[zzo38computer]

Yes, some religious people have done some good science. "There is no evidence of a god", but, what counts as the evidence of the gods existence? How, even, will you define the specific meanings of "God" and "exist" in this case? It is difficult.

I fail to see how Dawkins is "lying by ommission (which he already does with evolution)"; maybe you can elaborate how that is.

I agree when you say there is no proof of non-existence of a supreme being.

Also, I think that faith as "belief without evidence" doesn't applies to atheists more than religious persons. I have seen argument of such thing but fail to see how it is good. How is that?

I have seen many arguments for and against the existence of God, and they are not valid. There are different problems with them.

Also, believe or not believing the existence of God doesn't make you irrational. (Although a lot of both atheists and religious people will do many irrational stuff sometimes.)