Search the Community

Hi here is my small collection of dinosaur fossils so far, enjoy! a odd looking Tyrannosaur. indet tooth from the Judith River formation of Montana. A Spinosaur tooth from the Kem Kem Beds of Morocco. Abeliasaur tooth Kem Kem Beds of Morocco perhaps (Rugops sp.)

Hi, the skull below is found at Ganzhou of Jiangxi Province, China. It is very small, about 4.5cm in length. Does it look like a reptilian skull?

I've really started to look for fossils of interest to me (I'm a newbie to it, and have had fun researching). Dino eggs make me the most nervous, after reading (including on this site) about all the fakes --- even those sold at "reputable" auctions. I'm especially interested in Sauropods and came across these. Details: "Hypselosaurus priscus", Maastrichtian, Late Cretaceous, discovered in France. 1. I've been comparing to images on this site that users have noted are real --- and I feel those characteristics and things to look for align with these. But am I missing anything? 2. These are hatched, correct? This was my assumption based on unhatched examples (and the price!), but the auction language made it unclear. Thanks for your insights --- I've had fun lurking the site and learning as a non-member for quite a while.

Hey guys, I was wondering if there is any good books to help identify dinosaur fossils? Thanks so much, Wyatt

So I was looking through some “older” papers and found this one by Rigby et al. (1987)(pdf attached). They were looking at some of the rock formations specifically members of the Hell Creek Formation. In one area, they have a lot of river deposits from before and after the K-T boundary. In one of the river deposits from the Paleocene as dated by pollen fossils, contains ungulate mammal fossils and some dinosaur teeth specifically ceratopsian and theropod teeth as far as I understood. They recognize that the dinosaur fossils could have been eroded from the bank and fallen in but the fossils aren’t weathered like they should have been and the river wasn’t the right kind that would rework sediments. I’m not sure I believe their arguments but what do you guys think? Rigby-et-al_1987_Paleocene-dinos.pdf

Dear all, I am new to this website and to collecting fossils. I have seen a dinosaur egg, supposedly real, advertised as an egg from a large theropod. To me, the egg looks fake because the surface is very smooth and the shape "too perfect". Supposedly the egg was discovered in the 1960s. I would be happy if a knowledgeable person could briefly state their opinion on whether this is a fake or not.. Thank you very much

The holiday season is here and I would like to caution all collectors to be extra careful before you purchase. Over the past year I've seen more dinosaur material improperly identified than ever before and not only from online auction sites but from respected online dealers. Watch those impulsive purchases and get everything checked out BEFORE you buy. Lots of great material out there but a few red flags Red Flag, most dinosaur eggs sold are fake, verify before you buy Red Flag, lots Spinosaur hand claws are fake or composite, verify before you buy Red Flag, most dinosaur poo is either not from a dino or is geologic, verify before you buy Red Flag, verify all Dino material from the Kem Kem lots of nice stuff out there Red Flag, hadrosaurian or ceratopsian material that is described to a genus/species other than from the Hell Creek/Lance Fm. Red flags should include sellers who identify moroccan abelisaurid teeth like the one shown below as RAPTOR or large Nano teeth from the Hell Creek as RAPTOR or Dromaeosaurus. They are either clueless in properly identifying teeth or trying to be deceptive in their listing. A red flag either way and raises questions with all the other items they are selling. If buying dinosaur material from the North America, always ask for the County (if USA) it was found not just the State or Formation. This helps to verify that the information provided is accurate. If buying Canadian material verify it comes with a Disposition and obtain a specific locality not just Province. Montana and Alberta have lots of different Dino sites of different ages and species so knowing specifics helps with an ID Always insure you can return the fossil for a full refund "in cash" Post all interests here and knowledgeable members can help in identification Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays to all fellow collectors.

Hello, I have purchased this interesting fossil tooth from Kem Kem Beds, but I don´t know about the ID, it looks like Spinosaur or fish, but I´m not sure. Can you help me with the ID? The tooth is 1.1 inch (2,8cm) in lenght. Best regards!

Several months ago a speaker at a Dallas Paleontological Society general meeting gave a talk that included information about research into the remains of urine spatters left by large herbivorous dinosaurs which had been recently identified. I don't remember who it was, when it was or even the general topic of the talk but I would like to know what the scientific name is for these trace fossils if anyone knows.

I was given a rock with a bone through it. It’s about 12 inches across, weighs about 30 to 40 pounds and is a mud colored brown. I would much appreciate any input you guys could give me on it. It was dug up in Franklin County Ohio around Columbus Ohio by a heavy equipment operator. He would dig them up and then give them to me for my yard decorations. The guy who dug them up is retired now. Please use your expertise to educate me on what I have. thank you

https://palaeo-electronica.org/content/2019/2806-dental-features-in-theropods

Hi All, I have a question for those of you out there who know more about dinosaurs than I do. I recently picked up a grallator track that's about 5" long from Massachusetts. I'm thinking it would be cool to display this along with a tooth or two from a similar dinosaur. Obviously we don't know what species of dinosaur made the track, but does anyone know roughly what type/size of tooth I should try to find that would be a reasonable match for the type of dinosaur that likely would have made the track? While we're at it, I'd also be curious to know what size gastroliths this dinosaur might have had inside of it, if anyone knows. Thinking it could be fun to piece together a little set of parts roughly related to this track. For reference, here's the thread where I showed a picture of the track in question. Thank you!!

