Jump to content

Elko Nevada Fossils


Brianb

Recommended Posts

  • New Members

I found these 5/10/21 around Elko Nevada Nevada in an area rich with coral and Brachiopods.  Any help identifying theses so appreciated! 
 

Ty! 

166D531E-2B44-408E-A84B-0086F147CFAE.jpeg

Edited by Brianb
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Welcome to the forum. Unfortunately, to me these look like chert nodules. 

  • I Agree 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

+ 1 for chert. No fossils there. 

 

    Tim    -  VETERAN SHALE SPLITTER

   VFOTM.png.f1b09c78bf88298b009b0da14ef44cf0.png    VFOTM  --- APRIL - 2015     MOTM.png.61350469b02f439fd4d5d77c2c69da85.png  PaleoPartner.png.30c01982e09b0cc0b7d9d6a7a21f56c6.png.a600039856933851eeea617ca3f2d15f.png   Postmaster1.jpg.900efa599049929531fa81981f028e24.jpg   Screenshot_202410.jpg      IPFOTM -- MAY - 2024   IPFOTM5.png.fb4f2a268e315c58c5980ed865b39e1f.png

_________________________________________________________________________________
"In every walk with nature one receives far more than he seeks."

John Muir ~ ~ ~ ~   ><))))( *>  About Me      

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • New Members

Here’s two more flint Pseudomorph sponges I’ve mined.   They assay at 99 percent quartz with Montmorillmonite and Allophane. They fire assay for  AU .02/0Z/Ton. AG 1.05/OZ/Ton. They are flint nodules, they are siliceous sponge fossils that were first calcium carbonate but then later replaced with good old fashioned quartz from extreme geothermal heating.  As flint they are generally thought to be white on the outside and black on the inside, then again “flint,” is an archaeologic term. They are also eoliths, geofacts, figure stones and painted.  Did I mention they are gold and silver ore and that they are stunning. Even seasoned amateur paleontologists think these amazing amazing precursors to ALL LAND ANIMALS are nodules? Trust me, I’ve been confidentially told on this forum they are simply nodules. Lazy. Nice try. Have hundreds more. :) 

5259FB8E-A5A7-4CC3-BABE-05DC573038CC.jpeg

D267B955-3788-4608-82B8-4F853D0727C5.jpeg

Edited by Brianb
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You will do much better around here by avoiding calling other members lazy when they offer their time, opinion, and experience to assist in identification.

  • Enjoyed 1

...How to Philosophize with a Hammer

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Brianb

 

Have these been studied and proven to be sponges by an actual paleontologist? 

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.   :unsure: 

  • I Agree 1

    Tim    -  VETERAN SHALE SPLITTER

   VFOTM.png.f1b09c78bf88298b009b0da14ef44cf0.png    VFOTM  --- APRIL - 2015     MOTM.png.61350469b02f439fd4d5d77c2c69da85.png  PaleoPartner.png.30c01982e09b0cc0b7d9d6a7a21f56c6.png.a600039856933851eeea617ca3f2d15f.png   Postmaster1.jpg.900efa599049929531fa81981f028e24.jpg   Screenshot_202410.jpg      IPFOTM -- MAY - 2024   IPFOTM5.png.fb4f2a268e315c58c5980ed865b39e1f.png

_________________________________________________________________________________
"In every walk with nature one receives far more than he seeks."

John Muir ~ ~ ~ ~   ><))))( *>  About Me      

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Fossildude19 said:

@Brianb

 

Have these been studied and proven to be sponges by an actual paleontologist? 

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.   :unsure: 

While chert had been known to have fossils I have one or two ordovician chert that have microfossils in them (I can see tiny crinoid stem pieces in them). 

9 minutes ago, Fossildude19 said:

@Brianb

 

Have these been studied and proven to be sponges by an actual paleontologist? 

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.   :unsure: 

And I could be wrong but i remember some years ago they used certain acids that dissolves the quartz, revealing some stunning fossils inside

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • New Members

They’ve been studied extensively by geologists and paleontologists. Most comments from the area is they are poorly preserved. I say they are beautiful. Not this particular set, but from the specific area.  I’ll post more pics and it will click!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Were any of them sponge experts, such as Joe Botting? I would be interested to know which paleontologists confirmed these as sponges.

  • I found this Informative 2

...How to Philosophize with a Hammer

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What formation and geological time period are they from? Do you have any pictures that show spongy texture?

My goal is to leave no stone or fossil unturned.   

See my Arizona Paleontology Guide    link  The best single resource for Arizona paleontology anywhere.       

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your original post asked for and identification of the items you posted.  You were given two suggestions of chert.  Your assay supports that answer.  I'm not going to bother getting into the difference between chert and flint because you can ask 10 geologists and probably get 11 different definitions; suffice it to say they have the same chemical and microcrystaline structure and its not really relevant to whether they are fossils or not. 

 

Some chert is formed from the dissolution of organisms (including sponges) and reprecipitation as microcrystalline quartz but chert is also formed from inorganic processes.  So, without seeing any evidence of actual fossils in your specimens, I would not call them fossils.  If you can show us evidence of fossils in your rocks (not just the presence of quartz), I will gladly change my mind.  The fact that they are chert/flint does not automatically make them fossils.

 

You mention several times that you think they are beautiful.  I would agree, they can look very nice all polished up, but that has nothing to do with whether they are chert/flint nodules, fossils, mineral accumulations or anything else.

  • I found this Informative 1
  • Enjoyed 2
  • I Agree 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Brianb said:

They’ve been studied extensively by geologists and paleontologists. Most comments from the area is they are poorly preserved. I say they are beautiful. Not this particular set, but from the specific area.  I’ll post more pics and it will click!

 

If they've been studied extensively, there must be at least a couple of journal articles about them.

  • I found this Informative 1
  • I Agree 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...