Tanit Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 (edited) Length: 22 cm Width: 20 cm Thanks Edited November 10, 2015 by Tanit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troodon Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 Shark fins do not fossilized looks geologic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tanit Posted November 10, 2015 Author Share Posted November 10, 2015 You have the evidence before you that this is possible Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
izak_ Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 (edited) I agree with troodon looks geologic.. Where was it found? Edited November 10, 2015 by izak_ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 (edited) Shark fins do not fossilized looks geologic. No so about shark fins. Do a Google image search for 'cladoselache fossil.' But I completely agree that the posted fossil is nothing of the sort. Edited November 10, 2015 by Carl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troodon Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 Correct fins fossilized in matrix but I've never seen a standalone fossilize fin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auspex Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 You have the evidence before you that this is possible What leads you to conclude that this is a fossil shark fin? "There has been an alarming increase in the number of things I know nothing about." - Ashleigh Ellwood Brilliant “Try to learn something about everything and everything about something.” - Thomas Henry Huxley >Paleontology is an evolving science. >May your wonders never cease! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ynot Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 (edited) The piece looks like a layered calcite. Cave onyx to be more precise. Take some vinegar and see if it fizzes. If it does it is calcite. Agree with others - definitely not a "shark fin" or any other type of fossil. Tony Edited November 10, 2015 by ynot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tanit Posted November 10, 2015 Author Share Posted November 10, 2015 Here is an article in French that talks about the discovery of an entire shark found well preserved. "These specimens , in remarkable condition , were actually mummified by nature because their soft tissues and internal organs have been preserved in three dimensions. Reflecting this shark 80 cm long discovered in 1981 by Bernard Riou ...... " This is an exceptional specimen of its size but also by the quality of its preservation. Soft tissue effect is observed as the eyes and the skin folds formed in fine scales . Find whole fossils of cartilaginous fish such as sharks is extremely rare , "says paleontologist ." (google translation) http://www.ledauphine.com/ardeche/2010/05/04/un-fossile-de-requin-sorti-des-entrailles-de-l-ardeche Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tanit Posted November 10, 2015 Author Share Posted November 10, 2015 What leads you to conclude that this is a fossil shark fin? I did not buy this fin . It was offered to me by someone who found a whole shark. This fin was detached from the body in front of me . I asked him to sell me the fin, and he offered it to me for free. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tanit Posted November 10, 2015 Author Share Posted November 10, 2015 The piece looks like a layered calcite. Cave onyx to be more precise. Take some vinegar and see if it fizzes. If it does it is calcite. Agree with others - definitely not a "shark fin" or any other type of fossil. Tony I put vinegar , it does not fizze . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZiggieCie Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 Hi Tanit and welcome to the Forum. Please stay with us and you will learn the truth about what Fossils are and what they look like. There are people that claim things are something, but they can be wrong. We spend a lot of time and research to learn to identify fossils. Many people here have been studying Fossils for much of their lives. If you look at the person's avatar and their name, you will also see how many posts they have responded to, thousands to 39,000 responses to questions on fossils. The people here do not write one article and claim to be experts. Please stay and learn, it is fun and will open your eyes to ancient life of Earth. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ynot Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 OK, not calcite, do You know how to do a hardness test? Or a "streak" test? What was the type of rock it was found in? What area was it found? (City County/province state?) Is the piece wet in the pictures? The answers to these questions can help us to identify what You have. Thank You, Tony Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 The article you cited says: "Find whole fossils of cartilaginous fish such as sharks is extremely rare" And you say: "It was offered to me by someone who found a whole shark. This fin was detached from the body in front of me . I asked him to sell me the fin, and he offered it to me for free." If these things are so rare, and they absolutely are, how are we to believe that someone who found such a rarity would just snap off a part an give it to you even for a price? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tanit Posted November 10, 2015 Author Share Posted November 10, 2015 The article you cited says: "Find whole fossils of cartilaginous fish such as sharks is extremely rare" And you say: "It was offered to me by someone who found a whole shark. This fin was detached from the body in front of me . I asked him to sell me the fin, and he offered it to me for free." If these things are so rare, and they absolutely are, how are we to believe that someone who found such a rarity would just snap off a part an give it to you even for a price? The man who found the shark was a peasant in the region Mahajanga in Madagascar. He found the shark in a river while working his land. He did not know what it was . Of course , he did not knew that it was extremely rare ... and I too did not know it at this time. He gave me this fin because for him it has no value. He showed me the shark just so I tell him what it is . I told him that this is probably a big fish , maybe a mummified shark. When I asked him to sell me the fin , he did not want me to pay Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpc Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 It has too many layers to be a shark fin... and the layers seem to go through the base of the triangle... they do not follow the shape of the fin, which they would if they were part of a fin structure, say skin. Ceci est un morceau de pierre, pas un fossile. It has a triangular shape, but that does not make it a shark fin. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ashcraft Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 I think it is a fossil, looks stromatolitic or possibly a stromatoporoid. Brent Ashcraft ashcraft, brent allen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abyssunder Posted November 11, 2015 Share Posted November 11, 2015 (edited) About from one hour ago my thought is stromatoporoid. Edited November 11, 2015 by abyssunder " We are not separate and independent entities, but like links in a chain, and we could not by any means be what we are without those who went before us and showed us the way. " Thomas Mann My Library Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oilshale Posted November 11, 2015 Share Posted November 11, 2015 Here is an article in French that talks about the discovery of an entire shark found well preserved. "These specimens , in remarkable condition , were actually mummified by nature because their soft tissues and internal organs have been preserved in three dimensions. Reflecting this shark 80 cm long discovered in 1981 by Bernard Riou ...... " This is an exceptional specimen of its size but also by the quality of its preservation. Soft tissue effect is observed as the eyes and the skin folds formed in fine scales . Find whole fossils of cartilaginous fish such as sharks is extremely rare , "says paleontologist ." (google translation) http://www.ledauphine.com/ardeche/2010/05/04/un-fossile-de-requin-sorti-des-entrailles-de-l-ardeche Is this the "shark", you are talking about? Actually, it's a skate and not a shark. The composer of this article was..ehm...well...let's say "not very well versed in this field". Take a look at this picture - the preservation of what you have is completely different. Sorry, but what you have is an interesting looking stone and not a fossil and by far not a shark fin. Thomas Be not ashamed of mistakes and thus make them crimes (Confucius, 551 BC - 479 BC). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auspex Posted November 11, 2015 Share Posted November 11, 2015 Ziggy, He is going by what he sees, and he himself has little experience with fossils to draw upon. It is a matter of 'trusting his own eyes'. I do not doubt that he is sincere in his beliefs. "There has been an alarming increase in the number of things I know nothing about." - Ashleigh Ellwood Brilliant “Try to learn something about everything and everything about something.” - Thomas Henry Huxley >Paleontology is an evolving science. >May your wonders never cease! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tanit Posted November 11, 2015 Author Share Posted November 11, 2015 Hi Here new sharper pictures Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tanit Posted November 11, 2015 Author Share Posted November 11, 2015 Here new sharper pictures Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tanit Posted November 11, 2015 Author Share Posted November 11, 2015 Here new sharper pictures Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ashcraft Posted November 11, 2015 Share Posted November 11, 2015 sticking with stromatoporoid Brent Ashcraft ashcraft, brent allen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tanit Posted November 11, 2015 Author Share Posted November 11, 2015 sticking with stromatoporoid Brent Ashcraft I said and I repeat that I took this piece on a shark (or a big fish ) of about 1 meter. I have no reason to lie . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now