GuidesMagazineShopBuy FossilsJoin Hunts
Stef X
I posted a few items to see what level of advice is given on forums.

I was told to throw away Megalosaurus teeth away.

Observe the bone highlighted by the uv light.
And the root end in the final picture

Just bits of random flints and concrete I was told...

Be warned
Click image for larger version - Name: AD75DA3C-0DD8-4951-9D5F-1077D83FCBDB.jpeg, Views: 150, Size: 1.79 MB Click image for larger version - Name: 030C6F8C-2730-4922-A3A2-EFED06FEE74D.jpeg, Views: 155, Size: 1.92 MB Click image for larger version - Name: 6C90F9A5-203A-465F-8E39-3165FE5D0604.jpeg, Views: 156, Size: 1.69 MB Click image for larger version - Name: EDA2DAF9-7A7D-412F-9161-7AE0F3A6ED6A.jpeg, Views: 148, Size: 1.73 MB Click image for larger version - Name: BC6B6BEA-14A1-4A2D-BBCE-2C59AEB2234C.jpeg, Views: 140, Size: 1.74 MB Click image for larger version - Name: 7AB913F5-2F05-4DD3-8F01-A385C9A8883B.jpeg, Views: 137, Size: 1.52 MB
Quote 0 0
Dirty Pete
Thanks for the advice and Merry Christmas. Nice teeth by the way. Lucky you consulted a professional, I'd have chucked it in the bin.
Quote 0 0
Brittle Star
Stef x

Sorry you feel that way, lots of things are florescent under UV light. Bone is found in sedimentary rock on land or in the sea. I have seen different fossils in flint such as holes left by sponges, you can get forams and echinoids also. Teeth are unmistakable when you see them, as is bone which normally shows a honeycomb structure. If you look at the flint you have there is no boundary between what you think is a fossil and the rest of the piece. Do some research by looking online for images of fossils in flint.
A hole left by a sponge in flint is a trace fossil but a fossil non the less.
If you have a local museum take your pieces there and they will tell you if you disbelieve the people on here who have A LOT of experience and are only trying to help.
JW

 Never ask a star fish for directions
Quote 0 0
FossilPhil
Hi Stef x,
Sorry, but I think the professional who identified your fossils is wrong. These are clearly flint/chert nodules, as evidenced by the conchoidal fracture in picture 2, and the lack of any morphology that would even closely resemble a tooth or bone! Plenty of minerals fluoresce under UV light, so it merely shows a compositional change, and does not verify that these are bones.
Many of the collectors on this site have been collecting for a long time, and probably know as much as many professionals.
-Phil
Quote 0 0
advantage
Hi Stef x
 
I`m afraid a professional will give you the same answers you have been given on here. Please google Magalosurus teeth and them compare the images to your  stones, the difference will be blindingly obvious. Because people want something to be what they want it to be doesn't mean it is.

Specimens of fossil teeth have, similar morphology, structure and a uniformity about them, they normally look like teeth should look when originally in situ in the organisms jaw, especially if preservation is good. Hope this helps.

Thanks

Steve
Quote 0 0
Gary W
I agree definitely not Megalosaurus teeth. Maybe partial bits of fossil sponge in flint. Our club runs road shows at local museums a couple of times a year and I do identifications. Every show someone brings a flint along convinced it is a claw, bone or tooth. But they are just flints!
Gary
Quote 0 0
Olenus
What was the professionals name ? I would really like to know.
The Ace of Spades,,,







Quote 0 0
nomadiclifeguide
I would too, what a pillock.
Quote 0 0
Dirty Pete
I think the professional must have been Jeremy De Spain, he of coprolite fame. 
Quote 0 0
Chalkers
I have little knowledge about the identification of dinosaur teeth but at least 3 decades of experience has taught me how to identify a flint pebble when I see one. As a professional geologist too, I'm sorry to say that this is not a dinosaur tooth.
Quote 0 0
nomadiclifeguide
Megalosaurus tooth........from wikimedia
meg.jpg 

