So we did not know that hieroglyphics were language before finding the Rosetta stone?
Actually, some people thought they weren't.
Now, here's a puzzle for you. This is the Phaistos disc.
Some people think that it is a unique example of writing in an otherwise unknown script, and so presumably has meaning. Others think that it's a set of meaningless symbols that look like writing produced as an ingenious hoax on archaelogists. Perhaps some clever creationist could tell us which.
Once you're done with that, you could start in on the Voynich manuscript.
It's undoubtedly medieval, but is that a real language, possibly written in cipher, or was it just a hoax to appeal to a buyer of rare and exotic books, produced by writing the letters of the script at random?
You guys are punishing yourselves to avoid the obvious. Language is language and code is code only because of specified complexity and nothing intrinsic in DNA would lead to this occurrence. And every known code has a code maker. This is just a fact of life.
And possibly your post also has meaning, but it is difficult to detect.