There are two causes for evolutionary change, natural selection and neutral genetic drift. Scientists argue with one another sometimes when they think their opponents overemphasize one of these or the other one. Both types play a role in evolutionary change.
Darwinian (gradualistic) evolution and punctuated equilibrium differ on the timing and speed of evolutionary change, not on whether evolution is real or not. Therefore regardless of whether a scientist is a gradualist or a believer in Punctuated Equilibrium, there is no dispute that a new species can evolve from an existing one. They only disagree on how and how long it takes.
As to how new DNA is "created," biologists have an answer. They have discovered gene duplication, meaning an existing gene will be duplicated, so that there are 2 or more copies of the same gene. Sometimes an entire genome is duplicated.
When there are 2 or more copies of a gene, one of them can serve the original function, and the other copies can be used for new functions. If a copy of a functioning gene were to mutate, and the mutation goes wrong, and the gene becomes non-functional, then it won't affect the existing gene. That is how new features can evolve without doing harm to an existing one.
In the case of the length of the rabbit's ear, the genes that determine this trait are regulatory genes. These genes are active during embryonic development and they instruct cells in the embryo as to how long or short the ears should be. Therefore there is no need for a new gene, just a mutation for an existing gene will do the job.
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.