Is it possible to create a type of life form using DNA which doesn't match the DNA of that life form as we know it? For example, could we artificially create some type of DNA for a "cocker spanial" that didn't match a cocker spanial's DNA, but would produce a matching life form that looked and acted just like a cocker spanial? Alternatively, could the genes be interpreted differently such that the DNA of a cocker spanial produced a mushroom instead? Perhaps a less dramatic question might be, can a gene be interpreted in some different way than it presently is? A gene for example, that encodes the instructions to make cones in the eye might be interpreted as being the gene to make a kidney instead. Thus, by having different DNA entirely, the body's (ribosome's?) interpretation would be such that despite the different genes, the end result is a cocker spanial. The flip side of this is to suggest that genes or DNA constitute very specific and unique instructions for life which can not be interpreted differently. I can see some potential problems with this idea of multiple genetic interpretation. For example it may be the animal's digestive system could no longer digest the same foods because the enzymes used to digest food might no longer be the same. The properties of molecules are made up by the properties of the atoms, so those properties are fixed, but does that fact forbid nature from interpreting genes/DNA in more than one way?