Hello! I see these edmontosaurus jaws. Edmontosaurus jaw are common? What do you think? Are they good ones or not? Thank you so much. jaw 1

I know the typical signs to look for in Chinese fakes, but this one is stumping me. It's got a pretty unique patina to it. Here's info and photos: Species: Oviraptor Egg Country of Origin: Taiwan (red flag) Origin of Find: China, mid-80's Measurements: 18cm x 13cm x 5cm (egg without matrix) Weight: 1,970g This seller's other items look legitimate so I'm hoping there's authenticity here. Lend me your special fossil eyes.

Hello! I see this skin impression. What do you think about quality? Is a skin impression or mummy skin? The seller told me that belong to Kritosaurus. Thank you so much.

Hello! I see this 3 amber Burmese pieces with feathers. The seller told my that the feathers are from dinosaur. I am looking for amber information but is difficult to find a good resource. What do you think? Amber 1

Dinosaur Park in Laurel, MD, is a tiny, 7.5-acre tract of county parkland surrounded by a business park in bustling, suburban Maryland. Nevertheless, it is the most prolific dinosaur and plant site east of the Mississippi. The first fossils there were found in the 18th century by slaves in the siderite (bog iron ore) mine that was there at the time. It wasn’t until 1858 that the bones turning up in the mine were identified as dinosaur remains. The bones found that year were from what would have been, if they a had done all the paperwork, the second dinosaur identified in the US, Astrodon johnstoni, which is now Maryland’s State Dinosaur[1] . Since then dinosaurs, turtles, small mammals, crocodilians, gastropods, clams, and tons of fossil plant material have been found there, all of it now at the Smithsonian. The site is part of the Arundel Formation, dating to the Lower Cretaceous, 115 mya, when the place was an oxbow lake. Tributaries were strong enough to wash dino bones into the lake. The fossils there are disarticulated wash-out. Whole skeletons are not generally found or expected here. The exposed hillside consists of a mix of fine grey soil, siderite bog iron and lignite (coalified fossil wood the consistency of charcoal). The lignite and siderite form a thin, dense gravel layer. The challenge for visitors and paleontology volunteers alike is to find the pale blue bones and shiny teeth in the cacophony of black and orange. Collection is done almost exclusively by surface scanning. If something large turns up by way of erosion, then they cordon it off and dig it out. Anything other than the wood is documented with the finder’s name and sent to the Smithsonian. Visitors may keep one palm-sized piece of fossil wood if they like. My husband and I met a friend and her two daughters there today. It was cold, but sunny. There were harsh shadows on the ground, which are supposed to make it easier to pick out shiny teeth. I find the contrast too harsh to see details. The park is open from noon to 4 every other Saturday. We got there close to 1 and spent a couple hours there, despite the chill in the air. I didn’t expect to find any exciting fauna. That’s usually our daughter’s job, and she was at work. I was engrossed in the lignite and the siderite plant impressions, hoping maybe to find a seed cone or two for their collection. Apparently, a handful in a day is not unusual there. I had no luck on either score. I did find a nice plant impression in the siderite. Looks like tree bark. I asked if that could be the one I took home. The volunteer looked at me sternly and asked, "Do you now what it is?" "Tree bark impression in siderite, but I don't know from which tree." “What do you do for a living?” “Artist.” “What do you do that will prove to me that this will be used for educational or scientific purposes?” I told him about my fossil blog and the homeschool paleontology series I just ran at my local library. He was convinced. Now I have it at home, but I may offer it to the Delaware Museum of Natural History, where I volunteer. Each of the girls also found something nice, albeit smaller, to bring home. Unsurprisingly, most of the other kids were disappointed because they didn’t find dinosaur teeth. There was a list at the registration table of maybe a dozen interesting things found today. As far as I know, no one found anything interesting while we were there. Some days go like that, but I was not disappointed. It was a good afternoon to see someplace new. [1] Maryland has both a State Dinosaur and a State Fossil. The State Fossil is a gastropod, Ecphora gardenera.

Greetings, I recently acquired a big spinosaurus claw from a moroccan seller at a fossils and minerals event in Barcelona, Spain, called Expominer. I was quite happy with the purchase until a friend of mine told me that it could be a fake claw carved from a bone, but he is not sure, I have been checking similar spinosaurus claws on catawiki and they are sold as real dinosaur claws... What do you think? Thank you very much.

