Possible egg

[Mahnmut]

It was time for me to go to bed three hours ago, just because you enjoy the discussion so much one last comment from me:

People here are not simply dismissive of your idea because they are science snobs. I am an amateur fossil nerd and have been on the forum long enough to know how people react to great finds- we all love to tell someone that they found something great, even if the- smiley has to be used then.

I just recently had to learn that what I hoped to be my first whale tooth was just a tilly bone. There where some details that made me really believe they where teeth, but they where not.

https://www.thefossilforum.com/topic/145424-whale-teeth/#comment-1518106

 

I recommend reading the egg link and going to that museum (which one is it, by the way?) because I think all that the pictures can tell has been said.

Maybe I am wrong.

Off to bed,

curious to hear what a palaeontologist who has your find in hand might say.

J

 

[Fossildude19]

13 minutes ago, Tenchi said:

For people to be upset about me having hypothesis and wanting to work them out feels very strange. I know we live in a very volatile world right now and people can be very rudely opinionated. But I'm not claiming anybody to be absolutely wrong. Everything I am talking about is theory and the only thing I'm asking for is to continue any sort of discussion that could lead to better understanding. I believe this is the heart and nature of science and that it's always a process like this until you get to the true reality of what you're dealing with. I enjoy this ride at least LOL

 

I hope you were not referencing us when you mention rudely opinionated.   

 

 

All we have to go on is your pictures. I don't think anyone is upset about you having a hypothesis.

 

PROVING your hypothesis is another story.

 

We have see many hundreds of people over the years say they found eggs, embryos, skulls, etc.  They have never come back with proof of anything they claim to have found.

 

I have tagged CBChiefski, a paleontologist who studies fossil eggs. Maybe he can say something about your item, but to the rest of us, ... it looks like a concretion. 

The amount of people who actually HAVE found fossil eggs and posted them here is quite low. I can count on ONE hand those people.

Our collective experience is probably coloring our replies. 

I apologize,  if you were offended.

 

We get "Egg Posts" about every two weeks here. Almost NONE of them are ever eggs.

As Mahnmut has stated, all that can be said about your photos has been said.

 

I think you need to talk to a Paleontologist who studies eggs,  to work out your theory. 

[Tenchi]

5 minutes ago, Mahnmut said:

It was time for me to go to bed three hours ago, just because you enjoy the discussion so much one last comment from me:

People here are not simply dismissive of your idea because they are science snobs. I am an amateur fossil nerd and have been on the forum long enough to know how people react to great finds- we all love to tell someone that they found something great, even if the- smiley has to be used then.

I just recently had to learn that what I hoped to be my first whale tooth was just a tilly bone. There where some details that made me really believe they where teeth, but they where not.

https://www.thefossilforum.com/topic/145424-whale-teeth/#comment-1518106

 

I recommend reading the egg link and going to that museum (which one is it, by the way?) because I think all that the pictures can tell has been said.

Maybe I am wrong.

Off to bed,

curious to hear what a palaeontologist who has your find in hand might say.

J

 

Specifically I was commenting on the disgruntled nature coming from whoever Coco is. I'm really not bothered by it either but it seemed to bother this person what I was doing and I'm not saying I expect anything from anybody. I was just taken a back a bit by the attitude. It's no worries though

 

I will be contacting the people from The Royal British Columbia Museum and I will find out what they say.

 

I did watch the video you sent in the link. I would like to point out that there are three main different classifications of dinosaur eggs they have found and all three share very different outer surfaces and textures. Even on Wikipedia there is enough evidence gathered by people who are knowledgeable that make what I found very curious seeming. There is a lot to point out that would prove it's not an egg and it doesn't seem to prove enough that it isn't. Also finding a yoke like this might be insanely rare but I would still contend highly plausible. Everything on this Earth has different temperatures and humidity is going all around it all the time. There's always sort of a blend of different things petrifying in different rates all over the world. And there is many different forms of actions that can happen to create a different object then when you would see of the same thing in a different location.

 

Cheers! And I hope you get a good sleep

Edited 2 hours ago by Tenchi

[Fossildude19]

2 minutes ago, Tenchi said:

Specifically I was commenting on the disgruntled nature coming from whoever Coco is.

 

 

This is an international Forum, and sometimes, text does not translate well from one language to another.  Please be cognizant of this, and make allowances. 

 

What may seem to be rude or gruff, may just be an artifact of translation/language barrier. 

[Tenchi]

Just now, Fossildude19 said:

 

 

This is an international Forum, and sometimes, text does not translate well from one language to another.  Please be cognizant of this, and make allowances. 

I will absolutely and 100% keep that in mind. I appreciate the heads up.

[Tenchi]

Because I'm new here it might help by saying. I can sound a little excited and I might not write a sentence perfectly while I babble on about my thought process. I know by how much information I have gathered in many different areas in life that I'm a pretty smart person (not tooting my own horn. It took years for me to feel that way) but I never did well in School and I am no scientist, archaeologist or paleontologist.

 

What I do know is when I'm interested in something I can gather a lot of information very fast and put pieces together to make a picture when I can clearly understand how it works and why it's happened. That is one of my best and worst qualities :p

 

That being said. I hold to my heart that I want to learn for the sake of learning and not to be correct with what I think. I will defend what I've learned and share why I think in certain ways. But I respect fully the idea that I could always be wrong. I believe as well that being wrong has to come with proof and I don't expect anyone to HAVE to give me proof, but until I get clear proof I will continue searching to find the truth. And I really enjoy that process. I find it exciting to look at the value of what you know in science and to expand your knowledge of what you don't know. 

