The problem with the DNA argument is that the sway of the evidence is influenced by preconceived bias on both sides. Some see structure and pattern in nature and see nothing but intelligence, some see code and mathematics and marvel at the wonders of evolution, physics and natural selection.
Either way it is pretty awesome.
I don't think the process of life proves or disproves a God. The common misconception of some is that when we theists cannot explain a process, we assign it to a magic man in the sky (some may do), the god of the gaps theory. Rather, I think science is a way of understanding how God the scientist created the universe, how the God the mathematician Balanced physics, and how God the programmer coded life etc. None of this is proof that a god exists, but it is evidence that will lead some to believe in ID. It is however unlikely to meet the specified criteria that most atheists will ask for as proof of a deity. especially in light of alternative belief systems on the origin of life available.
There are many things that we haven't discovered about our DNA, we don't know what much of it does, there are conundrums and paradoxes you can google, but again, these are not proof in themselves of a god, ultimately given time, science will iron out most of these creases, some people/scientists etc will be convinced of the existence of a god through the process of examining life and DNA, most probably won't, but ultimately I imagine our preconceived bias will lead the appraisal of 99% of people on the subject.
All that said, I am neither scholar nor intellectual. so I accept that my entire worldview may well be wrong, I am always happy to consider correction
