So you realized it's there. That's progress. Now all you have to do is understand its plain meaning.
...realizes the utter complexity of DNA and not only compares it to a computer program, but thinks even that such a metaphor is way too reductionist to give it justice. As he admits, it is far too complex for us to understand it now or for many decades to come.
Fine.
Such complexity cannot arise by chance.
This is entirely undemonstrated.
Programs, even the simpler ones we use in our computers, do not arise by chance. More importantly, they cannot be modified by chance either which is what evolution requires.
No it isn't. Go look up the meaning of "metaphor." As even you were able to figure out, Baltimore says the metaphor is "too reductionist." Your interpretation is not only too reductionist, you don't even seem to understand it's a metaphor.
Here's the whole article which shows the interpretation that this is the work of evolution is totally wrong. Such a complex, decision making system, was clearly intelligently designed.
Tell it to Baltimore. He's the one whose article -- the one you've reproduced -- assumes evolution.
So you realized it's there.
Yup, I know it's there, and many articles disproving evolution say they prove evolution. Many people just say that as a mantra without thinking or perhaps because they are afraid to be called kooks. Most scientists are concerned with discovering things, they do not want to get engaged in politics and the evolutionists have turned science into a political arena. The evidence disproves evolution.
Such complexity cannot arise by chance.
This is entirely undemonstrated.
Not according to Darwin. He said that if a complex thing could not be shown to have been able to occur by many small gradual steps then it would disprove evolution. This complexity disproves evolution because in the first place you need many things working together to add any kind of improvement. In the second place, because these changes have to be made without affecting any of the other complex processes of the organism. So yes, the complexity disproves evolution. Together with all the other problems I mentioned such as the problem about spreading mutations and the problem of the complexity of genes they all join to show that evolution is impossible.