Search the Community

Hello! I see this 3 edmontosaurus claws. The seller told me that are natural and not restored. Are restored? Wich one has better quality? Thank you so much!!

Hey all! I seen some member's collections and wow, you all have some awesome pieces, the type of things I hope to add to my collection someday. I've only been seriously collecting for about half a year and am still in the early process of learning about ancient life and the science surrounding it, but I wanted to post what I have thus far. About a quarter of the collection is things I collected during my childhood, but my favorite stuff is things I've found and/or bought this year, which is the majority.(after learning how to finally identify fossils a little better so I didn't think they were just rocks and move along) There's a couple more insignificant things I don't have on these shelves but it's really crowded and I need to get a larger display before I add them. First pic is my display in it's entirety. This second image is of the top shelf, there's no particular rhyme or reason yet, as in nothing is placed in any way regarding age, type, etc, I just put the stuff I like the best at the top. This is mostly dino bones, and though it looks like quite a few different fragments, most of them are from a single unidentified bone I found completely shattered after a flood a few years ago caused a cliff to crumble. (at least I assume that's why the cliff crumbled) One bivalve of some sort, dino teeth, ceratopsian bones (frill I found, rib which I bought, caudal vertebra possibly ceratopsian, thank you to the users on this forum that helped me identify the frill and vertebra as well as the tyrannosaurus tooth) and an ammonite that I found. Spinosaurus tooth, another unidentified tooth, knightia. Some of the bones in the top display haven't been cleaned and prepared as of yet. The second image is just a bunch of random stuff. Shark and alligator teeth, fossil plant imprints, animals in resin, a nile croc skull, minerals, another ammonite & a trilobite, etc. Third shelf is kind of neat, it's mostly filled with bones a customer of mine found and gave to me of very old bison that were chased off a cliff by native hunters. They were washed out of banks along the Red Deer River and aren't completely fossilized. Also some petrified wood.

Dear members, today I want to tell you about one of the most epic misinterpreation in the history of italian palaeontology. A story that many newspapers and websites rushed to spread, but that was nothing but a leap! As you read in the title, it's about how an ammonite got mistaken for a dinosaur, in particular for a skull. How that could possibly happen? Let's see. Vigevano is a small town 31 km (20 milles) west of Milan, northern Italy. Famous since the Middle Ages (Leonardo da Vinci resided there several times), today a castle and a porch are its main attractions. But we will focus on the cathedral: built between the XVI and XVII centuries it is decorated with frescoes, paintings and decorative stones. Many italian churches feature very impressive decorative stones in their architecture: one of the most widely adopted is the Rosso Veronese (Red Verona's marble, even though it is a sedimentary rock!), a red and white stone that usually preserves fossils. In the Vigevano case, a slightly different rock was used, called "Broccatello". Still nowadays it is quarried in the swiss town of Arzo, extremely close to the Italian-swiss border, 60 km (38 miles) north of Vigevano. It is a marine limestone that dates to the Early Jurassic; common fossils found within include brachiopods, sponges and crinoids. Ammonites and other molluscs are more rare. On the map the red arrow shows the location of Vigevano and the purple arrow that of Arzo. Well, in fall 2010 one of the most respected italian newspapers shared the news that a dinosaur skull had been discovered in a slab of "Broccatello" that decorates a balaustrade in the Vigevano Cathedral. Responsible for the discovery was Andrea Tintori, then full professor of vertebrate palaeontology at the University of Milan. He reported that the in the cross-sectioned specimen, a cranium, nasal cavities and numeros teeth could be seen. At the beginning he thought it belonged to an Ichthyosaur or a crocodile, then he was convinced that it was a dinosaur. He also claimed to be intentioned to remove the slab and put it through a CT scan, in order to see it in 3-D. You can see a picture of the balaustrade and of the "skull" (the latter taken by me). After 9 years, however, the slab is still in its original location, untoched. Why? Well, because it is absolutely not a dino skull! A close (but not very sophisticated) analysis can easily show that is actually a cross-section of an ammonite shell: no teeth at all can be seen and other features (like symmetrical knobs or indentations) are not even remotely consistent with the original interpretation. (Picture obtained with permission of the original author) So, this is the end of our story: maybe a little disappointing, but in my opinion it teaches that any claim or fact should always be checked two times rather than one! You can read an article about this story from the Smithsonian Magazine website: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/a-dinosaur-in-an-italian-church-86306076/

