Dino Embryo in Egg I think

[SomeFNG]

What would you say it is?

[Rockwood]

Sorry but there is just no chance on this one.

[TqB]

I agree I'm afraid, looks like an igneous rock.

[SomeFNG]

It must be an ingenious rock because it looks exactly like an embryo. It would have to be the product of some type of mineral replacement. It's spot on.

I might add it came out of the same hole as this,

[Rockwood]

It must be an ingenious rock because it looks exactly like an embryo. It would have to be the product of some type of mineral replacement. It's spot on.

I might add it came out of the same hole as this,

It must be getting late out there. Get some sleep.

[Fossildude19]

Welcome to the Forum.

What about your items leads you to believe they are dinosaur embryos?

You do not mention where your items were found.

Are they from an area or place where known dinosaur embryos and eggs have commonly been found?

I took the liberty of brightening some of your photos.

I do not see anything there resembling dinosaur embryos that have been found in the past.

Compare to this photo.

Or any other images of dinosaur embryo fossils.

Your items lack any definitive bones or egg shell.

Soft tissue preservation is extremely rare, and not something that is frequently found.

Regards,

EDIT: I looked at your former posts here, ... and I am seeing a re-occurring theme in all of your posts.

You seem to be basing your guesses on vague shapes rather than truly identifiable features.

See Pareidolia.

I suggest you go to a local museum, and get to know what fossils really look like. Find out where fossils can be found in your area, and go looking for fossils only when you have a firm grasp of what you are looking for.

It would also be advisable to join a local rock or mineral club, to help you with learning some of your local geology.

Good Luck

Edited April 20, 2016 by Fossildude19

[Troodon]

Just a rock like others have said. Dinosaur embryos and incredibly rare

[prem]

I might just take those first pictures for granite. *ba-dum-ching*

---Prem

[RJB]

The imagination can sure get things mixed up!!!!!

RB

[abyssunder]

Just a nice igneous rock.

[fifbrindacier]

I agree it is igneous rock, but keep hunting you'll find very interesting things either fossils or minerals. We will be glad to help you to try to identify them.

[gwestbrook]

Definitely some feldspar and biotite in there, so looks like granite to me.

[SomeFNG]

Okay thanks for the replies fellas. It's amazing how much this thing is so spot on. Even through a magnifying glass. It has teeth, small arms, big legs, a tail, vertebra. Small horns on the head. Everyone that has seen it in person has agreed that it was definitely some kind of remains haha. No big deal. I appreciate you taking the time to look it over.

No one sees anything in the last pic I posted of the skull in the hole? It weighed about 350+ pounds. Looks almost turtle like, or ankylosaurus related. There were many scute, and armor looking objects around it. More rock in the hole than dirt.

I'll post a couple of pics of the scute like objects.

[Ludwigia]

[Auspex]

You have quite an imagination!

"Recognizing" things in suggestive shapes is called Pareidolia, and we all have it to some degree. When it runs away with you, though, it is time to take a deep breath and apply some critical thinking.

[Troodon]

The posts you reading are from members that have decades of experience with fossils and no one is even suggesting any indication of what you are saying. Take what you have to a local museum and see if it's any different.

[Bguild]

Well. Definitely one of the more rock looking rocks I've seen.

[Raggedy Man]

This is definitely granite. The only way this could be considered a fossil is if you put it in the context of geological activity of vulconism. Even then, using the term fossil is incorrect and highly subjective.

I know what it's like to find something and be dead sure you see what it's not. I suggest you pick up some geology/paleontology books and educate your self to better differentiate fossils from rocks.

Best regards,

Paul

[Petalodus12]

Yeah, I agree that it is most likely granite. Happy hunting!

[Nez]

It sure looks like a rock to me . I can see a few lines on the picture that u put in your second post, but nothing to thoroughly convince me its a fossil. Maybe try taking a brighter picture. Id call it a False-il don't give up tho

[curiousfinds]

It is extremely hard for one to take pictures of the details they see when the item is held in your own hand.

I don't think telling people that there finds are not real is truly fair.

I have things that I know what they are, however getting good pictures is very difficult.

Maybe we should take photography classes before we submit finds to be identified.

(Obviously, I'll be first in line for the how to photo classes.)

I have an egg with an embryo in it, can see the eye, feet toes, and body, much like other photos I have seen and xnayed here.

Most have the same features as others are submitting. If one can see the vertebra, tail, eye, feet, toes, etc. It must be real.

but if I were to submit pictures you wouldn't be able to see the details either, but if you held it in your hand you would.

I also have another fossilized egg that is translucent on one side with shadows of an embryo, in the shell.

Actually, I have 4 fossil eggs, small ones. Smallest is about 3/4 inches across. Largest is almost 3 inches across

[Max-fossils]

5 hours ago, curiousfinds said:

It is extremely hard for one to take pictures of the details they see when the item is held in your own hand.

