Dragon of Eden

[ZBranch]

I found these on public land in Austin, Tx already unearthed. They look like they could our predecessors, intelligent reptilian bipedal. Any thoughts or information from anyone would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

 

[ZBranch]

Here's the other one. Thanks

[Paleostoric]

It looks like a rock to me, but let’s see what others have to say. 

[ZBranch]

Other angles

[Petalodus12]

Sorry but this looks to just be a rock. No vertebrate fossils there. Sorry.

[ZBranch]

It's a fossilized cranium.

[JohnJ]

Just now, ZBranch said:

It's a fossilized cranium.

 

Unfortunately, it is not.  It is a stream worn piece of limestone that appears to have dark rubber tire scuffs from one of the local trails or parking areas.

 

If it was a cranium, many here would celebrate your discovery.

[Paleostoric]

4 minutes ago, ZBranch said:

It's a fossilized cranium.

I don’t really see any bone structure visible that would indicate it is a cranium, let alone an unidentifiable piece of bone. 

[Fossildude19]

Agreed. This is a weathered piece of limestone. 

Not a skull.  

No bone texture, no skull morphology.   

[Randyw]

+1 it’s just a rock sorry

[Ludwigia]

+2 for rock.

[LordTrilobite]

Sorry, but no.

This is not a skull of any animal. It's just a rock. Let me explain why.

 

Sure it might have some interesting pits and hollows that kinda make it vaguely look like the skull of something. But these are just suggestive shapes made through natural erosion on an otherwise ordinary rock. We humans are pattern seeking creatures. This means we are often really good at finding hard to find shapes and patterns. But it also means we see patterns in places where there are none to be found. This is called pareidolia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareidolia

 

For this to be a skull, there are a number of things we'd expect to see that are just not present on this specimen.

 

Vertebrate animals have bilateral symmetry, meaning a left and a right side that are mirrored. We'd expect to see this symmetry on a skull. But we don't see that here. Both sides do have a similar rough shape. But none of the details match up. While fossils are often badly crushed or bent out of shape, and thus won't have perfect symmetry, we would still expect the details to line up if we correct for the crushing of the fossil. But we don't see that here either.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symmetry_in_biology

 

Then there is the structure. If this were a skull, then we'd expect to see the structure of bone. The outside of bone is hard and compact. We'd see growth patterns of the direction the bone grew. We'd see openings for blood vessels and nerves. On the inside of bone the structure is much more open and often has a spongy look to it. Skulls are also made up of many different bones that fuse together. In young these bones have not fused yet. In older animals these bones will have mostly fused. But even after fusing, this leaves scars on the bone. We see any of that here, because it's not bone.

 

An example of a thigh bone. Many of the same bone structures are present all over the skeleton, including the skull. Click to enlarge

And then of course it needs to resemble something. To my knowledge, no animal looks like this. Texas is well known for certain types of fossils. For example; there are some lovely weird animals from the Permian age. Dimetrodon and Edaphosaurus among others are some more well known early animals related to mammals. But none of those even remotely resemble this.

[snolly50]

Thank you, the title of your topic elicited memory of astrophysicist and science popularizer, Carl Sagan's book, The Dragons of Eden. I had not thought of that volume, published in the '70s, in many years. I am now motivated to dig it out for a reread. The gigantic takeaway for me; Sagan introduced the Cosmic Calendar, later featured in the series, Cosmos . We, humankind, are the blink of an eye.

[ZBranch]

Yes, I am an extreme amateur, but I still believe it is a cranium that was instantly fossilized or hardened during a cataclysmic molten event that happened in the area. It's not only bone, it's also tissue and skin all fused together. I believe one large meteorite landed on earth and lit everything up and another soon landed after and snuffed the fire causing this instant fossilization that I can clearly see. Here is another of the underside or back side of cranium, which I believe shows fossilized brain matter. Looks just like hamburger meat.

[Top Trilo]

Sorry that's just weathering, even if it was brain material it wouldn't cover the entire bottom, there is no bone structure.

