Found Fossil? at Lake Huron

[chadschofield]

Good Morning, 

 

I am hoping someone could maybe give me a little information on what I may have found. 

This was found on the shores of Lake Huron in Ontario. I found it as I was walking along the shores. It looks to be a fish head or an eel head maybe. There is a whole in top, and around the neck looks to be roughly cut or torn and a lighter grey material inside what appears to be the head cavity. 

 

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

 

Cheers

Chad Schofield

 

[Ludwigia]

Sorry, but what you have there has nothing to do with eels or fish. It's just an interestingly shaped waterworn rock. At the most, the small round objects in it may be fossiliferous, but I can't make out what they may be.

[Sjfriend]

I too only see water shaped rock. And I also wonder if the round object might be a very worn fossil horn coral??

[Myrmica]

Yes, just a cool rock, unfortunately.  It is unusual for a fossil to resemble the outside of a living animal whose shape is formed by soft tissue.  Soft tissues almost always decompose too quickly to allow for fossilization, so we are left only with remains or replacements of bones, shells, or some sort of mineralized material.

[chadschofield]

Hey Everyone, Thanks for your replies, I have included some more photos that show a little more of what I believe to is hard to pass off as just a rock. If you can see from the bottom it looks as tho clay or mud has gotten into the cavity. Also a head on view will show that it appears to be a mouth opening where you can also see some of the mud/clay material. You will also see from the head on view that the two "EYES" are basically symmetrical on the shape and line up perfectly on either side which would be one large coincidence. The third photo appears to be a hole in the head and also has the mysterious substance in it. 

 

I find it great mystery...

 

    

[Kane]

No mystery. Waterworn stone like the others have said. Possibly a limestone/chert nodule mix, likely Devonian in age.

[chadschofield]

Thanks Kane for your response. 

I still cannot get over the eyes and the mouth. The pupils line up evenly, that would be way to much of a coincidence no? and the mouth hole. 

 

Cheers 

Chad

 

[Top Trilo]

19 minutes ago, chadschofield said:

Thanks Kane for your response. 

I still cannot get over the eyes and the mouth. The pupils line up evenly, that would be way to much of a coincidence no? and the mouth hole. 

 

Cheers 

Chad

 

the sizes are very different and with a lot of rocks in the world two circles on opposite sides are bound to happen. The most obvious way to tell its a rock is if an eel fossilized it would look completely different, the skin and muscle and eyes would not preserve and it would look different from when it was alive. I attached an image of a real fossil eel from Lebanon

From fossilera.com

[Randyw]

Sorry it is a rock. And as for the “eyes” lining up did you notice that one is about twice the size of the other? There are no eye structures in either one. And There are no bones or trace of bones where the back of the “head” where they would have been exposed if the “head” was severed. There are also no jaw structures.

[ThePhysicist]

Welcome to the forum!

 

I agree with the others - not a fossil.

 

We happen to have a whole subsection of the online collection devoted to fishes, which is well worth your perusal:

 

http://www.thefossilforum.com/index.php?/collections-database/chordata/fishes/

[Fossildude19]

30 minutes ago, chadschofield said:

Thanks Kane for your response. 

I still cannot get over the eyes and the mouth. The pupils line up evenly, that would be way to much of a coincidence no? and the mouth hole. 

Cheers 

Chad

 

Not if it is some tube that goes through from one side to another. 
Tube could be a worn horn coral, (which would fit with the differing sizes)  infilled burrow, or just a mineral inclusion. 

 

The lack of true bilateral symmetry, the lack of bone texture, or skull morphology of your "fish" proves to us that this is not a fossil. 

[Ludwigia]

8 hours ago, chadschofield said:

what I believe to is hard to pass off as just a rock

 

We are not passing this off, but rather giving you our experienced opinions and explanations as to why this is just a rock and not a fossil. Please don't be discouraged however. You are by far not the first beginner to be fooled by nature's penchant for creating interestingly shaped objects which resemble any number of creatures. If you have never heard of pareidolia, then please read this.

[Buteo]

6 hours ago, Ludwigia said:

 

We are not passing this off, but rather giving you our experienced opinions and explanations as to why this is just a rock and not a fossil. Please don't be discouraged however. You are by far not the first beginner to be fooled by nature's penchant for creating interestingly shaped objects which resemble any number of creatures. If you have never heard of pareidolia, then please read this.

Thank you for posting that link to pareidolia, that is very informative reading. I admire the patience as well with all the responses in that thread. It is kind of refreshing to see diplomacy in action instead of insults that you find on social media.

Edited April 16, 2021 by Buteo
Clarification