Opalised teeth

[Andre Pterosaur]

I have a few opalised teeth that i want to show you.

the first one Is a crocodile 

the second could be shark 

the third one I don’t know 

and the fourth it a rare Dinosaur opalised tooth 

the Dinosaur lost that tooth fighting as we can see the tooth roots it’s broken and preserved with the tooth.

the last one it’s a Dinosaur opalised tooth .

 

[Fossildude19]

These do not look like teeth to me.

[JohnJ]

@Andre Pterosaur

Can you explain the features that lead to your identifications?  Thanks.  

 

4 hours ago, Andre Pterosaur said:

I have a few opalised teeth that i want to show you.

the first one Is a crocodile 

the second could be shark 

the third one I don’t know 

and the fourth it a rare Dinosaur opalised tooth 

the Dinosaur lost that tooth fighting as we can see the tooth roots it’s broken and preserved with the tooth.

the last one it’s a Dinosaur opalised tooth .

 

[jpc]

As a guy who has collected a lot of croc, shark and dino teeth, I have to agree, there is only a slightly suggestive shape to these.  I don't think they are teeth.  The teeth I have seen from the Ozzie opal fields look a lot more toothy.  

[Troodon]

I'll address dinosaur teeth and here are examples of three opalized ones.  All look like theropod teeth and have serrations, carinae, smooth face and the recurved profile of one.   Those characteristics are not apparent in your fourth image.

 

 

 

[jpc]

wow, those are some amazing teeth.

 

[Andre Pterosaur]

 

Dr. Henk Godthelp Paléontologiste told me , that Dinosaur opalised tooth has a broken roots the Dinosaur lost it in a fight.

the others teeth I don’t know my self but I showed them at the Sydney museum and they told me they were teeth 

so I believe what they told me .

they’re so many different teeth and opalised one they’re so rare it’s difficult to really points which animals.

[Andre Pterosaur]

You can see very well the broken root of the tooth that is still in the tooth.

the tooth is not translucent so you can’t see the internal view.

[Fossildude19]

This is a paleontologist that specializes in mammals and marsupials, from after the dinosaurs were gone.  (Post Cretaceous).

I still don't think this is a tooth of any kind.

 

[Troodon]

1 hour ago, Andre Pterosaur said:

You can see very well the broken root of the tooth that is still in the tooth.

 

Sorry I cannot and looks nothing like a root or tooth and I've handled hundreds of theropod teeth and lots with roots.  In fact there is not a single characteristic that I can point to which says Theropod tooth. 

[Andre Pterosaur]

I never said it’s a Theropods tooth but Henk Godthelp head of UNSW Paleontologie told me it was a tooth with a broken root preserved, that tooth was broken in a fight .

[jpc]

honestly, I am surprised he would have said that, but then, he did get to see it in person.   While I have huge respect for his work on Ozzie fossil mammals, how the heck can he say the "tooth" was lost in a fight?    

Edited May 31, 2023 by jpc

[Troodon]

Well you did say rare dinosaur tooth and my comments are relevant to herbivore teeth especially sauropods

[Andre Pterosaur]

I was at UNNSW Paleontologie to show Henk Godthelp my boulder rock containing the pterosaur bones in 2005 , I had with me that tooth but I didn’t know what it was exactly, he look at it and told me this is just incredible , it’s a tooth of a Dinosaur but it lost it in a fight as the root it’s broken and it’s still in the tooth .

Dinosaur loses their tooth without the root.

 

[JohnJ]

5 hours ago, Andre Pterosaur said:

I was at UNNSW Paleontologie to show Henk Godthelp my boulder rock containing the pterosaur bones in 2005 , I had with me that tooth but I didn’t know what it was exactly, he look at it and told me this is just incredible , it’s a tooth of a Dinosaur but it lost it in a fight as the root it’s broken and it’s still in the tooth .

Dinosaur loses their tooth without the root.

 

 

Do you plan to have your specimens examined again by a peer reviewed paleontologist?  Since Dr. Henk Godthelp is still active; it would be interesting to hear his current explanations and identifications.  

 

Further, regardless of what credentials someone has or whoever proposes an identification for these opal specimens, there must be identifiable features to support their identification.  Otherwise, their ID is a random guess or personal fantasy.

[Andre Pterosaur]

I know, for me the identification is just a piece of paper , to own that rock with these opalised bones it’s a different story, try to find similar ones !

they could be from any animal but they are unique and extremely rare.

 

[JohnJ]

3 minutes ago, Andre Pterosaur said:

I know, for me the identification is just a piece of paper

 

I'm not sure what you are trying to say in regard to accurate identification.

[Ludwigia]

I've been following these posts for quite some time now and, although the opal finds are very pretty, I'm finding that the speculation without real evidence other than a few second hand quotes is getting rather tiresome.

[Andre Pterosaur]

I am wary of quotes from some paleontologist supposedly "Australia's best" telling me that my opalized bones were pieces of wood. I'm not a paleontologist but I still recognize a bone from a piece of wood.

 

 

This petrified and opalised wood is the same area where theses opalised bones were find .

 

 

I was at UNNSW Paleontologie to show Henk Godthelp my boulder rock containing the pterosaur bones in 2005 , I had with me that tooth but I didn’t know what it was exactly, he look at it and told me this is just incredible , it’s a tooth of a Dinosaur but it lost it in a fight as the root it’s broken and it’s still in the tooth .

Dinosaur loses their tooth without the root.

 

[Andre Pterosaur]

As I says that opalised / petrified wood is from the same area’s as the boulder rock containing these hollow opalised bones, we can see that petrified wood has not the same texture as the opalised bones.

 

[JohnJ]

3 hours ago, Andre Pterosaur said:

I am wary of quotes from some paleontologist supposedly "Australia's best" telling me that my opalized bones were pieces of wood. I'm not a paleontologist but I still recognize a bone from a piece of wood.

If that is true, then in fairness, you can understand when anyone is wary of some of the supposed identifications you have offered.  

[Coco]

Hi,

 

What proves that this "dinosaur tooth" would have been broken in a fight and not when it fed ?

[Andre Pterosaur]

Exactly it’s a rare specimen I love it ,

it’s like the others they could be different opalised fossils from the time of Dinosaur.

but are rare finding.

[Ludwigia]

7 hours ago, Andre Pterosaur said:

I am wary of quotes from some paleontologist supposedly "Australia's best" telling me that my opalized bones were pieces of wood. I'm not a paleontologist but I still recognize a bone from a piece of wood.

 

That says it all as far as I'm concerned. I for myself see no more point in trying to continue any kind of scientific and unbiased discussion with you. I'll just enjoy the pretty pictures from now on.

[Kane]

@Andre Pterosaur As a science-based forum, hopefully you can understand why some of your extraordinary claims for some of these pieces are being met with healthy skepticism. Certainly, no one is infallible, and paleontologists are no exception. That said, it would be exceedingly rare for an expert to make a diagnosis without some reasoning behind it. In terms of whether the specimen is wood or tooth, did you inquire further as to the paleontologist's rationale behind why wood was offered as an identification? Such a discussion might prove elucidating and provide an opportunity to learn so much more about the specimen beyond its appearance and resemblance. Making assertions on the basis of limited evidence is more a matter of belief than science.