I was also delighted to see evolution driven by epigenetics get a mention in a footnote. OK, the footnote essentially said 'basically not true', which is probably a bit harsh; but better than nothing!

For me, the genetic code (or cipher, as Cobb points out) was Crick's masterstroke. I think that the DNA structure would have been solved by someone else rapidly, but it took Crick's special ability to connect the dots to solve the central dogma.

It’s just 22 dyenin motors kicking a clathrin coated vesicle around

Outstanding analysis of an incredible trial. What’s so interesting to me is that the fallout did not settle the debate and militant creationism continues to be a force today

Your arguments are well put and logical; however, Nobel prizes, imperfect as they are, really do resonate with the public. They may therefore be a net positive for science by stimulating investment and interest.
Also, presumably you would say prizes for science writing are ok? ;)

They eat the fork there

worse than snakes on a plane?

Watching starmer fawn to Trump is excruciating.