I do have to disagree with the bit about probability, because no matter how many coin tosses you have, the probability of the next coin toss being heads (or tails) is 1/2. It doesn't matter if it's the first toss or the millionth toss, it will still and always be 1/2. Probability is an important thing to understand when trying to understand our world, but the author is fundamentally wrong when he writes "as the number of tosses increases..." And of course we know do know why, and the answer is because probability, but not because probability is inexplicable. If I roll a d20, any given side has a 1/20 chance of showing, odd numbers have a 1/2 chance of showing, anything ending with 3 has a 1/10 chance of showing. This is mathematically explainable.
And in the next chapter his bit about DNA and probability saying "anything is possible" doesn't belong, because it sounds awfully similar an anti-evolution theist babbling on about cats giving birth to frogs.
I did like the bit about the few true believers though, even if the words and concepts behind it were a stretch. And then the road maps made me groan, because so very often religion doesn't work. It doesn't ensure such things, and begs for the old Nordic-countries horse to be beaten some more, versus places like the relatively more religious America and the far more religious Middle East, and then also places like Japan where the term "religion" does not apply as it's typically understood from the position of a Westerner, or even Middle-Easterner who understands religion as something organized and dogmatic, and very few people there consider themselves to be religious.
I could keep going on (I read about half the book), but to me his case is very unconvincing. I find that Bill Hicks made a better case when he said "All matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration, that we are one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively, there is no such thing as death, life is only a dream, and we are the imagination of ourselves." It has the overlap with one consciousness, but Bill's statement gives an answer to the questions raised about magnetics and gravity. Though I could pick apart many more details (such as how lust is somehow supposed to be motivated by weakness), but assuming the position that god is omnipotent, it is interesting to think maybe he did get bored and blew himself up because he had nothing better to do. However, I definitely would have written something much better, something more accurate, and a much more concise thought experiment to do it with. But I wouldn't, because rather than assume this one higher power god, I would much rather ask "what if god has a god?"