Pretty much the same here. If my hand were forced, I'd place my bets on the pattern I've seen, but I don't see what is gained by going full atheist. My imagination and senses have limits. They don't seem terrible to me, but they might be ridiculously so in the grander scheme.

As for the "sensus divinitatis", there's evidence that we can stimulate it with transcranial magnetic stimulation:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_helmet

I'll have to look into Plantinga's thoughts on evolution. However, regarding the 'selection' part of natural selection, I think that many miss the point that there really isn't 'selection' at all. It only looks like selection if you trace back an evolutionary path of a particular genotype or phenotype. Simply put, all living things have dynamic genotypes. In any given environment, one genotype might prove more advantageous than another. So, a reproductive bias results towards the genotype that is more advantageous for that environment. However, the environment didn't select for it, and the gene didn't try to fit the environment. It's just like shaking gravel through a screen: if you are interested in those that pass through, you could say that the small stones have an advantage. If you are interested in those that stay behind, the big stones have the advantage. In evolution, survival isn't the object anymore than going extinct is. That's why Richard Dawkin's The Selfish Gene drives me a bit nuts. IMO it confuses people.