Sorry camel, although the Temple of Darwin scientists aren’t comfortable with the implications, they have known that DNA is a digital code going all the way back to Watson and Crick:
Dr Matt Ridley, author of Genome and Nature Via Nurture said: “Francis Crick made not one but many great scientific discoveries.
“He found that genes are digital codes written on DNA molecules, he found that the code is written in three-letter words and he was instrumental in cracking the code.
“Any one of those things would have got him into the scientific pantheon. Discovering all three places him alongside Newton, Darwin and Einstein.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3937475.stm
Again, you point to an opinion of an analogy. If you had passed Jr High science, you wouldn’t be making these grave errors in understanding.
Watson and Crick elucidated the structure of the DNA molecule, but they didn't beak the "genetic code" It was known that the ratios of bases to each other were related and that there were only four bases. They figured out how it fit together.
The code for what codons corresponded to what amino acids was done by Khorana (another Nobel winner I have heard lecture in person) and many others almost 10 years later. What bases correspond to binding sites for proteins that interact with DNA and RNA have been determined over the years and can still be discovered today. We don't know every protein a cell makes.
I have even seen the actual data Khorana wrote down. There was a traveling Smithsonian exhibit in town that had various scientific historic apparatuses and notebooks. Khorana's spread sheet (back when they were paper) was on display. See, part of getting an advanced degree in a scientific field is learning the history of the discoveries.