Hi all, I'm interested in finally purchasing some (theropod) dinosaur teeth for my collection. I'm just not sure where to start. I've been eyeing up some reasonably-priced stuff from a website. The material comes from the Kem-Kem beds in Morocco. Of course, I understand that going into the realm of dinosaur teeth (especially those from the Kem-Kem beds) and expecting any sort of accurate I.D. would be a poor idea. However, I'd at least like to know if they're even theropod teeth before I drop money on them. (Again, they are very reasonably priced.) There are a couple of items I'm considering: Labeled as "Abelisaur teeth" Labeled as "Carcharodontosaurus teeth" I can post more pics; the seller has a few for each. On one hand, the "carcharodontosaurus" stuff is better documented in the region which is always nice. However the "abelisaur" items are kind of in better shape. I guess my main questions are: Are they actually "dinosaurian" ? (I would be happy just being able to call them "theropod indet." but of course if the given labels are accurate that would be nice.) Would they be bad purchases? What would you purchase, if anything? I apologize in advance for my ignorance and I hope to learn something.

Hello everyone, I know this is a big scientific debate and I have researched about it but I haven't come to a conclusion. What do you think? Thank you

Hey all, hoping some of you could help me identify a few specimens I found this year while surface collecting on my hikes. The first one looks like maybe a ceratopsian frill segment? I'm just comparing it aesthetically to pieces of triceratops frill I've seen for sale but I could be dead wrong. It needed no cleaning, was completely eroded out of the hill. This next one is a vertebrae of some sort. Caudal maybe? Looks fairly eroded, likely exposed for a long time before I found it and was at the bottom of a hill so it took a tumble at one point. This last one is a partial tooth I found in two pieces, glued it back together. Despite being broken, the serrations are still very visible.

New possible acquisition but need more info. This was obtained in a trade and originally from Lightning Ridge Australia. It was claimed to be dinosaur vertebra but who knows? It is still unprepped and has matrix that needs to be removed which will further improve the look. Two piece, one is 1.5 inch and the second is 1 inch. There are sections where it looks like the fossil did not completely opalized. Any thoughts? @Troodon - help? Thank you all.

Good evening, today was THE day for me. In our city was the annual fair with fossils on offer. I was out and looking for uncommon/rare dino teeth and was lucky to find some. I know that most of the ID done by the sellers is wrong I would like to show my new aqusitions to you throughout the next days and hope for your help. No. 1 was sold as an "Richardoestesia gilmorei" from the Hell Creek Formation, Wyoming, USA (unfortunately no county provided). Length: 18mm Width (base) 6mm denticle count: Side 1: 6 per 1mm Side 2: 7 per 1 mm, (ca. 38 per 5 mm) I had to call it side 1 and side 2 because honestly I was not able to figure out which side is the mesial and distal side... Thank you very much for your help!

Hello everyone, after having seen many pictures of "nanotyrannus" and t rex teeth i have some questions. The first one being, how can paleontologists distinguish nano teeth from rex teeth and also sell them for a different price when the current theory is that they are the same dinosaur, also in many cases I have seen nano teeth with the same size as t rex teeth differentiated, so if they are the same dinosaur how can this be possible? Thank you for your time.

Hi does anyone know where the closest place to find and collect dinosaur fossils is from southern Ontario? Thanks.

The seller identified this as a dinosaur bone in matrix. I have two questions (1) Is it a dinosaur bone, (2) Should I prep this fossil to bring out more details or leave it as is?Toe impression 1

Hello, I purchased this fossil from China with the description reading - Dinosaur Toe cast. Can anyone tell me if this is in fact a cast of a Dinosaur toe print? Thanks in advance.

I have a large assortment of various Marine and Flying Reptile fossils. Here is a sample.. 1) pair of undetermined fossil heads 2)

I recently purchased my first tooth from the Bissekty Formation, Dzarakuduk, Kyzylkum desert, Uzbekistan. Tooth size - 1.57” (4 cm) Cretaceous, Upper Turonian Stage, (94 - 89 Ma) Would like to know if this tooth is best labeled as Tyrannosaurid indet, or Timurlengia euotica. Thoughts?

Hello! I see this psittacosaurus skull on internet. It seems real? Is small the sizes are 6.5 5,3 4,1 cm Thank you so much.

