Let me fix the italics here...
"I could describe him (He has long white hair and a deep voice)"
Please permit me to criticize your description of G_D. You may be limiting G_D to what you may like to or able to imagine, for the G_D I refer to possesses none of the finite qualities as you describe."
That was a joke, actually. I was just using that anthropomorphised God as an example.
"Perhaps there are those who believe in evolution as a faith too. But their faith may be baseless or not based on science of causality"
Well, I made a number of valid arguments for evolution up above. It's not really a matter of faith so much as it is a matter of no better theory to explain the data.
"The disciplines of science are built on causality of relationships governing related events. Yet the theory of evolution is built upon the idea of accidental changes that resulted in complex living systems."
Accidental, in this context, means basically "No sentient guiding force." Playing with semantics in here is only going to get me upset. :)
". Most are unable to comprehend how the notion that an infinite number of random accidents systematically happened to produce living species, and kept improving these beings, is justified."
Well that's a failing of the people who can not comprehend it. The theory is perfectly scientifically valid, and this statement, even though you requoted it, twists words around and mades evolution seem like the lottery. It's not. All it says is that beings who pass their DNA on also pass their characteristics on. I think you can agree that this is simple common sense?