Does "which does!" mean "this book is indeed dedicated to him"?

Context:
Douglas Adams's moving and funny account of his own con-
version to radical atheism - he insisted on the 'radical' in case
anybody should mistake him for an agnostic - is testimony to the
power of Darwinism as a consciousness-raiser. I hope I shall be for-
given the self-indulgence that will become apparent in the following
quotation. My excuse is that Douglas's conversion by my earlier
books - which did not set out to convert anyone - inspired me to
dedicate to his memory this book - which does! In an interview,
reprinted posthumously in The Salmon of Doubt, he was asked
by a journalist how he became an atheist. He began his reply by
explaining how he became an agnostic, and then proceeded:

And I thought and thought and thought. But I just didn't
have enough to go on, so I didn't really come to any
resolution. I was extremely doubtful about the idea of
god, but I just didn't know enough about anything to have
a good working model of any other explanation for, well,
life, the universe, and everything to put in its place. But I
kept at it, and I kept reading and I kept thinking.
Sometime around my early thirties I stumbled upon
evolutionary biology, particularly in the form of Richard
Dawkins's books The Selfish Gene and then The Blind
Watchmaker, and suddenly (on, I think the second
reading of The Selfish Gene) it all fell into place. It was a
concept of such stunning simplicity, but it gave rise,
naturally, to all of the infinite and baffling complexity of
life. The awe it inspired in me made the awe that people
talk about in respect of religious experience seem, frankly,
silly beside it. I'd take the awe of understanding over the
59awe of ignorance any day.