Hello there fossil forum! This post will actually contain some of my finds from 2 trips to the same location, namely the island of Bornholm in Denmark. I went there this summer, and made quite an interesting discovery, which I will get back to, and then went on yet another trip, which I got home from less than a week ago. I doubt many of you know about it, unless you're Danish or have an interest in the geology of Denmark, but most of Denmark was underwater for pretty much all of the Mesozoic era. That is, of course, with the exception of Bornholm, which is a geologist's/paleontologist's/amateur fossil collector's dream. Denmark is not well known for any dinosaur fossils whatsoever, except from a few teeth found in the Robbedale Formation, and a bunch of foot-prints scattered along the west and south-coast of Bornholm. As recent as last year in April though, someone discovered the very first dinosaur bone in Denmark, at Hasle Beach, Bornholm. It's supposedly from a young sauropod, and is still being studied at this very moment. After I heard of the discovery, I desperately wanted to go to Bornholm. So I went there for 5 days in July, and 7 days in October, where the second time, I brought some of my friends from my heavy metal band along with me. On the first trip, the very first day at Hasle Beach, I searched for about 5 hours along the beach, with not a single fossil in sight. Just as I was about to leave the beach to get something to eat, I stumbled upon a very odd looking rock. Which obviously wasn't a rock, it was a bone: It measured about 6x5x6 (LxWxH) cm. I brought this into the museum located at the island, called "Naturbornholm", which is where a lot of the fossils found on the island are showcased. I had some of the people from the museum take a look at it, and they agreed on that this was definitely bone. What was very unlikely about this bone however, is that it looks like the end of a limb-bone, meaning it probably wasn't a plesiosaur, but something that was able to walk on land. In Denmark there's a law concerning fossils, saying that if the fossil could be valuable to science, it is obliged to deliver it to the Geological Institute of Copenhagen for research. The bone is currently being examined and studied. I still haven't received any new information regarding the bone. However they have said, that there's a good chance it's probably from either a crocodile, turtle or dinosaur. Whatever the species might be, it is most likely also a new species, as most of the bone material found at Hasle are plesiosaur bones. I went digging in the exact same area for the rest of the days, in hope of finding other bone-pieces. The picture below shows other pieces I found, which according to the museum, are bone fragments. Some of them are very worn though, and covered with conglomerate and iron. They are in no way as well preserved as the slightly worn bone piece I found on the first day: Other than those, I found another piece of bone, however it is very hard to tell what it is from. I'm considering trying to open up the lump of sandstone, however the black layer of bone material is fragile. The picture quality might be bad on this one, but I can assure you, it is not coal or mineral: So after the first trip to the island of Bornholm, I was invited over there by some of the people from the museum in the autumn holiday. I brought some of my bandmates with me as well, in an attempt to up the amount of fossils we'd find. And we did find a lot of stuff. On the first day we started out slow. The guitarist from my band was the first person to find a fossil. He found a small tooth, which might be from a type of bony fish. We're currently talking with one of the paleontologists of the Geological Institute, who wants to have a look at it in person. It measures about 5 mm, and was cracked in half when found, but afterwards repaired. The second day, we went out digging up on the more northern side of Hasle Beach, where the cliff is a bit taller. We didn't find much though. The other guys went back to the hut after a few hours, and I worked my way back to the spot where I had been digging during the summer. Shortly after, I found a small fragment of bone, most likely a rib-fragment. It's probably not from a plesiosaur though, as all the plesiosaur ribs found on the beach are usually very round, and not flat. The next day, we all went to the museum, showing a few of the fossils we had found to the people we knew there. Other than that we took a look at all the awesome finds exhibited at the museum. Including 2 of the dromaeosauroides bornholmensis teeth found in the Robbedale Formation (1 of them was a replica though). Most of the dinosaur fossils found, as showcased by the museum, are trace-fossils. Dinosaur-tracks and coprolites, with the exception of the dromaeosaur teeth. However those are from the early cretaceous period (140 million years ago), while the place where we were digging, Hasle Beach (The Hasle Formation), is about 170-180 million years old. Later I went digging again the same day. Some of the others didn't feel like digging, so I went out alone. I searched in about the same area where I had found the bones last year, and got really lucky once again. First I found a nice jet-black hybodont shark tooth, measuring about 9 mm in length. Then a piece of fossil wood/branch shortly after. 2 hours after the last find, I decided to go back to the cabin we had rented not far from the beach, and once again I was super lucky, and then stumbled upon a large bone-piece! A plesiosaur paddlebone, measuring about 4x4x1 cm! The fourth day, the other guys wanted to get back in the game after showing them the paddlebone. The next day we found a couple of odd pieces, mostly shells, but also another tooth, this time it was a chimaera tooth. On the fifth day, we went to a slightly different location, about 4 km further south of Hasle Beach, at a place called "The Pyrite Lake", where there's an abundance of plant-fossils, but there has also been found a couple of plesiosaur teeth there, as well as large dinosaur tracks. These tracks, as shown at the museum, are not negatives however, but a "positive". As in, when the creature made the track, the track was filled up with mud or another sediment later, basically making a 'positive' "sculpt" of the foot so to speak. At the Pyrite Lake, we found some huge chunks of fossil wood. Some a tad too heavy to carry around in a rucksack. We did however also spot a very interesting-looking rock, that shared a big resemblance to the dinosaur-tracks at the museum. We sent the coordinates of this rock to the people at the museum, and they're gonna send a paleontologist out to take a look at it at some point, to try and determine, if it is indeed a dinosaur track. So it's going to be interesting to see, if this truly was made by a prehistoric animal, or if this is just a very funny looking rock. On the sixth, and last day of digging, we found a lot of odd looking fossils by Hasle Beach again, which we could not identify. One may have been a bigger, but crushed, hybodont tooth, trapped within a lump of sandstone. And another could be a rib or just some plant-material. Either way, we left a lot of the fossils at the museum, for them to take a look at, if any of it should hold any interest to them, or to the people of the Geological Institute of Copenhagen.

