"Man vs God" a Wall street Journal article

I copied and pasted a couple of lines out of the article in The Wall Street Journal recently ran. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203440104574405030643556324.html
Too much to comment on the whole thing but here are couple of my thoughts in italics...

The laws of physics, before Darwinian evolution bursts out from their midst, can make rocks and sand, gas clouds and stars, whirlpools and waves, whirlpool-shaped galaxies and light that travels as waves while behaving like particles. It is an interesting, fascinating and, in many ways, deeply mysterious universe. by definition the author of this article contradicts their premise. calling the universe deeply mysterious says that it is beyond understanding. and yet they draw their line in the sand and say "there is no God." --> mystery 1 a : a religious truth that one can know only by revelation and cannot fully understand 2 a : something not understood or beyond understanding 3 : profound, inexplicable, or secretive quality or character

There never was a rock that bounded like a kangaroo, never a pebble that crawled like a beetle seeking a mate, never a sand grain that swam like a water flea. Has there never been something like that or has there never been something like that witnessed by scientists of the 21st century that can be documented and tested and retested? (the red sea parting, water turning to wine, the burning bush speaking to moses, jesus walking on water, etc...)
Making the universe is the one thing no intelligence, however superhuman, could do, because an intelligence is complex—statistically improbable —and therefore had to emerge, by gradual degrees, from simpler beginnings: from a lifeless universe—the miracle-free zone that is physics. This is nothing more than an age old plea from God, "Lord, give me a miracle and I will believe in you."

It doesn't matter whether God exists in a scientific sense. What matters is whether he exists for you or for me. If God is real for you, who cares whether science has made him redundant? Another way of saying God is whatever you think he is. In essence let's all just create our own God out of what works for us. what an insult to the creator of everything that exists. no wonder he is pissed. Thank God I have a been justified by Jesus' death and resurrection so that he isn't pissed at me.

Richard Dawkin's premise is there is no God. So he uses science to argue that point. Scientific evolution as so many holes in it, it is a joke. The sad thing if you really think about it, without God there is no hope. without hope your spirit dies. my hope is in Jesus. my belief is in Jesus. The universe is a mystery, that I agree with. It is beyond my comprehension. It is beyond anyone's comprehension. That in and of itself points me to a Creator beyond my comprehension. And yet God has revealed himself to us through Scripture. He doesn't give us every detail, but he gives us enough. God created life. He gave man free will. With that free will man sinned against God. To be reconciled back to God, Jesus paid our penalty. To claim that payment, we must acknowledge Jesus above all names and put our faith in him. It makes sense to me, the same way we have laws and penalties and payments here in our justice system.