Taking It Slow

Despite the evidence (such as the osedax in the last post, a fossil of a fish eating another fish and others), people insist on the uniformitarian belief that fossilization is a slow process and not the result of rapid burial and proper conditions. The latest? Mating turtles. I can think of several jokes to make now, but I will leave the tacky stuff to the high-class science journals.

Not only are evolutionists baffled and leave it as a "mystery" (note the double standard, creationists cannot get away with that kind of thing), they are also troubled about the alleged conditions of the environment where this happened. Yet again, this all fits well with creationist and global flood explanations; we do not need to have "just so stories".
Evolutionary paleontologists have a mystery on their hands: how did turtles in the act of mating become fossilized?
Most of the news media are amusing themselves with prurient attention on turtle sex, using double entendres and French or Latin expressions to remind themselves that “turtles do it,” too: “Palaeontologists catch turtles in flagrante,” PhysOrg headlined, while Live Science put up in bold type, “Coitus Interruptus: Ancient Turtle Sex Fossilized” (we’ll spare our readers further titillating examples of sexting as news).
A more obvious question reporters seem to be skipping over is, how quickly would an animal have to be buried to be preserved in the sex act?  The BBC News article showed a photograph of the exquisite preservation of one of the pairs of fossils claimed to be 47 million years old.  About nine pairs have been found at the Messel Pit in Germany, most of them apparently in mating positions.
You can finish reading "Mating Turtles Fossilized Instantly", here.