Theyre are jellyfish and starfish to name a couple that do quite well without fins. Then there are all the shellfish too. I wonder though if you meant what would have happened if fish had evolved without fins. If that is the case then the best answer I can give is that life as we know it would not exist because fins were the beginning of legs/limbs. No fins = no legs = differently evolved species.
Jellyfish, starfish and shellfish are not fish. They belong in different families and are not related to fish. The person above has no idea of what he or she is talking about.
no fish do not have pores they have scales it is why they don't have pores if you were a fish then scales would be like pores.
Fins on a fish is what fish use to swim around, normally there would be three fins, one at the top and one on each side of the body. Scales would normally be on the body, to keep it secure. The sizes can be different, but it depends on the size of the fish. A big fish would have big scales and a small fish would have small scales.
the scales cover the fish's body so it would be skin of the fish or another layer.
No: fish have scales, not skin, unlike reptiles which have scaly skin (there is a difference).
The fish would dry out even if it is underwater.
all fish have scales, including sharks. their scales are just smaller than what you would normally think of as scales
it would turn into a transformer
No you can not it fish scales.
yes but it would probably choke you In America, some people eat Carp, but they remove the scales first.
they do not stay on by glue i am not sure why they stay on but my answer would be they gorw on them.
Fish scales do not tessellate, they overlap. Like most scales do.
Most fish do in fact have scales, even some with scales that are nearly microscopic in size; many catfish however do not have scales, they have armour plating, but not scales.