Just a short post today. Going through some old files and found one about a fossil shrimp dated 360 million years old. Guess what it looks like. Did you say “a shrimp”? Bingo. Surprise, surprise. This little fossil was so well-preserved even the petrified muscles can be seen.
So in addition to shrimp being a good example of “living fossils” (except we knew about the live ones before we found the fossils), this one also indicates a rapid burial, and I would argue it can’t be so old. How could such details be preserved over such unimaginably many years. Even though it is preserved in minerals that were encased in rock, such vast ages would cause even the slightest or slowest pressures and processes that might jiggle and shuffle and re-arrange the minerals and grains to blur the little fossil into the surrounding rock.
Think about it: moisture seeping down through the rock, or even hot water percolating up from below, possibly containing acids or bases, and new minerals. There would be various pressures, and seismic forces from far-off earthquakes. Given enough time, perhaps even the slight jiggling of atoms in solids would begin to have an effect.
Certainly over thousands of years such things wouldn’t be a problem, but think of how tiny changes might accumulate over tens or hundreds of thousands of years, even millions, tens of millions hundreds of millions of years? According to evolutionists, over 300 millions of years, time and chance were able to build up our fishy ancestors into humans — yet shrimp still look like they did, and so does this fossil. Which is more likely to happen, something becoming more complex, or falling apart? On one hand, we’re contemplating a tiny fossil being blurred a bit, on the other an incredible transformation! And while various pressures of survival supposedly shaped some fish into fellows, shrimp just remained shrimp.
“Oldest Fossilized Shrimp: Geologists Study Rare Well-Preserved Creature Showing Muscles,” ScienceDaily, Nov. 10, 2010