fossil?

File: 20170722_134717.jpg (4MB, 4032x3024px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 4032x3024px

2/4

>>1070829
A stack of corn tortillas that got left out to long.

File: 20170722_134723.jpg (3MB, 4032x3024px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4032x3024px

>>1070831
you're a corn tortilla that got left out 2long4 me

>>1070829
Looks like a coconut

Do you have a context for it?

>>1070829
pseudofossil or pseudoartifact depending on what you personally think it is.

in real life it's an interestingly shaped chunk of sandstone that you lugged home for no reason.

File: jdtm.jpg (26KB, 400x267px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 400x267px

>>1070829
Don't eat off it.

>>1070857

THIS
The question now is why did the sandstone form like that.

File: 45678.jpg (6KB, 308x164px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 308x164px

>>1070865
Dang, I was about to post the same pic.

>>1070829

>toes

Back to /k/ with you.

>>1070829
From what I can see it looks like sandstone - it's granular and appears to be bedded. Some of the beds appear to have iron staining, which means it was deposited in an oxic environment.
It's quite rounded, which means it probably fell off a bigger outcrop and was then eroded.
It seems that a uniformly thick layer not following the bedding has been lost on some of it, which could be a result of exfoliation (the outer layer repeatedly being warmed up and cooling over the day/night cycle, weakens it through thermal expansion and contraction).

Not sure what that knob is - could be a trace fossil of a burrow or something, or just a randomly formed weird bit. I dunno. I'm not a palaeontologist.

If you look for a geological map of where you found it, assuming it's in situ, you can look at the specific unit it most closely represents and probably find a description on the internet that will tell you if that unit contains fossils or not.

>>1071049
>Not sure what that knob is - could be a trace fossil of a burrow or something, or just a randomly formed weird bit. I dunno. I'm not a palaeontologist.
I am a paleontologist and you've named the possibilities right there.

burrow infill would be a likely interpretation if the thing was a lacustrine mudstone. However it appears to be an Aeolian sandstone such as one finds in the prolific Navajo Sandstone. Much of the Navajo is crossbedded dune deposits, though horizontal bedding is also common enough. Both forms were deposited by wind though. Neither type of sandstone commonly caries fossils, mostly because they were deposited in sterile deserts where nothing much lived. The Navajo isn't know for alluvial or lacustrine deposits found in fossil-rich formations such as the Morrison.

>>1070829

crack it open already.

>>1070829
Looks like a 20 dollar bill. You can get a pint of Jim beam and a sixer of nice IPA where I live with that.

File: images.jpg (4KB, 150x84px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 150x84px

>>1070829
>>1070830
>>1070833

>>1071540

The navajo does have some laucustrine stuff though. Interpreted as oasis where they find gypsum interbeds and greater concentrations of petrified wood.

As to OP, its probably some kind of concretion. They get into all kinds of fun shapes.

>>1070829
looks like a jew turd that is after your 20 american shekels

>>1070829

could it be a hoodoo from a stream bed or something

>>1071779
>The navajo does have some laucustrine stuff though.
yes, but it's not known for it. The vast majority of the unit is dune formations. And it's fucking huge. And 99% devoid of fossils.
>>1071805
kek
exactly correct. figure 8 pothole remains.

gumba

>>1071768
What? Is this an image for ants?

Its a fucking rock

>>1070829

That is a sandstone concretion, Anon.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concretion

>>1072899
>mom i did it again!