[Diamond]

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.

Help me out here. By definition, a film IS a "motion picture". The evidence for universal common descent is argument by definition?

Cordially,

[js1138]

Help me out here. By definition, a film IS a "motion picture".

What on earth is your point? A "motion picture" could be a series of still photographs of moving objects, or it could be a series of drawn or painted images, or it could be a series of photographs of objects being manipulated between photographs.

At least some versions of ID seem to argue for the claymation interpretation of reality.

[Physicist]

By definition, a film IS a "motion picture".

By your argument, that name merely leaps to an unsupported conclusion. That the "silver screen" is not actually made of silver is not at issue.

My contention is that a film or videotape (call it what you will) constitutes a satisfactory demonstration of motion. Similarly, I contend that the fossil record constitutes a satisfactory demonstration of common descent.