Dinosaur tooth, or trilobite?

[PetrosTrilobite 33]

I have 300$ for a fossil, and i don't know what is better to buy: a dinosaur tooth (diplodocus/camarasaurus), or a good trilobite (like huntonia from Oklahoma). What do you think? 

[Kane 11,888]

Buy what you like most; no one can make that decision for you.

[Huntonia 601]

I agree with Kane. While I might know what I would do with that money, the choice is up to you and should be based on your preferences; not anyone else's. 

[PetrosTrilobite 33]

i like both. You what would buy with this money?

[Tidgy's Dad 15,203]

Lots of brachiopods! 

[Brett Breakin' Rocks 1,627]

19 minutes ago, PetrosTrilobite said:

i like both. You what would buy with this money?

[Huntonia 601]

A coin is an excellent suggestion, by leaving it up to chance you may find you feel excited or disappointed by the results. Being given a decision as opposed to making a decision can show you how you actually feel about the matter.

[Yoda 341]

1 hour ago, PetrosTrilobite said:

I have 300$ for a fossil, and i don't know what is better to buy: a dinosaur tooth (diplodocus/camarasaurus), or a good trilobite (like huntonia from Oklahoma). What do you think? 

Of the two, which is your preferred area of interest?

 

Go with that one.

[FossilNerd 2,226]

If you really are torn between the two, you could look at getting both. Maybe a decent quality of each versus one exceptional quality piece?

[Darktooth 4,955]

I can't even relate, because I have never spent that much on a fossil. Maybe 1/4 of that on a sharktooth. Now I have spent that much ( a bit more) on a new Fly Rod. But enough about me! If I had $300 and the choice was Trilo or Dino I think I would go with Trilo. Depending on what species that you go with, you should be able to get a decent display piece.

[thelivingdead531 1,135]

As others have stated, it’s obviously up to you. I like the idea of flipping a coin, too. I will say, that if it were me, I would get a Dino tooth. 

[KOI 50]

The only reservation I would have about a dino tooth that most of the dinosaur bones (and megalodon teeth for that matter) have elevated level of radioactivity. I would sleep better with a trilo under my pillow than with a tooth. Consider trilobites from Russia as well. They can be cute and right on your budget. This is if you want to choose between those 2 types. When presented with similar problem early this year, I personally chose a large slab of petrified wood from Arizona.

[Kikokuryu 43]

2 hours ago, KOI said:

The only reservation I would have about a dino tooth that most of the dinosaur bones (and megalodon teeth for that matter) have elevated level of radioactivity. I would sleep better with a trilo under my pillow than with a tooth. Consider trilobites from Russia as well. They can be cute and right on your budget. This is if you want to choose between those 2 types. When presented with similar problem early this year, I personally chose a large slab of petrified wood from Arizona.

Do radioactive fossils give off more radiation than going outside and getting blasted by the the sun? I can't imagine them being worse than smart phones and other tech we keep in our pockets for hours on ends.

[Misha 1,099]

1 minute ago, Kikokuryu said:

Do radioactive fossils give off more radiation than going outside and getting blasted by the the sun? I can't imagine them being worse than smart phones and other tech we keep in our pockets for hours on ends.

These objects give off very different types of radiation, do not confuse them. The sun emits photons of light at varying wavelengths of which the more energetic can be harmful. Phones and other technology emit visible light which is radiation as well as lower frequencies that fall in the microwave or radio spectrum, these are very low in energy and are harmless.

What the other person is referring to is a different type of radiation, the one that comes from the decay of unstable isotopes of certain elements, that can be in the form of alpha, beta, and gamma. Alpha and beta are actual particles and they can be dangerous if they get inside the body like through inhalation (in large enough amounts) but otherwise, they will not do anything to you. Gamma is generally the one people worry most about as it is basically just energy and is very powerful.

That said, I do not know how much radiation can be given off by bones but I do not imagine that it is anything dangerous even if you keep the object in your pocket all the time. 

[Kikokuryu 43]

2 minutes ago, Misha said:

These objects give off very different types of radiation, do not confuse them. The sun emits photons of light at varying wavelengths of which the more energetic can be harmful. Phones and other technology emit visible light which is radiation as well as lower frequencies that fall in the microwave or radio spectrum, these are very low in energy and are harmless.

What the other person is referring to is a different type of radiation, the one that comes from the decay of unstable isotopes of certain elements, that can be in the form of alpha, beta, and gamma. Alpha and beta are actual particles and they can be dangerous if they get inside the body like through inhalation (in large enough amounts) but otherwise, they will not do anything to you. Gamma is generally the one people worry most about as it is basically just energy and is very powerful.

That said, I do not know how much radiation can be given off by bones but I do not imagine that it is anything dangerous even if you keep the object in your pocket all the time. 

It's non-ionizing radiation vs ionizing radiation correct? Morrison Fm. fossils like one of the two choices presented in this thread being some examples of radioactive fossils.

 

I doubt it being dangerous enough to cause harm, but I'll keep a mental note of it in the back of my head.

[FF7_Yuffie 306]

Maybe get whichever collection needs a boost?

 

If you have lots of rare dino teeth but only common trilobites, get the trilo and level up that colkection.  Or vice versa

[minnbuckeye 2,997]

I, myself would grab a dino tooth. But only because I have many trilobites and not even a shard of bone from any dinosaur. I need to expand my collection, especially after being in Wyoming and seeing raw  dino stuff for the first time.

[Bobby Rico 9,002]

If it was me I would look for both and see if any bargains are available in your price range. If your not experienced in bugs or dinosaur material before buying do a post on the forum asking for advice. Both bugs and dinosaur material can be a mine field with obtaining a correct IDs off sellers and spotting any undeclared  restoration .

 

[Misha 1,099]

9 hours ago, Kikokuryu said:

It's non-ionizing radiation vs ionizing radiation correct? Morrison Fm. fossils like one of the two choices presented in this thread being some examples of radioactive fossils.

 

I doubt it being dangerous enough to cause harm, but I'll keep a mental note of it in the back of my head.

Well, both types of radiation can be ionizing. 

I would say in this case it is electromagnetic radiation vs nuclear radiation.

[KOI 50]

Here is a link with more information about biological effects of radioactivity.

https://opentextbc.ca/chemistry/chapter/21-6-biological-effects-of-radiation/#:~:text=Biological Effects of Exposure to,%2C bone marrow%2C and embryos.

"Exposure to radiation can cause a wide range of health effects, from minor to severe, and including death. We can minimize the effects of radiation by shielding with dense materials such as lead, moving away from the source, and limiting time of exposure." 

By the way, real skeletons of dinosaurs in the museums are covered with leaded paint to minimize the effects of their radioactivity:

https://www.quora.com/Why-are-some-dinosaur-bones-covered-in-heavily-leaded-paint#:~:text=The leaded paint is used,all fossilized bones are radioactive.

 

[Abyss 65]

I wouldn't worry about any NORM with fossils, you most likely come across small amounts of it every now and then in your daily life without knowing, let alone your daily life most likely will kill you faster than NORM will.

Your money = Your decision 

I'd buy the one that you can get the better of the two specimens. Though if you just want to start your collection of both & plan on buying better specimens later of each (or more ?), then why not buy the mid range of each so you have something to admire of both ?

Though I'd go for the Trilobite.