[saad (OP)]

Please tell me [O8)]

[LeeE]

Need some side views, plus some shots where there are no total blacks.

[RD]

Bigger Brighter Version...

 [ Invalid Attachment ]


Including a ruler in the image would establish scale.

[RD]

fern ?

 [ Invalid Attachment ]

source

A lot of them about in the Carboniferous Period.

[Bass]

Where's the old man from Texas when you need him?

Possibly a trilobite?

[BenV]

I would have guessed trilobite of sorts. It looks, to me, more like the impression of a fossil now removed, rather than an actual fossil.  I could be wrong, and often am...

[RD]

At first glance I thought it was a horseshoe crab or trilobite type creature,
but on close inspection it is more like frons of vegetation, some parallel some crossing.

[JimBob]

I am not sure it is a fossil. It might be an archeological artifact. I have seen things like this that are supposedly religious articles. They are found in neolithic cultures from Southern Europe to Morocco to Iraq to Pakistan. YAETA - I cannot be sure of any of this.

Saad, please try to describe this stone further. Does it seem to be made of a very hard rock or could it clay that has been baked? Do the lines on it seem natural or could they be inscribed in this stone with another sharp stone?

Lastly, Saad, where did this come from?

Where's the old man from Texas when you need him?

Possibly a trilobite?

"I have returned" - MacArthur

And --- trilobite? BASS, FOR SHAME !

[Allanon]

I agree with JimBob, to me this does not look like a fossil or an impression. By appearances it does not look like a sedimentary rock which generally produces fossils. In the middle upper portion you see vertical grooves which could be caused by erosion, although everything else appears (used loosely) to be a trilobite. Every trilobite I have ever seen has not had any vertical markings unless caused by an outside source. newbielink:http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://krlphotography.typepad.com/photos/historical_artifacts/trilobite1.jpg&imgrefurl=http://krlphotography.typepad.com/photos/historical_artifacts/trilobite1.html&h=611&w=481&sz=61&hl=en&start=2&usg=__Gn4_UE07i7s8NNhoeSh7kGT3gM4=&tbnid=fDtqdOHTmBduiM:&tbnh=136&tbnw=107&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dtrilobite%26gbv%3D2%26hl%3Den [nonactive]

Very interesting, rock doesn't look like anything able to produce a fossil yet the form appears to be something out of the pre Cambrian age.

[JimBob]

Have we picked up TWO new USGS members??? Allanon and Evie?

I haven't had much time lately. Bass and I have been very making money (and in Bass's case, hauling horses hither and yon.! What a schmuck!) And for the past week - fighting two Trojans, one I finally found to be a Master Boot Record Trojan on my computer.

As for the rock - I still thing it is a neolithic artifact.

[frethack]

Whether fossil or artifact, the stone is very well rounded and looks as if its been tumbled around in a river for a good long while.  Given this, the cast (if indeeed it is a fossil) has probably been altered enough that it is surely incomplete.  Can you post a picture with a ruler or something to give it a bit of scale?  Also, what does the matrix appear to be made of...sand, clay?

[Allanon]

Unfortunately not USGS memeber, just an avid fan of all things geology and planet Earth.

Some sort of scale and images with different angles would certainly help.