Behe, just for reference, the article you are referring to is published in 2003, is that correct?

A. That's correct, yes. Q.

Continue, please. A. So apparently, this had not been explained up until at least the publication of this paper.

The authors continue, quote, We examined this issue using digital organisms, computer programs that self-replicate, mutate, compete and evolve. Let me close quotes there. You have to remember that the labeling of these things as organisms is just a word.

These things are not flesh and blood. These things are little computer programs. There are strings of instructions.

And a comparison of these to real organisms is kind of like comparing an animated character in some movie to a real organism. So the authors go on. And the next slide, please.

And this is the first figure on the first page of their article. And I just want to emphasize, this is just an illustration emphasizing that these -- there are computer instructions. Each one of these are little computer instructions; swap, nand, nand, shift R.

They have no similarity to biological features, ... more.

I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.