why are fossil bones and shells so heavy?
86928
Fossil bones and shells have turned into rocks.  That's why they're heavy.
820799
Weight. "An object goes as deep as the amount of mass it can move upwards", so that's why... the more salt, the heavier the water and less the egg can descend.
870606
Oddly, usually they don't.  Usually, a piece of bone is found protruding from the ground already, and that's how dinosaur skeletons are found.
1064624
Good point!\nAs for them being veggi beforehand...LMAO! (I wonder what that fossilized *meat* was, found in a dino's stomach? T-Rex, anyone?)\nIt's not just animals either, it goes right down to the microscopic level. I could point out the fact(scary word for xtians!)that there's more prey than predators too...but I won't. \nNature is cruel to be kind.\n\n:)
515939
THE ARGENTINOSAURUS IS ESTIMATED AT 125 FEET LONG AND WEIGHED 90 TO 110 TONS.\nTHE SEISMOSAURUS IS ESTIMATED TO BE 110 FEET LONG AND WEIGH ABOUT 45 TONS.\nTO  LEARN MORE GO TO WIKIPEDIA THE ONLINE ENCYCLOPEDIA
808132
Yes, all dinosaurs are thin at one end, much much thicker in the middle and thin again at the other end!
559718
I heard that it was their bone mass, not the bone marrow.  That black people have heavier bones than other people. A swimming teacher told me this about 15 yrs ago. I always thought it was a strange concept - don't we all have the same kind of bones?
174572
We call them remains. They are not fossils until they become fossilized, that is, the original materials become replaced with surrounding minerals. Fossils are basically remains of long gone plants and animals that have turned into rock.
59372
They aren't "preserved" except in form. They are replaced by minerals, the major exception being calcium carbonate shells of things like oysters and clams (Mollusks), but those are shells and might not be considered "body parts" as they are not the soft tissue. Most fossil bones are replaced with a mineral. Most fossil wood is replaced with minerals, but some actual parts of the wood sometimes remain. Fossil insects imbedded in amber are the real original bug, but probably aren't really a fossil.
174497
As above\nIn exoskeletons it is more difficult to regulate body temperature and they limit the size of the organism (No post-nuclear 20 foot tall ants, sorry).  \n\nExoskeletons also cause differences in support muscle/organ development.  For example, and endoskeleton is a frame and other organs are attached to it.  The outer skin is the only tissue requiring support from inside the body.  In an exoskeleton, the outer shell requires much more support to resist implosion (crushing the internal organs).  Some exoskeletons avoid this by being self supporting (rounded or spherical shaped for instance), but this leads to another problem.\n\nExoskeletons are heavier than endoskeletons.  Bone is the densest of all tissues.  Thus a human-sized exoskeleton organism (assuming it could exist) would weigh far more than and endoskeleton of the same size.  While it may have stronger muscles, these muscles would have to contend with keeping the exoskeleton supported.\n\nOnce breached, and the internal organisms of an exoskeleton are very vulnerable as there are no bones to absorb the damage. Exoskeletons would also be very difficult to mend, requiring bone grafts to replace damaged sections.  Bones also tend to shatter.  The mythical 20 ft ant would be very strong, barley able to move, and easy to kill with most rifles and shotguns, or any crushing force.  This is because any shock to the shell would cause fragments, or shrapnel, to peel off the inner shell and go flying through the creature due to the force of the shock, even if the shell was not penetrated.  In the Army, we call this effect "spall".  It would also be very difficult to repair the carapace after any fight.  You would have to break the shell in order to operate, thus causing much more damage.\n\nExoskeletons are not all bad (or else they would not exist).  Exoskeletons are very resistant to most "natural", or non-firearm, damage.  The organs, while easily damaged once the shell is broken, are usually well protected from normal wear and tear.  Vital organs are safe from most predators and competitors.  Endoskeleton creatures protect vital organs with the ribcage, but this is rarely enough to withstand the damage inflicted in a “fight to the death” with a similar sized creature (i.e. a mating fight).\n\nEndoskeletons offer greater size for the creature, greater mobility, easier "damage control", and a regenerative and breathable outer skin.\n\nThe cross-overs, like turtles or some dinosaurs with both endo and exoskeletons show the best, and worst, of both worlds.  A turtle's shell is self supporting, but limits mobility.  Damaging it also tends to kill the turtle.  It also limits the turtle's defenses as it can only attack (if it is a snapper) with its mouth.  Some dinosaurs (stegosaurus, ankylosaurus, and others) had this arrangement but were better defended and had longer legs, or a weaponized tail.\n\nThat's my first SWAG.  If I find more I will edit this.
610196
Giganotosaurus, in Argentina. They weighed two tons more than T rex. They hunted giant herbivores that weighed 92 tons, and were called....Argentinasaurus.
