A tornado passing through a forest could never cut a tree into boards and assemble them into a house. Also there are things which never come together naturally. When we make a car we bring together specially made and formed metals, wires, insulation, glass, rubber, etc., all of which no natural force would be able to accomplish. In fact, if we were to discover a structure like Stone Henge on the moon, there's not an evolutionist in the world who would argue that it was not put there by intelligent beings of some kind.
Thus, although we can calculate all the combinations of the components of the DNA of bacteria and determine that there is one chance in 10 with 40,000 zeros following that a living cell could come together by chance. But this really begs the question. We can easily reduce a living cell to its component parts. But is there any natural power that can reassemble them? If that power doesn't exist, then all eternity is not enough time for it to happen. So it is a matter of faith, not science, that it actually happened.
As George Wald, a biochemist at Harvard wrote, "One has only to contemplate the magnitude of this task to concede that the spontaneous generation of a living organism is impossible. Yet here we are--as a result, I believe, of spontaneous generation." That is truly blind faith! It's impossible, he says, but I believe it happened anyway because it squares with what I want to believe.
The homology argument is based on the similarity of structure in the organs of different organisms. We must be related to animals, so they say, because they have organs corresponding to ours, arms, legs, eyes, etc. But closer study shows that widely separated organisms have similar functions which could not have been inherited from any conceivable common source. The ability to fly requires a complex set of characteristics. Yet creatures as widely separated as birds, insects, bats, and reptiles (flying dinosaurs) have (or had) the ability.
Duane Gish wrote, "When the homologous structure is traced back to the genes which determine it, these genes are found to be completely different in the animals (or plants) possessing the homologous structure." Fascinating!
You ask for proof that God exists. Due to the fact that we can always play with words, any proof can be questioned. (No offense, but you can't prove that you have a brain unless you want to open up your head and show me!) I can say, however, that belief in God is far more reasonable and consistent with empirical data than belief in blind naturalism.