Sadly, the author does not understand the first thing about biology or biologists. I know exactly zero biologists who believe that DNA represents a "blue print" for an organism. That view may have been popular when the heritibility of DNA was first discovered many decades ago, but it is no longer in the main stream, and hasn't been for some time. The human genome project has shed light on the nature of some diseases, but none but the most dogmatic thinkers ever thought it would yield the secret of life. There is so much more complexity to heritibility than DNA. It would be silly for me to try to go into it in a short comment section, but suffice it to say that the set of biomolecules expressed in the mammals (and apes/humans in particular) is vastly more complex than that of a worm or an insect, despite the fact that our sheer number of protein coding genes is not strikingly different. Do we know everything about development? No, of course not. That is why there is still research in this field. But so is the way of the creationist (and you don't have to be a young Earth, Bible thumper to be a creationist): Ask if "science" can explain everything. If the answer is "no", then all is wrong and only God (or whatever substitute, e.g. "consciousness") can be correct.