CherylZ Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 What kind of creature could have made this? Found in Central Texas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ynot Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 Welcome to TFF! Although there is a resemblance to a raccoon print, I think it is a pseudo fossil. Just an odd depression in the rock and not a foot/paw print. See what others think. Darwin said: " Man sprang from monkeys." Will Rogers said: " Some of them didn't spring far enough." My Fossil collection - My Mineral collection My favorite thread on TFF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kane Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 I second ynot's view. It might be a fossil impression, but it does give a pseudofossil vibe. A provocative piece that would certainly cause one to look twice! ...How to Philosophize with a Hammer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FossilDAWG Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 I'm thinking it might be a highly suggestive impression of an oyster. The "palm" would be a smoother area near the umbo, and the "fingers" would be impressions of strong ribs that developed a small distance from the umbo. So maybe not a pseudofossil per se, but still not an actual hand print. Very cool, I would keep it if I found it. Don Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeschWhat Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 I'm with the others, I think it is a worn shell impression of some sort. Nevertheless - a really fun find! Welcome to the forum! Lori www.areallycrappystory.com/fossils www.facebook.com/fossilpoo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fruitbat Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 It certainly is a suggestive-looking piece! Maybe it is the proof that some people are seeking for alien visitations during the Cretaceous! -Joe Illigitimati non carborundum Fruitbat's PDF Library Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockwood Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 An important clue here is the lack of a layer of plate shaped minerals that would indicate the presence of a bedding plain. Footprints are unlikely to be recovered without it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phishmi Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Cheirotherium_prints_possibly_Ticinosuchus.JPG just a guess.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ludwigia Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 5 hours ago, Phishmi said: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Cheirotherium_prints_possibly_Ticinosuchus.JPG just a guess.. First of all, these prints are found in the Permian, whereby most of Texas is cretacean as far as I know. Need more info there. Secondly, count the number of "digits". I'll go along with Don on this. Greetings from the Lake of Constance. Roger http://www.steinkern.de/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.