The main sentence is:<p>&gt; <i>Sorry, but I’m not sympathatic to the problems of journalists who decide to tell a distorted story because they are either too lazy or don’t have enough space to tell the right story.</i><p>It&#x27;s popular in other fields. There are a lot of articles that try to explain quantum mechanics using wrong unintelligible metaphors, but for me it&#x27;s not clear what part of the unintelligibility is due to the bad metaphors and what part is due to the real unintelligibility of QM.<p>(For some lucky coincidence, other topics I know like Harmonic Analysis are not popular topics for wrong metaphor writers.)<p>Anyway, if you want to read a version of the article with more technical details and less discussion about the journalism, I recommend the second article linked there: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com&#x2F;2016&#x2F;05&#x2F;06&#x2F;researchers-criticize-the-mukherjee-piece-on-epigenetics-part-2&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com&#x2F;2016&#x2F;05&#x2F;06&#x2F;research...</a>