I'm not backtracking. I believe Dawkins is saying ToE, or certainly science, is complete in explaining everything about the development of life.
From the jacket to "The Selfish Gene": "Our genes made us. We animals exist for their preservation and are nothing more than their throwaway survival machines."
His "The Ancestor's Tale: A Pilgrimage to the Dawn of Life" is a narrative of four billion years "explaining" all of the origin and development of human life.
No I don't think it a stretch to ascribe to Dawkins that "the ToE is complete in explaining all knowledge possible about the development of life." He certainly would not say anything outside science can be used to explain it.
I honestly think he would quickly agree with this statement and that his writings are in implicit agreement with it.
So basically, your beef is that scientists don't include enough mysticism in their work? Isn't that rather outside the realm of science?