From Morocco World News : https://www.moroccoworldnews.com/2019/11/286852/flesh-eating-dinosaurs-migrated-between-morocco-and-europe/

Hello! How do you see this claw? I think it is a rare species. It seems that it has no restoration. Do you think it's the foot or the hand? Thank you!

Hello!!! I have been offered this tooth. The seller says it is from Albertosaurus and comes from Montana. Without restoration, they have only used glue. What do you think? Thank you very much and sorry for the quality of the photos but the seller does not know how to make them better ...

Hello! I see this 3 pachycephalosaurus claws. The seller told me that are natural and not restored. Are restored? Wich one has better quality? Thank you so much!!

Hello! I see this 3 edmontosaurus claws. The seller told me that are natural and not restored. Are restored? Wich one has better quality? Thank you so much!!

Hey all! I seen some member's collections and wow, you all have some awesome pieces, the type of things I hope to add to my collection someday. I've only been seriously collecting for about half a year and am still in the early process of learning about ancient life and the science surrounding it, but I wanted to post what I have thus far. About a quarter of the collection is things I collected during my childhood, but my favorite stuff is things I've found and/or bought this year, which is the majority.(after learning how to finally identify fossils a little better so I didn't think they were just rocks and move along) There's a couple more insignificant things I don't have on these shelves but it's really crowded and I need to get a larger display before I add them. First pic is my display in it's entirety. This second image is of the top shelf, there's no particular rhyme or reason yet, as in nothing is placed in any way regarding age, type, etc, I just put the stuff I like the best at the top. This is mostly dino bones, and though it looks like quite a few different fragments, most of them are from a single unidentified bone I found completely shattered after a flood a few years ago caused a cliff to crumble. (at least I assume that's why the cliff crumbled) One bivalve of some sort, dino teeth, ceratopsian bones (frill I found, rib which I bought, caudal vertebra possibly ceratopsian, thank you to the users on this forum that helped me identify the frill and vertebra as well as the tyrannosaurus tooth) and an ammonite that I found. Spinosaurus tooth, another unidentified tooth, knightia. Some of the bones in the top display haven't been cleaned and prepared as of yet. The second image is just a bunch of random stuff. Shark and alligator teeth, fossil plant imprints, animals in resin, a nile croc skull, minerals, another ammonite & a trilobite, etc. Third shelf is kind of neat, it's mostly filled with bones a customer of mine found and gave to me of very old bison that were chased off a cliff by native hunters. They were washed out of banks along the Red Deer River and aren't completely fossilized. Also some petrified wood.

Dear members, today I want to tell you about one of the most epic misinterpreation in the history of italian palaeontology. A story that many newspapers and websites rushed to spread, but that was nothing but a leap! As you read in the title, it's about how an ammonite got mistaken for a dinosaur, in particular for a skull. How that could possibly happen? Let's see. Vigevano is a small town 31 km (20 milles) west of Milan, northern Italy. Famous since the Middle Ages (Leonardo da Vinci resided there several times), today a castle and a porch are its main attractions. But we will focus on the cathedral: built between the XVI and XVII centuries it is decorated with frescoes, paintings and decorative stones. Many italian churches feature very impressive decorative stones in their architecture: one of the most widely adopted is the Rosso Veronese (Red Verona's marble, even though it is a sedimentary rock!), a red and white stone that usually preserves fossils. In the Vigevano case, a slightly different rock was used, called "Broccatello". Still nowadays it is quarried in the swiss town of Arzo, extremely close to the Italian-swiss border, 60 km (38 miles) north of Vigevano. It is a marine limestone that dates to the Early Jurassic; common fossils found within include brachiopods, sponges and crinoids. Ammonites and other molluscs are more rare. On the map the red arrow shows the location of Vigevano and the purple arrow that of Arzo. Well, in fall 2010 one of the most respected italian newspapers shared the news that a dinosaur skull had been discovered in a slab of "Broccatello" that decorates a balaustrade in the Vigevano Cathedral. Responsible for the discovery was Andrea Tintori, then full professor of vertebrate palaeontology at the University of Milan. He reported that the in the cross-sectioned specimen, a cranium, nasal cavities and numeros teeth could be seen. At the beginning he thought it belonged to an Ichthyosaur or a crocodile, then he was convinced that it was a dinosaur. He also claimed to be intentioned to remove the slab and put it through a CT scan, in order to see it in 3-D. You can see a picture of the balaustrade and of the "skull" (the latter taken by me). After 9 years, however, the slab is still in its original location, untoched. Why? Well, because it is absolutely not a dino skull! A close (but not very sophisticated) analysis can easily show that is actually a cross-section of an ammonite shell: no teeth at all can be seen and other features (like symmetrical knobs or indentations) are not even remotely consistent with the original interpretation. (Picture obtained with permission of the original author) So, this is the end of our story: maybe a little disappointing, but in my opinion it teaches that any claim or fact should always be checked two times rather than one! You can read an article about this story from the Smithsonian Magazine website: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/a-dinosaur-in-an-italian-church-86306076/