1. There are plenty of “switches” in evolution: between unicellurar and multicellular life, for instance. No consciousness is possible unless an organism has a nervous system, so there goes another switch.
2. There is nothing to suggest that life and consciousness are inextricably connected, except in the trivial sense that the latter requires the former. Most of life is not conscious.
3. Just because we can’t pinpoint exactly when human consciousness develops it doesn’t mean it’s a miracle. Also, we *can* say approximately when important elements of consciousness arise. For instance, fetuses that are less than three months old cannot feel pain, because their pain receptors have not formed yet.
4. Of course human consciousness is the result of billions of cells. So is human blood circulation (millions, in the latter case). That’s why these aren’t inexplicable miracles.
5. Arrogance has nothing to do with it. We are talking science and empirical evidence. I would suggest it is arrogant to believe in something for which there is no evidence.
6. Fractals are fascinating but entirely irrelevant to the discussion at hand.
7. “Purpose” implies conscious planning. Regardless of how you slow down other animals’ movements there is no evidence of purpose. See difference between teleology and teleonomy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teleology) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teleonomy).

So no, there is no evidence at all for panpsychism. As I said, one of the leading panpsychists clearly admitted as much to me during our dialogue (the science and philosophy of panpsychism).