[ZBranch]

And these rocks or craniums are all over Austin, Tx and as far north as Killeen, Tx; at the uppermost layers of Earth, all fossilized in a similar respect. I believe there story of the meteorite that started the dinosaurs destruction, but I'm very sure that event happened much more recently.....10,000 years ago or less. Otherwise these specimens that many believe are rocks would be covered by layer after layer of sediment.

[Top Trilo]

If I'm understanding you right you believe that dinosaurs went extinct about 10000 years ago because there was no sediment on top of this rock. Right?

 

There is a worldwide black sedimentary line called the KT boundary rich in iridium which is rare on earth but common in meteors and above it there are no dinos below it there are.

[JohnJ]

13 minutes ago, ZBranch said:

Yes, I am an extreme amateur, but I still believe it is a cranium that was instantly fossilized or hardened during a cataclysmic molten event that happened in the area. It's not only bone, it's also tissue and skin all fused together. I believe one large meteorite landed on earth and lit everything up and another soon landed after and snuffed the fire causing this instant fossilization that I can clearly see. Here is another of the underside or back side of cranium, which I believe shows fossilized brain matter. Looks just like hamburger meat.

 

@LordTrilobite nicely explained "paredolia" to you.  It would be worth your while as an "extreme amateur" to investigate it.

 

Also, the reason that rocks which are millions of years old are on the surface on the ground is called erosion.

 

The question to you is whether you are interested in furthering your education on the local geology and fossils, or whether you are locked into your beliefs?

 

[ZBranch]

Not locked in just very naive. Not that dinosaurs went extinct at 10,000 years ago but possibly those two creatures that I posted might have. I'll continue learning and exploring. Thanks for your info.

[LordTrilobite]

29 minutes ago, ZBranch said:

Yes, I am an extreme amateur, but I still believe it is a cranium that was instantly fossilized or hardened during a cataclysmic molten event that happened in the area. It's not only bone, it's also tissue and skin all fused together. I believe one large meteorite landed on earth and lit everything up and another soon landed after and snuffed the fire causing this instant fossilization that I can clearly see. Here is another of the underside or back side of cranium, which I believe shows fossilized brain matter. Looks just like hamburger meat.

20 minutes ago, ZBranch said:

And these rocks or craniums are all over Austin, Tx and as far north as Killeen, Tx; at the uppermost layers of Earth, all fossilized in a similar respect. I believe there story of the meteorite that started the dinosaurs destruction, but I'm very sure that event happened much more recently.....10,000 years ago or less. Otherwise these specimens that many believe are rocks would be covered by layer after layer of sediment.

 

This is not a skull for reasons that have already been explained. If you say you are an extreme amateur, maybe you should listen to the people here on the forum. People here come from a variety of backgrounds. From the amateur to the seasoned professional. There is probably more collective expertise here than some small museums. Everyone here is telling you that what you have is just a rock.

 

The asteroid that killed the dinosaurs is not just a story, it's based on decades of research in many different areas and it's quite certain that it happened around 66 million years ago.

It stinks when we think we found something cool and others tell us that it's nothing special. But that is what happens sometimes. There are plenty of wonderful fossils to find in Texas. But this is not one of them.

[ZBranch]

Thanks a bunch, I'll continue exploring. I appreciate yalls expertise and time. Happy hunting.

[JohnJ]

If you use magnification to study the surface of the rocks you have shown, it is likely you will discover fossil shell fragments.  To experienced eyes, they are clearly not what you think they are.  

 

A good book to pick up online or many places in Austin is A Field Guide to Fossils of Texas by Charles Finsley.  It will give you a good start on what to look for in the local area.

 

 

[aplomado]

I've posted some "fossils" on here that turn out to be rocks!  (the latest was a dinosaur "toe bone" that turned out to made of iron )

 

I recommend that you find a local fossil club and go search some sites that are rich in fossils...

 

It is a lot of fun.

[Plax]

The underside photo looks to show some structure similar to sponges. Sponge in limestone or chert?

[Leahlulu]

I am new to this stuff and I am not disagreeing with anyone but I just want to say that I am on your side lol