 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Natural Science Forum / Biology / Paleontology / December 2006Inquiry
I am looking to get some expert opinions from some individuals with expertise in fossils/paleontology. I am a member of a team researching a Native American site north of Phoenix. We have been surprised by the number of anomalies at this site, including what seems to be the presence of fossils where there should be none. Originally, we received verification from a paleontologist that these were indeed fossils. This was almost two years ago and we have been sitting on this since then. While my expertise is more in the area of Physics/Toplology, I have read enough to know the possible importance of soft-tissue fossils and the valuable data they provide. I would appreciate hearing any thoughts and/or opinions you may have concerning this. Images can be viewed here: http://picasaweb.google.com/Worldblend/Fossils Thank you, Rob TKI, Phoenix, AZ > I am looking to get some expert opinions from some individuals with > expertise in fossils/paleontology. I am a member of a team researching [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > Rob > TKI, Phoenix, AZ None of those pictures are of fossils. Ken >> I am looking to get some expert opinions from some individuals with >> expertise in fossils/paleontology. I am a member of a team researching [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > > Ken Agreed. Looks like he might have a little carbon on one in a depression but that suggests human use rather than fossil. > I am looking to get some expert opinions from some individuals with > expertise in fossils/paleontology. I am a member of a team researching [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > http://picasaweb.google.com/Worldblend/Fossils I would suggest that you take some of the specimens to an University department of geology/palaeontology. They don't look like fossils.  SignatureGautam Majumdar Please send e-mails to gmajumdar@freeuk.com on Wed, 06 Dec 2006 07:02:57 GMT, Gautam Majumdar <gmajumdar@xspamfreeuk.com> sez: >> I am looking to get some expert opinions from some individuals with >> expertise in fossils/paleontology. I am a member of a team researching [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >I would suggest that you take some of the specimens to an University >department of geology/palaeontology. They don't look like fossils. I mostly agree, but look carefully at the parallel (wavy) lines on the upper right of this one (labelled "ribcage" in the pic). http://picasaweb.google.com/Worldblend/Fossils/photo#4997472541425139730 There is something odd going on there. To the OP, what type of rock is this, and what has a geologist told you of the age of the strata? Signature========================================================================== vincent@triumf[munge].ca Pete Vincent Disclaimer: all I know I learned from reading Usenet. > on Wed, 06 Dec 2006 07:02:57 GMT, Gautam Majumdar > <gmajumdar@xspamfreeuk.com> sez: [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >>I would suggest that you take some of the specimens to an University >>department of geology/palaeontology. They don't look like fossils. They do not look like fossils in any way. Someone has taken up Conrad's banner: any rock is a fossil is you squint your eyes up real good and turn your head kind of sideways and are a wee bit in a hurry. on Thu, 7 Dec 2006 03:56:44 -0500, Aardvark J. Bandersnatch <sumbuddy@micrsfot.com> sez: Nothing quoted in this post was written by me. >> on Wed, 06 Dec 2006 07:02:57 GMT, Gautam Majumdar >> <gmajumdar@xspamfreeuk.com> sez: [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >>>I would suggest that you take some of the specimens to an University >>>department of geology/palaeontology. They don't look like fossils. >They do not look like fossils in any way. Someone has taken up Conrad's >banner: any rock is a fossil is you squint your eyes up real good and turn >your head kind of sideways and are a wee bit in a hurry. Signature========================================================================== vincent@triumf[munge].ca Pete Vincent Disclaimer: all I know I learned from reading Usenet. > I am looking to get some expert opinions from some individuals with > expertise in fossils/paleontology. I am a member of a team researching [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > Rob > TKI, Phoenix, AZ They could be fossils -- at least some of them could. But none of them looks like any common form and none of them look to be of indisputably organic origin. I'd take them to a real paleontologist. Were they found in matrix or in float? Any clue what rock formation the rocks originated in? Are there similar rocks at the site (same material and texture) that don't look like fossils? If your chosen paleontologist finds them to be interesting, he or she will probably want to visit your site. Don: My current opinion is similar to your stance below, but originally I was more sceptical. I especially agree with you about them being in a form not normally seen. I might add that these are different in that they usually become more interesting the closer you look. The comments below are from the individual who indeed did come out to the site to look around and take some samples back. He is the director of a museum with two degrees in Paleontology. He is no hack. Let me also say that I have no need for these to be fossils. We decided to sit on this after his assesment due to concerns about maintaining site integrety, as there is other work being done at the site. I introduced this subject here only because we were having thoughts of mentioning it in a paper (separate field) and we thought some additional opinions/assesments were in order. I will give you a few more details when I have some more time. "Okay, first assesment of the fossils you let me take for examination. Most are just rock, but a few are indeed fossils. Type of sediment indicates around 4 to 5 million years old but that is best guess without doing a real science study. They are also mammalian rather than dinosaur. That is still pretty spectacular, but not as good as we hoped. Still that is great eyes to even find that Rob. The most interesting is the one that resembled jawbone and teeth. It not only looks like that but it is and clearly a carnivor. Where do we go from here?" > > I am looking to get some expert opinions from some individuals with > > expertise in fossils/paleontology. I am a member of a team researching [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > finds them to be interesting, he or she will probably want to visit > your site. ***I might add that these are different in that they usually become more interesting the closer you look.*** Actually that's not uncommon and is perhaps another reason to have some doubts. Some decades ago, one of the science populizers of the time -- Willy Ley or Issac Asimov -- wrote an article about a fairly well regarded paleontologist who went round the bend and started seeing faint fossils of a sometimes rather large (for a protozoan) discoid forminifer called Nummilites literally everywhere. Most people don't carry things that far., but many of us can find some sort of odd, possibly organic, markings on a lot of rocks. Some of them may be genuine fossils. Many aren't. It you look long enough at any rock, you will very likely see features that are not all that easy to explain. And no, there doesn't seem to be all that much good data on pseudofossils other than a few common forms that aren't relevant to your situation such as dendrites (fern-like mineral stains sometimes found on bedding planes in shales and slates). I agree that this tendancy exists and the geography of Mars is a good example. Many people see evidence of past civilizations where most others see unusual Martian Topography. However, I disagrree with the idea that when a theory or suspicion is strengthened as a result of closer examination or increased granularity, then it should be seen as reason to doubt or increase suspicion. This conflicts with both logic and the scientific method. > ***I might add that these are different in that > they usually become more interesting the closer you look.*** [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > (fern-like mineral stains sometimes found on bedding planes in shales > and slates). |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.