Fossil fish

A complete fossil fish with three other incomplete fish in a small piece of rock.
See close up, no.1. www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/12683911855/in/photos...
And close-up no.2. www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/12684146323/in/photos...

Notable features:

The excellent detail, and the fact that numerous fish were buried simultaneously (4 in this small section alone), indicates very rapid burial of the fish.

The sedimentary deposit from which this is a tiny sample, can be considered a fish graveyard, where literally hundreds of fish were overwhelmed by a catastrophic event, which buried them instantly in a substantial depth of sediment.

Under normal conditions of slow deposition of sediment, such a mass burial and remarkable preservation, would not occur. The evidence is that a great number of fish were suddenly inundated by a mass of sediment in turbulent water, and buried alive.

The creation of intact fossils almost always requires rapid burial in a substantial depth of sediment. This has to take place before they can be damaged or destroyed by predation and/or decomposition. If you find a well preserved or intact fossil, it is most unlikely to have been buried gradually. Although that is the way it is often presented in descriptions of how fossils are formed.

Evolutionists claim that: because soft parts of fossils are rare, the fossil record is incomplete, and that is why there are so few fossils with intermediate features, required for evolution. But, as can be seen in this example, soft parts of the fish, such as the fins and tail are very well preserved.

Although it would be claimed, by evolutionists, that such fossils are many millions of years old, these fossilised fish are identical to any regular fish alive today. Which means they have not evolved at all in tens of millions of years.

The life span of such small fish would be very short. There would be many billions of generations of such fish in even one million years. That no evolution at all has taken place throughout all the vast number of generations of fish that there would have been in tens of millions of years, is a serious problem for evolutionists.
However this is not exceptional, it is the general rule.
For example, Insects found in amber, which is claimed to be many millions of years old, are the same as insects alive today. An insect's life span is even shorter than most fish, and the number of generations in a million years even greater. But still no sign of any evolutionary change. So-called living fossils, such as the Horseshoe Crab also remain un-evolved, some of them after an alleged hundred or more million years, What many people don't know is ... that whenever a creature/plant alive today is found as a fossil, there is no major difference between the fossil version and the present one. In other words, no evidence of any evolutionary change