Q. Now, one big difference between the mousetrap, Mt. Rushmore, my keys, and my watch, and all the biological systems being described in this trial is that none of those objects or structures is alive.
A. That's correct.
Q. The term you used when talking about Robert Pennock's computer organisms, they're not flesh and blood, correct?
A. Yes.
Q. And unlike those biological systems, the keys and the watch and Mt. Rushmore, they don't reproduce or replicate, correct?
A. Yes. You have to take that into account when you're doing your reasoning about this.
Q. Okay. And actually Professor Pennock's organisms, they do replicate, correct?
A. Well, that's a metaphor. I do not think that they replicate in the sense of a biological organism.
Q. And you don't dispute that biological systems and organisms that replicate and reproduce exhibit changes from generation to generation?
A. They certainly do.
Q. We see it in our own children, correct?
A. Yes, we do.
Q. And as we discussed in the bacterial flagellum, they often have millions or in some cases billions of years to go through this process of replication of reproduction and have changes occur, correct?
A. Yes, that's correct.
Q. So when we try to figure out from the appearance of design in, how the appearance of design arises in biological systems, they have some opportunities to develop that don't exist for my keys or my watch, correct?
A. They certainly have properties of their own which would, you have to take into consideration. You have to take into consideration. They also have other things that you have to worry about because they can die and so on, which watches and so on don't do.
Q. But no longer, no matter how long my keys exist, they're not going to reproduce or replicate, correct?
A. That's right.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/dover/day12pm2.html