Re: stone or fossil? (incl jpg)
karen@uab.edu
Sun, 10 Nov 1996 20:18:07 GMT
myers@netaxs.com (Paul Myers) wrote:
>In article <5602kc$2u3@neptune.worldonline.nl>, maaskant@worldonline.nl
>(Barend Maaskant) wrote:
>> Hi everyone.
>> I have a question.
>> On the beach of Domburg (i Holland, near Flushing) I found a remarkable
>peace of stone. If it is a stone.
>> I just found it between shells on a place where more often fossils are
>found: most of them
>> are from small sea-animals like the sea urchin.
>> I enclose a picture (stones.jpg) UUencoded.
>> Can anybody tell from this picture what it is?
>> Is it an arrowhead or some fossil?
Well, it isn't an "arrowhead". It could be a fossil of some sort.....
but there is really very little one can tell from such a lithic. When
you find an individual fossil, if indeed it is a fossil, there is very
little you can tell from it without other contextual evidence. If you
really want to know if it is a fossil, I suggest putting it under the
microscope. You should be able to tell with a microscope. However,
it still isn't going to be very helpful or really of much importance
because of the context in which you found it. If it were just lying
on the beach with other shells, it could have come from anywhere at
all. But for your personal curiosity, I suggest looking under a
microscope.
Karen
|