You've posted an image of a stemless crinoid with no scale and no identification. The segments of their feeding arms would be tiny indeed. Your illustrations are not indicative of much beyond your enthusiasm to win a disagreement.
You, gatorboy, are trying to squeeze your quirky identification into the known science. How many fossil stemmed crinoids did you find from Florida in your Google search? That's right . . . none. For that matter, I can't find a reference to a fossil stemless crinoid from Florida, though I can't exclude that possibility. Just not in the Peace River.
In the areas of the country where Palaeozoic rock is exposed, crinoid columnals are commonly called 'Indian beads.' I can understand how little sections of silicified invertebrate burrows might come to be called 'Indian beads' as well. But, mistaking burrow sections for crinoid columnals is unusual . . . I'd not heard that one before. Now it's time to come down to earth. The Peace River 'beads' are not crinoid parts any more than they are mini cake donuts.
You must not of looked very hard the one I just posted is on Wikipedia.
Several references including ones on the fossil forum which I believe you are a part of speak of the fact that they may well be crinoid segments.
I will take probably about 2 minutes right now and post at least one other photo labeling the ones from Peace River as crinoid stem segments.
I read an entire history and evolution of the animals themselves and the places they inhabited and still do... the area that is now the Peace River was loaded with species of crinoids the Gulf immediately adjacent to still is.
Do you really believe that these amazing shrimp were perfectly round and mud kept perfectly round shapes consistently through every burrow?
This is the first one I found.. www.paleocurrents.com
Just scroll down the page to the Peace River..
For some reason that link is not going to the same place as I found the information..
I'm not talking about Paleozoic crinoids here... Let me make that clear
I found VERY similar items at big brook nj. Also lots and lots of ghost shrimp burrows. I just assumed they were segments of burrows, but there subtle differences. Looking under my microscope confirmed this. Also fossilized vertebra worn down to a bead looking object (very even wearing created hole in middle). But again, distinguishable. Can't post pics now, not working for some reason....but I am very interested in this thread. I don't see it as an argument but a scientific discussion science is not set in stone, natural history is, it is up to us to interpret it. Our understanding of the past constantly changes. Which makes this so interesting. I don't see a right a wrong here, just a portal for discovery. I say keep up the theories...because I find things that do not fit what the "experts" say a lot....but something in me (intuition maybe) says there is more to this story and that is why keep searching