So I'm new and I did read the how too section so there will be better pictures to come. I found this rock that I'm hoping is a tooth. Id stumbled across the area previously and found an inordinate amount of quartz with some really pretty rose quartz sprinkled in. I was about 15 miles north west of Grand View Idaho, in Owyhee county about 150 yards off of Missle Base RD. The entire valley follows the Snake River and was once entirely under water. Bruneau Jasper and aquatic fossils are a big draw to the area. I hope that's the correct info. I can't get much more specific on the geology and again I'll post better pictures soon

Hello! What do you think about this tooth? Posible Deltadromeus? Thank you so much! IMG_3885.mp4

I picked up a little Hell Creek lot that hat this fossilized bone in it. I think it might be a theropod toe bone from looking around on the web at Hell Creek bones. Anyone with more experience (most everyone) have any opinions?

Any idea if this tooth belongs to dinosaur or Sabre-toothed tiger? It is said to be found from Ganzhou of Jiangxi in China.

Hello! I recently attended a show and picked up this Triceratops Squamosal Section (labeled as such). I don't have much experience when it comes to ceratopsian bones and I was hoping you guys could help either confirm the I.D. or correct it. It was found in the lance Creek Formation, Wyoming by the seller, dated between 69 to 66 Mya. I know determining the exact species is difficult, and I was thinking of using the I.D. of Chasmosaurinae indet. (Thanks @-Andy- for your helpful naming guide on the "Dromaeosaurus Teeth?" thread ). I tried to get appropriate angled pictures to help with I.D.ing but if another view would be helpful that I missed, I'm more than happy to get some more pictures once I get home. Thanks for your help!!

Hello all, What is the hardest teeth to obtain nowadays? It seems to change based on the export restrictions from other countries and rarity. I’m trying to expand my collection and want to see what our the ones to chase after. Thanks in advance

Hi im in the middle of prepping this dinosaur vertebrae and I’d appreciate help with ID. Its from the early Cretaceous of the Isle of Wight. The neural spine is with the vertebrae but has become broken and lies underneath the vertebrae as well Thanks Nick

Hello everyone, this is my first post on the website though I've browsed many threads for useful information. I've been collecting fossils for years but only recently got into dinosaur fossils. Anyway, I bought this supposed Thescelosaurus dorsal vertebrae from a reputable shop that I've been a patron at for years. Everything until this that I have bought from there has been authentic, so when I wanted to buy a nicely preserved vertebrae as a center piece for my display, I didn't look this over enough before I bought it, having sort of trusted this store. Took a little look at it, it was packed for me and I was out the door. Got busy with work, didn't even take it out of the box for a week. When I finally did, it felt really light, lighter than fragmented dino bone fossils I have only half it's size, and when I tapped it, the vibration sort of sustained. Obviously shouldn't happen with a rock. Seen paint brush marks, which was the red flag that got me to do the following because who would paint an authentic fossil? Curiosity was killing me, so I decided to make a small break in it to see what the inside of the bone looked like, because seeing the middle would make it more obvious, and I was absolutely floored to find metal wire holding it together. Broke a few more pieces off, more wire. Nothing porous that would indicate it was even pieced together as parts of bone with fill in parts on or around it or inbetween the pieces, it seems to be completely fake. So long story short, seems I was duped. I'm going to mess with it some more today and see if there is ANY bone at all in this supposed vertebrae. "All sales final" with the store. A young idiot with more money than knowledge. (It wasn't cheap) I'll have to do a lot more research and be much more careful when I buy, and sort of made me mistrust any specimen I haven't surface collected myself. Just thought I'd share and ask if anyone has seen anything like this.

I put "brain" in quotes because I obviously know it isn't one, but helps describe its physical appearance. Although, maybe it is??? Lol. No idea what this might be. Found on my ranchland, western Colorado, amongst other dinosaur fossils on the surface. Appears to be agatized. It's in the shape that I found it and assume the entire piece would be a sphere. I was thinking some sort of coral, but due to the other dinosaur fossils in the immediate area, I'm wondering if it might be something dinosaur related. Pictures taken wet. Any guesses? Thanks