[Diamond]

...it tests whether the subjects reject the evidence (common descent), rather than just the interpretation (natural selection)

Sorry, the notion of universal common descent (of every organism from a single, or few putative ancestors, including human from earlier non-human ancestors) is not evidence, it is an interpretation of evidence. Explanations are not evidence.

Cordially,

[Matchett-PI]

See #120
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1617533/posts?page=120#120

Also see:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1617533/posts?page=96#96

and

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1617533/posts?page=11#11

[Physicist]

Sorry, the notion of universal common descent (of every organism from a single, or few putative ancestors, including human from earlier non-human ancestors) is not evidence, it is an interpretation of evidence.

By that standard, a film can never constitute evidence of motion. Motion would only be one interpretation from what is, ultimately, just a series of still photographs.