The second argument worth considering is the one on evidence.  This is a major issue running right through Dawkins' reasoning.  He thinks the scientific world-view is unshakeably justified, while the religious one isn't.

The question of justification is as crucial in science as it is in religion.  And we cannot naively reject religious claims just because they are justified mainly by testimony rather than experiment.  The role of testimony within scientific practice is a growing area of research.  Individual scientists cannot establish all the claims they need.  There is an inevitable role for mutual trust both in science and religion.