On his point of DNA not having enough information: > But recent research in neurobiology suggests that human DNA just doesn’t have anything like the coding pow

On his point of DNA not having enough information: > But recent research in neurobiology suggests that human DNA just doesn’t have anything like the coding power needed to do this How could the author arrive at this conclusion without knowing what the universal grammar which needs encoding is? And beyond that, what if such a universal grammar is simply an artifact of existing structures accounted for in DNA?