 

Cheers! 

[Randyw]

1 hour ago, Tenchi said:

Also finding a yoke like this might be insanely rare

From your studies you should have also learned that the number of proven fossilized yolks is/are exactly zero. You should also be aware that some of the people that have answered you are either paleontologists, have fossilized eggshells or have handled, seen or prepared fossil eggs. There has also been samples of eggshell found from most areas in the world that have exposures of the correct age including the U.S.A etc etc etc.   Both round and elliptical eggshells have been found and studied both from dinosaurs and other prehistoric species. Your concretions outer rind is more then 10 times thicker then real fossilized eggshell. Quite simply a hatching creature would need a jack hammer to get out. The rind would also be too thick for the gas transfer that all terrestrial eggs need to keep the developing life alive…

[jpc]

Hello and welcome.

What we like to see in fossilized eggs is actual eggshell.  Dinosaur and bird eggs are all made of a crystal structure where the texture/directionality of the crystals is perpendicular to the surface.  Basically it is many many small crystal lined up in a thin , rounded sheet.  Does yours have anything like this? 

[Tenchi]

1 minute ago, Randyw said:

From your studies you should have also learned that the number of proven fossilized yolks is/are exactly zero. You should also be aware that some of the people that have answered you are either paleontologists, have fossilized eggshells or have handled, seen or prepared fossil eggs. There has also been samples of eggshell found from most areas in the world that have exposures of the correct age including the U.S.A etc etc etc.   Both round and elliptical eggshells have been found and studied both from dinosaurs and other prehistoric species. Your concretions outer rind is more then 10 times thicker then real fossilized eggshell. Quite simply a hatching creature would need a jack hammer to get out. The rind would also be too thick for the gas transfer that all terrestrial eggs need to keep the developing life alive…

You have given me good information that gives me things to think about. This is the sort of information I was hoping to get. I don't really care how important the background someone has when I know nothing more of them than one half sentence saying I'm wrong or a one simple name answer to what it is. Some people are happy with a one word reply but I am hoping to find a way to learn more information from all sides and very happy to learn more information. So thanks! Much appreciated (and I'm not being sarcastic) 

[Tenchi]

2 minutes ago, jpc said:

Hello and welcome.

What we like to see in fossilized eggs is actual eggshell.  Dinosaur and bird eggs are all made of a crystal structure where the texture/directionality of the crystals is perpendicular to the surface.  Basically it is many many small crystal lined up in a thin , rounded sheet.  Does yours have anything like this? 

Honestly this is the best I can get with the texture of the outer shell/layer. You can see in another Pic I took that some of a thin layer is lost on parts of the shell. 

 

What also I would like to understand is the different cleavage plains going on. Also if anyone can tell me they have seen a true therapod shell and whether or not it is completely rounded but in an oval shape or if the very base of it is actually a little bit flatter than the surface is. Did it have a flat base so it wouldn't roll away? Or did it keep it oblong cylindrical shape all the way around? Did this show all the sudden randomly get thicker near the bottom? Another answer I would like to know

[jpc]

I have seen and worked on a few dinosaur eggs, and just like a chicken egg, the shell is the same thickness all the way around.  

 

PS.. not sure what part of your specimen is highlighted in your greenish photo.  

 

But now I must away, for it is past the bewitching hour.  I have fossils to go work on...

 

Edited 52 minutes ago by jpc

[Tenchi]

Again things that happen as a reaction can very much look the same as the way life functions. I find the thicker bottom flat part very Bazar. The way the darker brown line keeps the same thickness and wraps around the inner core and the base still having the hard shell go down but also become this softer chunk of a whitish color very interesting. I mean I can be wrong. But I would hope people here would see this as a reason someone would want to come on this forum and ask. It kind of plays with your mind even if it wasn't an egg. 

[Tenchi]

5 minutes ago, jpc said:

I have seen and worked on a few dinosaur eggs, and just like a chicken egg, the shell is the same thickness all the way around.  

 

PS.. not sure what part of your specimen is highlighted in your greenish photo.  

 

But now I must away, for it is past the bewitching hour.  I have fossils to go work on...

 

The greenish photo is the outer "shell" under a stereo scope. You can see it's not actually brown but that greenish color. For some reason it's covered in black/brown little spots and I guess it makes it look brown at a distance. Even that I find cool in itself. 

 

Have you seen a theropod egg? I would really like to know if that was part of what you have examined. 

 

Cheers

Edited 48 minutes ago by Tenchi

[Tenchi]

This is from my stereoscope. What you are looking at is the base of the outer layer near the bottom where you see the thickest part of the "shell" it looks (to me) like it's caused by crystalizing into this way and not by compacting from the outside in. You can very much see it's cleavage and see that it looks similar to the pattern it has all over the outer surface. I have found a lot of rocks. I live on an island made 99% of sandstone. I've never seen anything forming in this way. 

[DPS Ammonite]

A very warm welcome from Arizona. It was in the upper 90s today.

 

I encourage you to read professional publications about real eggs. You can sign up with JSTOR to read many issues of the Journal of Paleontology for free.

https://www.jstor.org

 

I think that you have an agate nodule where microcrystalline quartz such as chalcedony filled a hollow space. Some of the layers stuck to all sides of the cavity while others formed layers horizontal to the ground due to gravity. The horizontal layers are sometimes called waterline agates. (See red marks.)