Quote 0 0
Dirty Pete
I smell a troll....
Quote 0 0
nomadiclifeguide
Its a lot of trouble to go to just to troll though, the pictures, the UV light. I have trouble believing any 'expert' could be such an incompetent tool though.
Quote 0 0
Dirty Pete
Anybody who purposely creates a thread on a site in order to 'test' then rubbish the opinions of its members is a troll in my book and cannot be taken seriously. Megalosaurus teeth FFS....
Quote 1 0
Brittle Star
I think in the future instead of everyone putting themselves out, when an answer is so vehemently rubbished, just point them at there local museum and give no further responses.
Perhaps getting everyone's knickers in a twist is what they want.
They also went to The Fossil Forum and got same response.
JW

 Never ask a star fish for directions
Quote 0 0
tc
I thought you all might like to see the Megalosaurus vertebrae I've found. For proof I've threaded them all on a string via their foramina 😉

Meg.jpg 
Quote 0 0
Brittle Star
Ahhh a stone age necklace, thanks for sharing Bam Bam
JW

 Never ask a star fish for directions
Quote 0 0
Weald on Bed
Evidently 'trolls' turn to stone under UV light
Quote 0 0
Unregistered
These specimens photographed are interesting.

Flint, chert etc.. can be mineralogically quite complex and can often contain mineral  impurities.   The existence of some impurities called activators can actually some flint, chert, agate etc... to fluoresce.  I have seen many such examples before which can reveal internal banding and other odd features which may not evident under normal light conditions. Such features can be construed as possible fossils when they are not, and were simply created at the time of crystallisation/deposition etc.. 

Additionally there seems no other morphological evidence looking at the photographs of the possible features being those of Megalosaurus teeth. 

In my professional experience I can only conclude that the specimens are not Megalosaurus teeth.

Would I admit to being an expert, the fact I have been working with fossils professionally for over 40 years, some people might say I am. However, I continue to learn everyday and would never describe myself as an expert.  
Quote 1 0
aurelius
Unfortunately the world is full of people who imagine their random rocks are valuable fossils, and nothing will ever convince them that they're wrong.
Quote 0 0
Elbert
Hello, I do not think this is so unfortunate; these people allways bring a smile on my face and things would become rather boring without these topics of less well informed people...or trolls...

greetings, Bert
the search is as valuable as the finds...
Quote 1 0
cinders
Hi,
I'm glad you finally found out exactly what your finds were.

The issue is often that people take their 'fossils' along to the local museum for ID and expect a detailed and accurate answer, yet the local museum is often mainly staffed by volunteers and possibly one curator who might have a degree and experience in social history and yet is expected to be the fount of all knowledge - and is expected to give an answer even if it's not quite right (or blatently wrong).
Apart from the NHM in London, there are no museums left in the UK with an overall knowledge of most fossil groups, and even they have endured cut after cut and would admit that they can't do everything. Us palaeontologists are becoming few and far between in academia, and most of us rely heavily on the services of local collectors and preparators as they as far more knowledgeable in their own area of expertise.

If you bring a fossil in to me I'll do my best, with my 33 years of experience, and a degree to back it up, but I do still sometimes email various colleagues, and specialist collectors elsewhere if needed as well. 

So, if you find a fossil, then do by all mean take it into your local museum, or ask on this website, or ask around the collectors in your local area. then check out the answers on the internet, and in publications, and you might get a reasonable identification. But don't go with the first answer you get, especially if that person hasn't studied that group, collected them themselves, and hasn't seen the specimen to hold (rather than a photo which can be misleading).

Professional is a funny word too - you can be a professional in one thing but yet know nothing about anything else!

Sorry - it's not a rant, just trying to explain why sometimes people get it wrong!

Quote 0 0
polyfenestella
A perfect reply Cinders
Adrian
Quote 0 0
nomadiclifeguide
Theres a big differnece between being a little wrong and lot wrong. The "expert" that said that identified these as teeth should have said "sorry I don't know anything about fossils" rather than get it so laughably wrong.
Quote 0 0
Write a reply...


Discussions on fossils, fossil hunting, rocks, locations, and identifying your finds.
(C)opyright 2019 - UKGE Ltd and UK Fossils - Contact us