OK This One Explains Itself

[Muuleey]

OK…. I really have a good feeling about this one…. Found today “on family property” here in East Feliciana Parish,  Louisiana…. 
Im guessing this possibly is a “snake head”. Looks to have had its left side of his head partially damaged… possibly resulting in his death…

Fossil is in excellent condition….

Please, advise on this piece… also if this is a real piece, advise as to how I should store it since it is no longer in the ground…

 

Thanks,

TJ

[Fin Lover]

Sorry, just a rock

[Coco]

It’s a rock and not a snake’s head, they don’t fossilize that way. I understand the idea because it has a slight resemblance, but nothing more.

 

Coco

[Fossildude19]

You would greatly benefit from joining a local club that could get you familiar with what fossils are available in your area for collection, and what they look like.

It's also a great way to meet like minded people, and get access to club field trips to locations that might otherwise be off limits to individual collectors.

 

LINK

[Muuleey]

My pics must be pretty bad…. Just out of curiosity….

If this is just a rock, then why does it present a visible set of fairly sharp looking teeth?

Am attaching a pic I changed from color to black and white for visual purposes…

 

TJ

[Andúril Flame of the West]

Unfortunately, this does appear to be geologic in nature. I always find it quite interesting how so many identify rocks as snake heads… Could there be a reason for this uncanny convergence? (Perhaps an innate, unconscious fear of snake venom that would make spotting them beneficial)

[Muuleey]

So this would, more than likely, be a case of pareidolia that I need to attend to, correct Mr. West?

[Fin Lover]

35 minutes ago, Muuleey said:

If this is just a rock, then why does it present a visible set of fairly sharp looking teeth?

I'm not seeing any teeth.  I would agree with pareidolia.

 

Here is a picture of a fossilized snake skull. You can see that the bones are clearly different than the matrix and that no soft tissue remains.

 

Edited November 28, 2023 by Fin Lover
Added picture

[Randyw]

Unfortunately this is just a rock. No teeth no bilateral symmetry, no eye orbit or bone texture….just pareidolia at work

 

[Sagebrush Steve]

12 minutes ago, Fin Lover said:

I'm not seeing any teeth.  I would agree with pareidolia.

Agreed.  The problem is that if you do an internet search on “fossilized snake head” you will see lots of photos that people have posted of rocks that look vaguely like snake heads that they claim to be real fossils.  Once you see a real fossilized snake head you will easily be able to tell the difference between a true fossil and an igneous rock that has vent holes from gasses that escaped from it.

[val horn]

Pareidolia  is a survival trait to be able to recognize a  creature, a situation,  a threat without seeing all of it.  That ability to put a picture together from small and missing pieces has keep our ancestors alive.  It is generally a sign of intelligence to be able to put a picture together from small parts.  but it can be a drawback  particularly in paleo where there really will be only partial fossils, but also a lot of almosts and maybes.  Whenever I good to a new site it takes me a while to get my eyes adjusted to pick out what I should be looking for-- and sometimes I just dont find anything until I go with somebody more experienced.

[digit]

11 hours ago, val horn said:

Pareidolia  is a survival trait to be able to recognize a  creature, a situation,  a threat without seeing all of it.  That ability to put a picture together from small and missing pieces has keep our ancestors alive.  It is generally a sign of intelligence to be able to put a picture together from small parts.  but it can be a drawback  particularly in paleo where there really will be only partial fossils, but also a lot of almosts and maybes.  Whenever I good to a new site it takes me a while to get my eyes adjusted to pick out what I should be looking for-- and sometimes I just dont find anything until I go with somebody more experienced.

That's one of the best concise explanations of why pareidolia exists and why it must always be considered in paleontology when making fossil IDs.

 

We've had members in the past object strongly when we tell them that pareidolia is behind why they are convinced they are seeing something that is not there in their item brought here for ID. Some have replied back that they "do not have a mental illness" as if pareidolia (which we all possess to a lesser or greater degree) was in the psychiatric textbooks between depression and schizophrenia. Pareidolia (like optical illusions) can produce some amazing ambiguous images:

 

https://www.google.com/search?q=pareidolia&tbm=isch

 

https://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/do_you_experience_pareidolia_it_could_help_you_be_creative

 

 

Cheers.

 

-Ken

[Fossildude19]

12 hours ago, Muuleey said:

So this would, more than likely, be a case of pareidolia that I need to attend to, correct Mr. West?

 

 

Pareidolia isn't something that "needs attending to". It just needs to be put into perspective with facts and science.

Just a matter of couching your expectations with knowledge about your area's stratigraphy, and with how things actually fossilized.

Learn what aged sediments are in your area. Learn what fossils can actually be found in your area.

Then bring your finds here to be identified.  Read scientific papers about the formations in your area. Familiarize yourself with the types of rocks in those formations, and what the fossils look like. 

This approach will lead to more success, eventually.  Picking up random rocks because they may "look like something" only goes so far.

And usually, it ends up in the direction of Pareidolia.