I don't think telling people that there finds are not real is truly fair.

I have things that I know what they are, however getting good pictures is very difficult.

Maybe we should take photography classes before we submit finds to be identified.

(Obviously, I'll be first in line for the how to photo classes.)

I have an egg with an embryo in it, can see the eye, feet toes, and body, much like other photos I have seen and xnayed here.

Most have the same features as others are submitting. If one can see the vertebra, tail, eye, feet, toes, etc. It must be real.

but if I were to submit pictures you wouldn't be able to see the details either, but if you held it in your hand you would.

I also have another fossilized egg that is translucent on one side with shadows of an embryo, in the shell.

Actually, I have 4 fossil eggs, small ones. Smallest is about 3/4 inches across. Largest is almost 3 inches across

Well, what about this: show us pictures! If we can't see anything but you are sure that there is something, then bring it to the closest museum and get it identified there, as the paleontologists will be able to hold the thing in their hands. And maybe show them what you see as a vertebra, a tail, a head, etc. 

I agree with you that taking photos of small details are very difficult, but sometimes photos are enough to distinguish rock from fossil, and I fear that it is the case here too with the "embryo" of @SomeFNG.

 

Best regards all!

 

Max

[ynot]

7 hours ago, curiousfinds said:

I don't think telling people that there finds are not real is truly fair.

Would You rather have Us lie and tell them what they want to hear?

 

7 hours ago, curiousfinds said:

I have an egg with an embryo in it, can see the eye, feet toes, and body, much like other photos I have seen and xnayed here.

Most have the same features as others are submitting. If one can see the vertebra, tail, eye, feet, toes, etc. It must be real.

but if I were to submit pictures you wouldn't be able to see the details either,

Why would a photograph not be able to show these features?

 

8 hours ago, curiousfinds said:

Maybe we should take photography classes before we submit finds to be identified.

(Obviously, I'll be first in line for the how to photo classes.)

Great idea, wish everyone would do that!

Try looking at this sub forum....

http://www.thefossilforum.com/index.php?/forum/12-fossil-photography/

 

 

8 hours ago, curiousfinds said:

I also have another fossilized egg that is translucent on one side with shadows of an embryo, in the shell.

Actually, I have 4 fossil eggs, small ones. Smallest is about 3/4 inches across. Largest is almost 3 inches across

I for one would love to see pictures of these eggs.

 

 

Regards,

Tony

[Ludwigia]

15 hours ago, curiousfinds said:

It is extremely hard for one to take pictures of the details they see when the item is held in your own hand.

I don't think telling people that there finds are not real is truly fair.

I have things that I know what they are, however getting good pictures is very difficult.

Maybe we should take photography classes before we submit finds to be identified.

(Obviously, I'll be first in line for the how to photo classes.)

I have an egg with an embryo in it, can see the eye, feet toes, and body, much like other photos I have seen and xnayed here.

Most have the same features as others are submitting. If one can see the vertebra, tail, eye, feet, toes, etc. It must be real.

but if I were to submit pictures you wouldn't be able to see the details either, but if you held it in your hand you would.

I also have another fossilized egg that is translucent on one side with shadows of an embryo, in the shell.

Actually, I have 4 fossil eggs, small ones. Smallest is about 3/4 inches across. Largest is almost 3 inches across

 

I agree with Max. Bring your eggs to the nearest museum and show them to a knowledgeable paleontologist who can either confirm or negate your suspicions, or have you already done that?

[fifbrindacier]

19 hours ago, curiousfinds said:

It is extremely hard for one to take pictures of the details they see when the item is held in your own hand.

I don't think telling people that there finds are not real is truly fair.

I have things that I know what they are, however getting good pictures is very difficult.

Maybe we should take photography classes before we submit finds to be identified.

(Obviously, I'll be first in line for the how to photo classes.)

I have an egg with an embryo in it, can see the eye, feet toes, and body, much like other photos I have seen and xnayed here.

Most have the same features as others are submitting. If one can see the vertebra, tail, eye, feet, toes, etc. It must be real.

but if I were to submit pictures you wouldn't be able to see the details either, but if you held it in your hand you would.

I also have another fossilized egg that is translucent on one side with shadows of an embryo, in the shell.

Actually, I have 4 fossil eggs, small ones. Smallest is about 3/4 inches across. Largest is almost 3 inches across

 

14 hours ago, Max-fossils said:

Well, what about this: show us pictures! If we can't see anything but you are sure that there is something, then bring it to the closest museum and get it identified there, as the paleontologists will be able to hold the thing in their hands. And maybe show them what you see as a vertebra, a tail, a head, etc. 

I agree with you that taking photos of small details are very difficult, but sometimes photos are enough to distinguish rock from fossil, and I fear that it is the case here too with the "embryo" of @SomeFNG.

 

Best regards all!

 

Max

Yes, please, show us your photos and if you disagree with us, show it to the closest museum as said @Max-fossils