Paleo Seahorse

[Nick Yiu]

Hi All,

Here's the first of a series of unusuall object, hardened to stone in whatlike Medussa-effect manner simmilar to Squid sac discovered in UK.

Subject was found on the shore, detached from matrix or its death bed. And as per observation, i had this notion that it died out and fossilizes, mummified or Hardened into rock amids extreme elemental and hot atmospheric condition of the time.

Photo of the left face showing distinguishing feature of a horse. If one compares this specimen to what a mummy looks like, where all the muscles goes, and only that creppy-bony feature of the corpse remains. Thus, it's conceiveble and more likely that subject-Horse was mummified, but in a very different way where elements dominated the atmosphere for age, so its' Silicate in whiteness...,

Left face showing detail of a perfectly round eye socket, and Its sphere is about as small as a ballpen butt. Thus, because of the size of the eyes, no sign of ears where it supposed to be, no gaping or linings of the mouth.., but with that crown atop the head, gill hole near the neck and flat skeletal frame, I conclude object was a (Pigmy) SEAHORSE, not land Horse.

Details of right face showing obvoius sign of ground impressioned. It had a smirky look where the eye socket was pulled upward. Note; Where all the face muscles shrunk like in Mummy's, the bulky and flat skeletal frames forming a party plate size head of a SEAHORSE.

Either one will believed this as Fossil or not, this is already an amazing find. And if this comes to be Natures carved, i think this is rarer than Fossil itself. I hope i'm not wrong....., Please help, and Thanks.

[fossilshk]

Impossible is a SEAHORSE.Do you know what is SEAHORSE?:rock:

And I cant see this is a fossils.

[Bill]

Hi Nick,

You're going to get the same answers here as you did on the other forum I'm afraid. It is NOT a fossil seahorse. Sorry.

[Bear]

Actual seahorses are very small creatures - well under 10 cm at most - and do not resemble land horses very much. There is no trace of land - type horses that lived in the water in the fossil record thus far.

What you have appears to be a water - worn piece of sedimentary stone. "Serendipity" (chance and the forces of nature) have worn the stone into a shape that resembles a horse so that you believe that is what you have found, but I do not think it is one from the pictures you have shown us, sorry.

A thing called "Occam's Razor" tells us that the simplest explanation is the most accurate. Your explanation of how this stone came to be a horse head fossil is much more complicated than it being just a worn rock, so it is much less probable. Welcome to the Forum though, and thanks for sharing your find with us.

[Frank Menser]

Nice rock for a Terrarium but alas, no Seahorse.

[Nicholas]

Sorry I'm with the above, Not a seahorse.

I'm going with a rock.

[Dicranurus]

It is not a seahorse or fossil but it is nice rock.

[THobern]

Of course it's a rock; however, like the heart, I suspect that too much has already been read into the rock for the belief to be shaken.

[Nick Yiu]

Hello All,

Thanks to all your input. I appreciate your taking time over my lengthy details. Thanks a lot.

[Roz]

Here is a link showing some fossil seahorses for you to check out..

Fossil seahorses

happy hunting and keep looking...

[Nick Yiu]

Here is a link showing some fossil seahorses for you to check out..

Fossil seahorses

happy hunting and keep looking...

Thanks for the tip. But i'm no stranger to modern day Seahorse or pipefish. I lived closed to the sea, and used to catch these slow swimmers in my earlier years. The pipefish on your link is locally known as Seadragon.

Thanks for taking time.

[Nick Yiu]

Sir, There's no point argueing or prolonging discussion over the same matter. I conceded to the fact that my find are in-deed very unusual, and in such case, the term Fossil is even harder to believe.

But please allow me the opportunity to add something based to the fact that I'm holding the real thing..., Combining visual and feels of the object on my hands, It's how I based this conclusion and not sees it through mere photos. For how else a professional geologist can accurately Identify a grain of Silver from among grains of Platinun, Titanium and Nickel all grouped in one photo? I hope i made my points clearly and well understood.

Here's a closed-up photo of the same subject. If you'll note the deep formation on the face revealing the inside bone structures, It's like arriving in a state as we sucked the air out from our mouth. Note further the looks on a Mummy, where all the muscles have gone?

Thanks for the opportunity. Wish you all well.

[Seldom]

Of course it's a rock; however, like the heart, I suspect that too much has already been read into the rock for the belief to be shaken.

Nice sedimentary stone but still just a stone.

[Auspex]

Nick,

It sounds like you have already decided what your object is, and that you are now focused on proving your belief.

Science requires a more skeptical approach. Look for ways to disprove your belief; only if all those efforts fail might you be on your way to the truth.

If this object is a mummified skull, then there will be bones inside. Is there any evidence of this? Are there any bones protruding, such as where the vertebra of the neck would emerge?

[Tracer Jr.]

Sir, There's no point argueing or prolonging discussion over the same matter. I conceded to the fact that my find are in-deed very unusual, and in such case, the term Fossil is even harder to believe.

nick, the fact that you keep denying your "seahorse" is a rock is going to cause people to continue arguing with you. i am not a professional, nor do i know anything about fossil seahorses, but i am absolutely positive that you have a naturally formed sedimentary type rock and not a fossil seahorse. you can take auspex's advice and disprove your beliefs, but in this case you will just get the same result over and over. there are many people on this board who have hunted, seen, and studied fossils for their entire lives that have told you that you do not have a seahorse. you can believe what you want to believe, but you will keep getting the same answer on this one.

Edited October 18, 2009 by Tracer Jr.

[Hawkeye]

Nick, you have a rock. In my opinion, it doesn't even remotely look like a sea horse. Even if I squint my eyes and pretend with all my might I don't see the faintest outline of a sea horse. Sorry.

[Frank Menser]

Have to agree. Even with my background in Art it is hard for me to make anything seahorse out of that rock.

I'm afraid wanting it to be something does not make it that.

It is a rock.

[Lindsey]

I own horse and this rock doesn't even remotely look like a horse much less a sea horse.

[fig rocks]

Huh???

[Nick Yiu]

Hi All,

Thanks for taking time and for all opinions shared. I regretted that unknowingly my wildest imaginations based on the mysteries surrounding the origin of this Rock has created such stir, my sincere apology...,

I'm asking all with considerate heart, pardon my misguided curiousity and ignorance..., For in my belief, i had only taken step sharing photos of these unusual cast of nature..., Thank you.

Sincerely,

Nick

[Xiphactinus]

Nick -

You obviously have a big interest in fossils, but are having a tough time identifying what's a fossil and what is a natural formation. I suggest you visit some local museums and look at their collections. This is a great way to get a feel for the type of fossils that you can find in your area. You will learn the type of preservation, the type of rock they are found in, and even what kind to search for. Good luck!