therefore every new scientific - in any science - is a disproof of randomness.
A good point! However, the theory of evolution calls for gradual, natural selection from random mutations. Therefore, IMHO, if the randomness pillar fails either the overall theory is in deep trouble or seriously crippled.
The strange thing is that this is not coming from intelligent design theorists or creationists - it's the observations being made by information theorists (and mathematicians.)
There must be information content from first cause - but there are no natural origins for such information. Further, the process requires symbols (self/non-self, friend/foe) - i.e. significant information content.
Algorithms are counter-indicative of randomness per se (Kolmogorov/Chaitin).
The problem of the symbolism in DNA is something which materialists like to ignore, but it cannot be. Symbolism is particular to intelligence and it is not so obvious. The abstractness of our alphabet, which DNA resembles, took many centuries to develop. It takes even intelligent individuals, children, a lot of learning to grasp.
Yes the scientific community is doing much work. As usual, they care about science, not about politics and ideology. They keep on searching for truth wherever it may lead and the truth does not lead to evolution. It was not scientists looking to prove evolution that discovered DNA, it was scientists looking for truthful answers. Science is essentially non political, non ideological. The evolutionists, the atheists, the materialists, the leftists have tried to turn it into a tool for their ideologies but as in politics, in science also the truth cannot be repressed.