What are these?

[Kane]

I do not see anything here that suggests fossil.

[Kfinn0319]

[Fossildude19]

Sorry, but I see no fossils either. First looks like a piece of chert or weather worn mudstone.

The second item  photo is too blurry and dark to tell. But I would wager it is something geologic in nature, like agate or chert.

[Kfinn0319]

 

[Kane]

I do not see any significant resemblance between your recent finds and fossilized embryos. 

[Kfinn0319]

[Kane]

7 minutes ago, Kfinn0319 said:

Sorry, but I very much doubt anyone else here is seeing fossilized embryos either. 

[Fin Lover]

I don't see any evidence of fossils here either.  Would you like to point out where you are seeing a skeleton in your rocks?

Edited April 11, 2023 by Fin Lover

[FossilNerd]

All of your posted items are geological. Shape alone is not diagnostic of a fossil.

 

I assume you meant the below picture to be a comparison to what you have. So compare the two. In the reference photo you posted you can see individual bones that make up the fossil, bone texture, shell. Your items have none of these features.

 

You are experiencing a phenomenon known as pareidolia. It is a natural thing to happen. It's why we see shapes in clouds or a face on the moon. You are seeing embryos where there are none.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareidolia

 

 

44 minutes ago, Kfinn0319 said:

 

 

[Randyw]

I’m with the rest. These are rocks not fossils for all the reasons given above.

[JohnJ]

4 hours ago, Kfinn0319 said:

Anything to say about this? 

 

I looks like you may have used a wire brush or wheel on half of this rock...?

 

I'm also supposing you never made it to an Arizona paleontologist with your finds?

 

Shapes do not tell the whole story.  Lots of things are shaped like things they are Not.  It's a combination of defining characteristics that help us identify fossils.  You can read about how easily we can be fooled by rocks, HERE.

[Mark Kmiecik]

I see out-of-focus photos shot in a dark closet. It's hard enough to ID specimens only from viewing photos. Bad photos only make it harder. You should take the photos in better light. Outside works if you don't have a photo studio in the house. Bright sunlight but not shining directly onto the specimen. Use a featureless surface for a background so the camera can focus on the specimen and not the support surface. Move the camera away from the subject until it is in sharp focus, and then use photoshop to crop and enlarge the photo. This will help tremendously with the ID of specimens containing fossils. It will not help with specimens that are not fossils like what you've presented so far, with the possible exception of the last one you posted today. I'd like to see photos of the other sides of that specimen.

 

 

 

 

Edited April 11, 2023 by Mark Kmiecik
fix typo

[Kfinn0319]

On 4/11/2023 at 9:04 AM, FossilNerd said:

All of your posted items are geological. Shape alone is not diagnostic of a fossil.

 

I assume you meant the below picture to be a comparison to what you have. So compare the two. In the reference photo you posted you can see individual bones that make up the fossil, bone texture, shell. Your items have none of these features.

 

You are experiencing a phenomenon known as pareidolia. It is a natural thing to happen. It's why we see shapes in clouds or a face on the moon. You are seeing embryos where there are none.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareidolia

 

 

 

[Kfinn0319]

That is a heck of a thing. Pareidolia? I can see a head with a bottom jaw and even some teeth starting to show. I could see something under the mud and I was just trying to see if anyone else saw it. Thank you Mark for your suggestion on my photography. I really don't know what I'm doing here, so everything helps. 

[Kfinn0319]

On 4/11/2023 at 11:57 AM, JohnJ said:

 

I looks like you may have used a wire brush or wheel on half of this rock...?

 

I'm also supposing you never made it to an Arizona paleontologist with your finds?

 

Shapes do not tell the whole story.  Lots of things are shaped like things they are Not.  It's a combination of defining characteristics that help us identify fossils.  You can read about how easily we can be fooled by rocks, HERE.

I have never used a wire brush or any power tools. Slight water pressure and soft bristle brush. Everything you see is the way it came out. Only sediment removal. 

[Ludwigia]

I think that it's time to agree to disagree and leave it at that.

[doushantuo]

Here's a suggestion: let the poster point out some items in the "physiognomy"/phenology that can be checked againt relevant peer-reviewed literature 

in the field of developmental biology.

Maybe the poster is willing to provide some sedimentological ,stratigraphical ,paleo-ecological and taphonomic data/insights  as well?

[Ludwigia]

1 hour ago, doushantuo said:

Here's a suggestion: let the poster point out some items in the "physiognomy"/phenology that can be checked againt relevant peer-reviewed literature 

in the field of developmental biology.

Maybe the poster is willing to provide some sedimentological ,stratigraphical ,paleo-ecological and taphonomic data/insights  as well?

That would be helpful, wouldn't it?

[FossilNerd]

8 hours ago, Kfinn0319 said:

That is a heck of a thing. Pareidolia? I can see a head with a bottom jaw and even some teeth starting to show. I could see something under the mud and I was just trying to see if anyone else saw it. Thank you Mark for your suggestion on my photography. I really don't know what I'm doing here, so everything helps. 

 

8 hours ago, Kfinn0319 said:

Pareidolia is a heck of a thing and can trick the mind into seeing all sort of fantastical shapes, but if you can train yourself to look beyond the shape you will see this is an ordinary rock. 
 

There is no evidence of bilateral symmetry, no skull morphology, no bone, or bone texture, no tooth enamel. Nothing that you are seeing is actually there. 

[Fossildude19]

11 hours ago, Kfinn0319 said:

I can see a head with a bottom jaw and even some teeth starting to show. I could see something under the mud and I was just trying to see if anyone else saw it.

