Argument from personal incredulity, or Argument for Ignorance, yea, your position is just that simple.
Your argument also include an a case of Special Pleading.
This Universe is so complex it MUST have a creator, yet the complexity of the intelligence required to create the Universe, by your rules, would be so complex as to require a creator itself. As a result, by invoking Magic, you have not explained anything at all.
[i][/i]
AS,
EXACTLY! It is YOU!
An argument from personal incredulity: Asserting because one finds something difficult to understand it can’t be true.
You find it difficult to accept or understand the idea of “god” so you dismiss it.
Then you go on: An argument from ignorance: It asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false.
You assert that because you see no satisfactory proof of a creator then there must be a “natural” explanation for the universe, but you don’t know what it is!
TF
That's a whole lot more honest then claiming "it was magic", but that kind of goes back to the OP, doesn't it?
Nope, just shows your hard set bias.
btw, what is honest about Larry Krauss and the "Universe from Nothing" business. He is a book seller. Not exactly honest when he says the universe comes from "nothing."
What does he start with and how did the "starter" come to existence?
Isn't he the one who made a name for himself by "proving" that the universe was "curved" and therefore would expand and contract then burst again in a never ending cycle? Now is seems that most astrophysicists see our universe as expanding, linear and there is NOT a never ending cycle.
TF
The tax collector said: “Lord Jesus, have mercy on me, a sinner.” Jesus said he went home “justified.”
