There is a fascinating - and revealing - video on YouTube called "The Great Debate: Has Science Refuted Religion?" Its at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HKk62brr4o4.
The physicists Sean Carroll and Ian Hutchinson (author of Monopolizing Knowledge (see http://monopolizingknowledge.net/), a new book on scientism) along with Dinesh D'Souza and Michael Shermer are speakers.
To me as a physicist, what is noteworthy is how little thought the physicists Sean Carroll has given to the received arguments - things that were taken seriously 40 years ago but have been thoroughly refuted since - that he talks up. He is preaching blind belief in science as a pin-for-pin replacement for blind belief in religion. No way, Jose!
Shermer gives the sociobiological evolution arguments for religion as an evolutionary adaptation. Of course, there is no valid scientific proof that these arguments are valid - they are basically speculation. And, even if they are valid, the results apply equally to science as religion AND they don't have any impact on whether or not God exists or religion is true.
To see this, consider the idea, widely known, that we evolved color vision - and our response to unfrequently seen red objects - on the savannahs of Africa. That doesn't mean that when we see a red apple in an apple tree it is just an illusion. It may well be an apple. Similarly, if evolutionary processes gave us the inclination to believe in God, it doesn't mean that God doesn't exist.