 

I cannot see what you are seeing.  This is the issue at hand. What you are SEEING. Generalized shapes and outlines can be very interesting, but not overly persuasive of fossils.

 

Seeing is the problem. Only seeing shapes, you are interpreting what they are, without the benefit of actually having any real evidence of the items being fossils.

No bones, bone texture, no teeth, no enamel, no root textures, no bilateral symmetry, no fossil skeletal morphology of any kind.

Looks can be deceiving, and mother nature is a good artist.

 

If you were to remove the layers of "mud" would you see bones and teeth? I am willing to bet you wouldn't. You have before you, collectively, hundreds of years of experience with fossils in this membership. We would be ecstatic if you had found anything truly fossilized and amazing. We live for new finds and scientific discovery.

There is no agenda here beyond trying to help people realize what they are looking at, and teaching about how fossils actually form. 

Unfortunately, people feel the need to believe what their eyes are telling them, rather than the facts presented before them by people more knowledgeable about the processes involved in fossilization, and fossil Identification.

 

Again, it appears time to agree to disagree. Please take our advice, and have a university or museum PALEONTOLOGIST look at your items.

 

[JohnJ]

On 6/16/2022 at 9:16 PM, JohnJ said:

No one here is trying to belittle you or "throw a hurtful jab" at you.  Please do not presume negative intentions by others that disagree with you.

 

What large towns are closest to you in Arizona?  Other members might be able to get you in contact with the closest paleontologist.

 

16 hours ago, Kfinn0319 said:

I really don't know what I'm doing here, so everything helps. 

 

Last year, we offered to help you get in touch with a paleontologist.  If that is not useful to you regarding these items, I am not sure what you are looking for. 

[Kfinn0319]

15 hours ago, FossilNerd said:

 

Pareidolia is a heck of a thing and can trick the mind into seeing all sort of fantastical shapes, but if you can train yourself to look beyond the shape you will see this is an ordinary rock. 
 

There is no evidence of bilateral symmetry, no skull morphology, no bone, or bone texture, no tooth enamel. Nothing that you are seeing is actually there. 

That's incorrect. I do disagree with some, but not all of the comments. It's not exactly fair to say I don't agree. Although I fished, I put other items to rest even though I saw more all just because of the advice on this forum. This piece I have was picked up years ago just because it looked interesting. I was walking by it recently with the light being cat on it and seeing it at an angle that caught my attention. I didn't even know what exactly I saw, but I started working on it. This one is frustrating because of what I can see. I am horrible at taking pics, but this is something that needs to be seen. I have tried to reach a paleontologist anywhere near n az, but unfortunately I have not recurved replies. I don't exactly have the ability to travel very far so I can't go see anybody. This thing is symmetrical, or it was at one time. You can see it was pushed up on one side. That is one leg and the hip. If you can imagine that side being brought down, you will see the symmetry. Also, the lower jaw bone suffered a similar pushing, and is protruding from one side and not yet visible on the other. I'm telling you this is something to at least hold in your hand before deciding. Again, my photography does this thing no justice. I'm not being stubborn for me. I'm doing it because I think this thing needs to be studied. I attached another photo. If you were able to push the right hand side down from the top and even then out, the symmetry is there. In this pic I took quickly, to make my point, you can even see ribs showing up from what I believe is the torso. I tried more photography and will upload those as well...

[Kfinn0319]

[Kfinn0319]

I was trying different filters, trying to get things to show b better. I hope it works, and I'm sorry they look like metal. It's just the filters I used...

[FossilNerd]

32 minutes ago, Kfinn0319 said:

That's incorrect. I do disagree with some, but not all of the comments. It's not exactly fair to say I don't agree. Although I fished, I put other items to rest even though I saw more all just because of the advice on this forum. This piece I have was picked up years ago just because it looked interesting. I was walking by it recently with the light being cat on it and seeing it at an angle that caught my attention. I didn't even know what exactly I saw, but I started working on it. This one is frustrating because of what I can see. I am horrible at taking pics, but this is something that needs to be seen. I have tried to reach a paleontologist anywhere near n az, but unfortunately I have not recurved replies. I don't exactly have the ability to travel very far so I can't go see anybody. This thing is symmetrical, or it was at one time. You can see it was pushed up on one side. That is one leg and the hip. If you can imagine that side being brought down, you will see the symmetry. Also, the lower jaw bone suffered a similar pushing, and is protruding from one side and not yet visible on the other. I'm telling you this is something to at least hold in your hand before deciding. Again, my photography does this thing no justice. I'm not being stubborn for me. I'm doing it because I think this thing needs to be studied. I attached another photo. If you were able to push the right hand side down from the top and even then out, the symmetry is there. In this pic I took quickly, to make my point, you can even see ribs showing up from what I believe is the torso. I tried more photography and will upload those as well...

 

We will have to agree to disagree.

 

Again, you are looking at the shape of the rock and what YOU see. If you can’t look past your pareidolia, then we cannot help you.

 

Pareidolia happens to us all. We have all been there. Especially in the infancy of our fossil journey. It is not meant as an insult to you. Simply a term to help you understand why you think you see what you do.

 

If your photography skills are as lacking as you think, then I would usually suggest taking it to your local museum or similar facility so someone can look at it in hand, but you say you don’t have the means to travel. Sending a paleontologist an email with the same supposedly bad pictures (I’ve seen a lot worse) will do you no good. I don’t know what else to suggest. 
 

Honestly, I don’t see how I can be of further assistance. However, I do wish you well in your search. If you find a professional to look at it in hand and prove us wrong, I encourage you to come back and share so we can all learn something.