[AntiGuv]

Pardon the intrusion, but:

1) With regard to your question, it's irrelevant whether all DNA codes are the same (i.e., follow the same set of rules). It only matters whether human and lobster genetic codes are the same. They are. If you'd rather insert a different creature, feel free to go right ahead.

2) Whether or not the code 'created' itself has no bearing on whether it's a common feature. If, by example, an intelligent designer 'created' the code, then all evidence supports that both lobsters and humans descended from the code that the intelligent designer created.

Evolution does not preclude such fantasies.

[PatrickHenry]

It's irrelevant whether the creationist questioner selects humans and lobsters, or pinaples and 'possums. All such questions may produce snickers from an ignorant audience (such as those who admire Johnson), but the scientific response to all these rhetorical questions is the same. All species on earth fit into the Tree of Life, which indicates that all species are related by common descent. The "tree" is the result of a century and a half of research. All the data fits, as predicted.

When two apparently closely-related species are compared, their genetic codes are remarkably similar, as their shapes and chronological sequences suggested before the discovery of DNA. DNA is the killer argument against all claims that the tree of life is arbitrarily assembled to make a backwards fit to the theory of evolution.

The farther appart two species are on the evolutionary tree, the more their codes diverge, but if we trace backward in time, they do converge on common ancestry. There is no evidence to contradict this. All the evolution-deniers have going for them are dumb creationist questions.

[metacognative]

I agree that the purported evidence was no evidence.
Par for the course with these darwinite fundamentalists