New Members ranlain39 Posted May 13 New Members Share Posted May 13 (edited) What kind of fossils are these? They're from the KY area one is bout 10 in in length and weights roughly 10 lbs and is sandstone and limestone the other is 5ft in length, it weighs roughly 300lbs and is limestone and possibly actual bone in the stone Edited May 13 by ranlain39 Adding pictures Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fin Lover Posted May 13 Share Posted May 13 (edited) Welcome to the forum. I'm not seeing any fossils from these pictures. Here is some information on Kentucky's stratigraphy and fossils (no dinosaur fossils have been found there): https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleontology_in_Kentucky#Fossil_genera_found_in_Kentucky Also: https://www.uky.edu/KGS/fossils/fossil-dinosauria.php#:~:text=Cretaceous (the last period in,Region in extreme western Kentucky . Edited May 13 by Fin Lover Added 2nd link 2 1 Fin Lover Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Kmiecik Posted May 13 Share Posted May 13 The photos are out-of-focus, but neither looks to have any features that one would expect to find in fossilized bones. Nature has ways of shaping rocks into all sorts of interesting shapes. 1 1 Mark. Fossil hunting is easy -- they don't run away when you shoot at them! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fossildude19 Posted May 13 Share Posted May 13 Weathered limestone, for me. No recognizable fossils here. Cropped, rotated, and brightened: Tim - VETERAN SHALE SPLITTER VFOTM --- APRIL - 2015 IPFOTM -- MAY - 2024 _________________________________________________________________________________ "In every walk with nature one receives far more than he seeks." John Muir ~ ~ ~ ~ ><))))( *> About Me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FossilNerd Posted May 13 Share Posted May 13 Hello from a native Kentuckian. Unfortunately, there are no dinosaur bones here in the Bluegrass State. There is a small section of the state that has Ice Age (Pleistocene) fossils that could possibly contain larger bones. However, your pieces are NOT those and are just weathered limestone. The limestone here weathers in all sorts of funny shapes. Nature can be tricky like that. Some may be curious about the Pleistocene fossils I mentioned above since KY is not know for them. If you are, check out the aptly named Big Bone Lick State Park. The birth place of North American Vertebrate Paleontology, believe it or not. One of Kentucky’s many hidden gems. https://parks.ky.gov/parks/find-a-park/big-bone-lick-state-historic-site-7807 https://www.uky.edu/KGS/education/did-big-bone-lick-birthplace.php https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bone_Lick_State_Park 2 The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it. -Neil deGrasse Tyson Everyone you will ever meet knows something you don't. -Bill Nye (The Science Guy) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandy Cole Posted May 14 Share Posted May 14 Can you post additional pictures of the item on the left side, along with a ruler for scale? It has some features that might indicate a modern bone, such as a worn or broken juvenile cow femur without the epiphysis. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandy Cole Posted May 14 Share Posted May 14 Here is the item I'm talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
New Members ranlain39 Posted June 6 Author New Members Share Posted June 6 I've used my AI on my phone several times and it says this is a dino fossil possible petrified. It also says on some that it could be from a t-rex. I was wrong about the rock type. It's agatized. As well as the other pic I posted. We've found lots of blue oil shale, churt , and quartz. Maybe someone could help me identify the several pieces I've found. The area has sink holes and cave systems. Recently as a month ago they found oil bout 3 miles from the he location. VID_20240602_200508962.mp4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kane Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 Is this the same piece as in your last thread? The photo is dark and not really in focus, but it does not seem to be a dinosaur fossil. 2 ...How to Philosophize with a Hammer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Kmiecik Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 Nothing in this photo even vaguely resembles T-Rex; skull, vertebra or anything else. 1 Mark. Fossil hunting is easy -- they don't run away when you shoot at them! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
New Members ranlain39 Posted June 6 Author New Members Share Posted June 6 I don't understand why when I use my AI says it's petrified bone. I can do high definition with it. But every time I try to upload a high def photo it tells me there not enough memory to to do ot. It's a white sand around the outside but it's really dense. I'm gonna try and upload more photos. I don't know exactly what it is that's why I came here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kane Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 AI such as Google Lens, etc., are poor in being able to identify fossils. As for memory issues in uploading, try cropping the photo or emailing it to yourself first, which reduces the file size. 3 ...How to Philosophize with a Hammer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Kmiecik Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 (edited) AI is still 50 years short of being dependable. At this point in time it has difficulty identifying humans in many cases. In something that can be as abstract as fossils the possibility of correct identification is only in the 1 to 10 percent range, depending on the complexity of the specimen. The simpler things are actually more difficult to ID. In other words, it can probably ID an entire T-Rex half the time, but if you show it a single bone it can only guess, and wrongly most of the time. Edited June 6 by Mark Kmiecik 2 Mark. Fossil hunting is easy -- they don't run away when you shoot at them! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fossildude19 Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 TOPICS MERGED. Ai just isn't there yet. Please do not rely on AI for identifying anything other than shopping goods it can recognize. Limestone is likely for the item, but it could be some sort of sandstone, mudstone, or dolostone. 1 2 Tim - VETERAN SHALE SPLITTER VFOTM --- APRIL - 2015 IPFOTM -- MAY - 2024 _________________________________________________________________________________ "In every walk with nature one receives far more than he seeks." John Muir ~ ~ ~ ~ ><))))( *> About Me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fin Lover Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 2 hours ago, Kane said: AI such as Google Lens, etc., are poor in being able to identify fossils. Agreed. I did a test with Google Lens and a nurse shark tooth some months back and it IDed it as either bed bugs or termites. 2 2 Fin Lover Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patelinho7 Posted June 7 Share Posted June 7 Keep in mind that AI-driven identification apps require a human-designed sample set to classify from. Unless someone has made a tool that references the entirety of the USNM (Smithsonian) collection, the chances are low that it is correct, I think. Even with the whole collection, it wouldn’t be 100% accurate. 1 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