You're viewing a single thread.
This person assumes only bones are visible in fossils. When in reality even things without bones can end up fossilized.
But that is their bones. Dragonflies have exoskeletons.
I think their point is that a beaver's tail would also show up if something as fragile as a dragon flies wings do.
If the composition matters here, it could be an incorrect assertion, though. Do we have a paleontologist up in here?
Soft tissues preserve poorly, which is obvious enough. Hair, if you’re incredibly lucky might show up, displaying the beaver paddle for whatever might be looking at the fossil, but otherwise, that tail can only be extrapolated to be fairly strong due to the numerous large connection points for muscle. There will be screaming matches between scientists to determine who is right about the beaver’s appearance if the fossil is hairless, and the being discovering it is even faintly human-like.
Exactly.
The... wings aren't exoskeleton...
Yep they are - made out of the same stuff, and with veins throughout.
Huh, wow.
What are your wings made of?
Armor
No not around them but the wings themselves?
Armor
Nature is metal
Maybe Google a diagram?
It happens, but it's incredibly rare. There's a wikipedia article of all known examples of soft tissue dinosaur fossils and it's not a long one: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_dinosaur_specimens_with_preserved_soft_tissue