0
$\begingroup$

enter image description here

It this a stromatolite fossil? If it is, it’s probabaly at least 1 billion years old

$\endgroup$

closed as off-topic by Universal_learner, uhoh, Peter Jansson, Jan Doggen, arkaia Jul 13 at 15:53

This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:

  • "Please review our rock identification guidelines to provide the missing information so that your question is both answerable and useful to new users." – Universal_learner, uhoh, Peter Jansson, Jan Doggen, arkaia
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ from just one picture from one angle it is impossible to say, it could any number of things $\endgroup$ – John Aug 5 '18 at 4:21
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I wanted to brush the hair from my screen... $\endgroup$ – Jan Doggen Aug 7 '18 at 14:12
  • $\begingroup$ @JanDoggen ditto! $\endgroup$ – uhoh Jul 13 at 10:35
4
$\begingroup$

No, it is not a fossil.

This is a sedimentary rock with veins of a stronger material in it.

For example, it could be limestone with veins of quartz, or mudstone with veins of calcite.

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

Doesn't look like a stromatolite... The layering would be more intense, more 'crumbled'... Stromatolites form by algae mats and sand layers 'catched' by the algae. After a sand layer, a new layer of algae forms on top of it. Keeping this in mind, your piece looks quite different. I saw dozens of fossil stromatolites and I never encountered one looking like your piece.

Like Gimelist stated, the veins of harder material shouldn't be there, too

$\endgroup$

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.