581145
Fossils (from Latin fossus, literally "having been dug up") are the mineralized or otherwise preserved remains or traces (such as footprints) of animals, plants, and other organisms. The totality of fossils and their placement in fossiliferous (fossil-containing) rock formations and sedimentary layers (strata) is known as the fossil record. The study of fossils is called paleontology.\n\nFossilization is actually a rare occurrence because most components of formerly-living things tend to decompose relatively quickly following death. In order for an organism to be fossilized, the remains normally need to be covered by sediment as soon as possible. However there are exceptions to this, such as if an organism becomes petrified or comes to rest in an anoxic (oxygen-free) environment such as at the bottom of a lake. There are several different types of fossils and fossilization processes.\n\nFossils usually consist of traces of the remains of the organism itself. However, fossils may also consist of the marks left behind by the organism while it was alive, such as the footprint or feces of a dinosaur or reptile. These types of fossil are called trace fossils, as opposed to body fossils. Finally, past life leaves some evidences that cannot be seen but can be detected in the form of chemical signals; these are known as chemical fossils (for lack of a better term).\n\n\nThe oldest known structured fossils are most likely stromatolites. Now understood to be formed by the entrapment of minerals by mucous-like sheets of cyanobacteria, the oldest of these formations dates from 3.5 billion years ago. Even older deposits (3.8 billion years old) of heavy carbon that are indicative of even earlier life are currently proposed as the remains of the earliest known life on Earth.\n\nRarity of fossils\n\nBecause fossilization requires the relatively quick preservation of bodily remains, fossils are relatively rare. Due to the combined effect of taphonomic processes and simple mathematical chance, fossilization tends to favor organisms with hard body parts, those that were widespread, and those that lived for a long time. On the other hand, it is very unusual to find fossils of small, soft bodied, geographically restricted and geologically ephemeral organisms, because of their relative rarity and low likelihood of preservation.\n[edit]\n\nPermineralization\nA permineralized trilobite, Asaphus kowalewskii\nEnlarge\nA permineralized trilobite, Asaphus kowalewskii\n\nPermineralization consists of organic remains being to some degree impregnated by minerals derived from the surrounding sediments or waters. For permineralization to occur, the organism must become covered by sediment soon after death or soon after the initial decaying process. The degree to which the remains are decayed when covered determines the later details of the fossil. Some fossils consist only of skeletal remains or teeth; other fossils contain traces of skin, feathers or even soft tissues. Once covered with sediment, these layers slowly become compacted and cemented into rock, and the organic remains are slowly replaced with hard minerals. This is a form of diagenesis.\n[edit]\n\nReplacement and compression fossils\n\nIn some cases the original remains of the organism have been completely dissolved or otherwise destroyed. When all that is left is an organism-shaped hole in the rock, it is called a mould fossil or typolite. If this hole is later filled with other minerals, it is called a cast fossil and is considered a replacement fossil since the original materials have been completely replaced by new, unrelated ones. In some cases replacement occurs so gradually and at such fine scales that no "hole" in the rock can ever be discerned and microstructural features are preserved despite the total loss of original material.\n\nCompression fossils such as those of fossil ferns are the result of chemical reduction of the complex organic molecules composing the org
20843
I read somewhere that when people found dinosuar bones, they believed them to be dragons. I guess as a way to explain them.  Not sure though
329958
They weigh the same, but I'd rather be hit over the head with a pound of feathers than a pound of rocks :)
44664
Yes, I live in a suburban area close to the coast in Buenos Aires, Argentina. Some years ago, excavations were made in order to install sewers (believe it or not, we were not connected to the public sewer system then!) and the workers dug up large fragments of fossil whales. I only have a fragment that could be part of a humerus, but more complete whale skeletons often appear when people around here construct large swimming pools. \nThese bones are not of much paleontological interest, though. They're much too "new" and do not correspond to any uncommon or interesting species.
413020
Fossils (from Latin fossus, literally "having been dug up") are the mineralized or otherwise preserved remains or traces (such as footprints) of animals, plants, and other organisms. The totality of fossils and their placement in fossiliferous (fossil-containing) rock formations and sedimentary layers (strata) is known as the fossil record. The study of fossils is called paleontology. Because fossils are by their nature old, the word has also entered the modern vernacular as a derogatory term for an elderly person. Fossils are like coal, oil, etc or u can try these:\n\n\nKind of fossils:\n1 Trace fossils \n2 Microfossils \n3 Resin fossils \n4 Pseudofossils \n5 Living fossils
311439
I found a website that may help on that. Try this one\n\nhttp://www.public-action.com/SkyWriter/WacoMuseum/library/bones1.html