I think Dawkins went a little overboard with his latest books; his attacks on all sorts of religion are plain ridiculous. If I were of Christian faith, which I used to be once, I would have no problem at all to believe in both evolution and God. Why, the first part of "Genesis" even looks as if someone is trying to sum-up evolution! Yes, according to the bible the world was made in seven days, but how long is one of God's days? I am reminded of an old joke; it goes like thsis:
A man prays to God and begs if he may ask him some question, and God grants them to him. So he asks: "God, is it true that for you a millon years are like a minute"? "That is true". "And a million dollars are like one dollar to you"? "That is also true". Then please, God, can you lend me a dollar"? Replies God: "Wait a minute".
I personally believe there is some strong evidence for the existence of God, but you have to follow my definition of it (I don't like to have a gender attached to God). I think physicists are wrong to think of the universe as matter and energy (yes, I know they are equivalent). The universe is a PROCESS, with myriads of sub-processes in it, all of them interfconnected in many ways.
Now I think it can be said that the more complex a process is, the more consciousness it has. A stone is more compley than an atom (though as to the consciousness of either we have to pass), a mammal is more compliex than an amoeba. Consciousness is definitely a process, once that process has stopped in our brains because we are dead there is only one process going on in our brains, which is decay. And the sum of all these processes on nthe world is God.
"Then why do you worship Gaia?", you may ask. Because the deity I justdepicted is much too far above me; I will be to his consciousness no more than an an atom is to a human being.. The ratio is slightly better for Gaia; she is much closer to me. But Jean and I are very well awre that Gaia is just the earthly manifestation of God.
