hunt here and im not sure about it and i would like to show to you brothers and sisters to exchange knowledge about it. For me my idea i guess is a pearl fossilized but im not sure as i told you i found it in a river its really heavy and i should clean it more i will show some photos to you guys King regards Salomon

Hi guys, a couple of bones here I'd like a little help with please:

I am definitely an amateur when it comes to collecting and need some advice: I recently purchased my first 'larger' Spinosaurus tooth from a small gem/fossil shop in Seattle. The owner told me that it had no repairs or restorations, and that it of course came from Morocco. I tested the tooth under a UV flashlight and there were no anomalies, but I just wanted some more experienced opinions. The enamel looks good- no apparent cracks or suspicious color variations, root still has some of the matrix on it, but the tip seems a little suspicious to me... maybe I'm just being paranoid, but I have read so much about fake fossils and just want to be sure! Let me know what you guys think- Thanks!

I was able to attend the Tucson show over the weekend, and as always, found some goodies I could afford. Both of these are from Morocco, and both are still quite a mess, unfortunately. The partial skull has had some filling on the teeth, but I know that's usually the standard procedure before selling, and I understand that. I'd love to have both of them prepared and have an identification tag for them if possible. I know they can be notoriously difficult to identify at times, but I thought it'd be worth a try!

So I was browsing our favourite auction site, and I came across these interesting specimens. The seller claims these all belong to the same individual, while at the same time, strangely, they are selling each bone separately. And while these bones are definitely real Kem Kem bones, I'm posting it in this forum because there is reason to believe the information that these belong to the same animal is suspect. All of these are sold as being from one individual Spinosaurus. This first one is definitely a Spinosaurid cervical vertebra. a fairly nice one. But the rugose triangular area on underside shows that this is in fact from a Sigilmassasaurus, one of the Spinosaurids from Morocco. From the length of the vertebra this can be placed somewhere in the back of the neck of the animal. Next specimen is also a Spinosaurid cervical vertebra. Though due to damage this one is harder to identify as Sigilmassasaurus. Again due to the shortness this seems to be a cervical vertebra from somewhere back in the neck. The dorsal spine though worn, seems to be not that big. So this might point towards it being Sigilmassasaurus as well. So seems fairly plausible if the seller says these belong to the same individual right? Now here comes the problem. This third specimen is listed as belonging to the same individual. But this is clearly a cervical vertebra from a type of crocodile. Since it's nice and complete we can see which way is the front and which is back. The front of the centrum looks to be concave, while the back of the centrum here is convex. This is typical of some crocodiles. But on Spinosaurids it's the other way around, with the front of the centrum being convex and the back is concave. So with that this specimen casts doubt on the whole claim that some of these specimens belong to the same animal. Which is too bad 'cause the fossils seem pretty nice. There were some other specimens as well. But these three were clearly identifiable.

Hi everyone, I was hoping to gain more info about this saw shark on matrix from morocco. It is from a very reliable moroccan exporter who picked it up from quarry workers himself. 100% natural. I had never even heard of the existence of fossils of these before this. I'd love to hear about the rarity of specimens like this and if people are aware of value of these a PM would be much appreciated. Thanks for looking. Not really sure what sub forum to put this into. The white long bone is the bill of the shark with 1000s of teeth around it.

Hello. Good afternoon to all of my favorite forum! Please, these two claws of Dinosaurs. Are they real? Any likely candidates? Claw Nº 01 : ===================================== ===================================== Claw Nº 02 : @Troodon @LordTrilobite

Just a quick note to be careful when buying Mosasaur skulls. I know that this particular specimen may look incredibly convincing, but read on. This is clearly one of the most impressive skulls ever to have come onto the market. Indeed, the seller believes it to be worth $6,500 and describes it as 'museum quality'. I immediately recognised that this must be a new species. A careful, scientific examination of the photographs revealed that this animal had incredibly wide eyes, and a bone structure entirely unknown to science. Obviously this is a very rare find, and I immediately took steps to remortgage my home to secure the purchase of this remarkable animal. However, I had gotten as far as drawing a life-restoration of this creature (below) to include with my scientific paper describing this new specimen, when I began to have my doubts. Artist's reconstruction Firstly, the fact that the skull was clearly cobbled together from lumps of modern bone, sand and glue began to ring alarm bells with me. I am very astute, and my trained senses told me that an animal would be unlikely to evolve in such a way. Secondly, the fact that the surfaces were all flat and appeared to be almost two-dimensional, and that the whole thing was clearly rubbish, clued me in that all was not as it seemed. I'm thankful that my superior fossil know-how prevented me from buying a dud. On the plus side, the verts look like they might be real marine reptile, as are the crowns of course, which makes the $200 starting bid a bit easier to swallow.

Some members want me to share more trilobites so i do 1- Name : kolihapeltis 2- Name : Drotops armatus 3- Name : Phacops

my beautiful Trilobite from Morocco.It is named CERATONURUS.