I do believe your "
Great Barrier Reef"
counterargument needs a bit of work, specifically, the
example you use.
You seem to be assuming that the ultimate form of evolution, if it exists, is camoflauge; that is, the best thing is to hide in the Reefs, thus, the eel is a failure, disproving evolution. The eel is not an angelfish, thus evolution is a crock.
Unfortunately, you ignore the possibility that evolution can take numerous paths. You could easily attempt that same logic with an antelope and a lion; they are not the same creature, thus, evolution is a fraud. In the wild, however, there ARE distinctions between predator and prey. The antelope evolved as prey; it developed the ability to live off the plants it encounters in daily life. The lion, on the other hand, evolved to be a predator; it relies on eating the antelope.
Relating it to your example, the angelfish is not a predator, and the eel is. The theory of evolution, if I recall it, does NOT state that all creatures will evolve into the same being.
And your first argument can be shot down soon as someone develops a test...