It's very easy to say you can't prove / disprove something, but then we must consider all manner of things that cannot be disproved, but are nonetheless so unlikely as to be discounted. The Flying Spaghetti Monster does this well; you can't disprove its existence, and yet it is a satire on religious belief precisely because it is so absurd, and yet in the same grey area of "yeah but you can't disprove" as theistic Gods. The likelihood of a Universal God that resembles in action or intellect a species that evolved on the small planet of Earth, one that is conveniently moral or recognisably an architect is also outlandish. Why would our concepts, as Hume said, of why a house must be designed, therefore be be extrapolated to the Universe?
Of course you would expect to find attributes of the creator within it's own creation. We understand morality because we were designed to be able to act upon it.
Many assume reality and life was designed because they are all machines, and through observation we've learned nature degrades and wears down things, not makes them come together and build complex systems. Machines have only ever been proven to come from an intelligent mind.
Secondly, and perhaps most importantly, a God answers nothing. I hate to mention this, because it is abused so often in debate, but Occam's Razor is useful here. Essentially, the simpler answer is usually the correct one; what is more likely, that the Universe existed in some form, forever, or that a God existed in some form, forever, and made the Universe? If we can't comprehend the infinity of the Universe, and whatever may have existed before (or whether that question is even relevant at all) then why insert a cosmic middleman? It simply raises further questions; who created God? If no one did, then God might as well be left out of the model - because if you attest that God was always extant, then we can attest the same for the Universe, albeit in different form.
HA! I wish somebody pulled out Occams Razor before quantum mechanics was founded. "Hey it's simpler just to say everything are just blobs of matter and nothing more, lets not bother investigating"...
God is eternal, meaning having no beginning nor end. It simply is and always has been and always will. Surely the universe could've been eternal, but thermodynamics and the big bang itself says otherwise. All hard evidence points to the universe coming from merely nothing.. all that had to have come from somewhere, meaning there is something that is outside and beyond the edges of reality itself. It wouldn't make sense to say the singularity caused itself if it were outside the realm of the spacetime continuum cause and effect would be unable to operate.
It only adds more questions, and injects into the whole affair that sordid arrogance that the Universe "was probably made by an intelligence, because we're intelligent and we make things, so I'll assume the Universe came about in the same way." It's bunkum.
Things such as DNA are showing us things within reality are extremely complex and even put to shame our own creations. What does it tell you when us incredibly smart humans who can build rocketships that travel across the solar system can't even make a simple single piece of grass? Just one uni-cellular organism is coded and engineered beyond anything humans could even dream of making...
Name the last time you saw inanimate matter be pieced together through natural processes and make a functioning self sustaining machine?
The fact that you don't understand the science behind the big bang doesn't make it unproven. I haven't studied it either, but considering there seems to be a pretty universal concensus about it among physicists, I believe I'm not in position to doubt it.
And once again another blind follower who believes what he's told because a man in a white coat said so. You don't know much about it but follow it's teachings because everyone else does.. that's a religion isn't it.. blind faith and all? I'm saying it's unprovable, there's no way without a time machine to prove that's how it happened. Majority used to also beleive heavier objects fall faster than lighter objects, I ask you what does majority belief prove?
I would like to ask you, what exactly does assuming this intelligent conscious cause explain? Wouldn't we then have to ask ourselves how the intelligent conscious cause was caused? How he relates to time, space and matter. But then we would start getting nonsensical answers like: "he's outside of time space and matter". The same sort of answer you'd get when you would've asked an ancient Greek how Zeus caused lightning.
Assuming an intelligence behind reality would allow us to assume everything was designed by an intelligence meaning we can make logical sense of the world around us, which is absolutely true and science couldn't exist if it wasn't.
An analogy I like to use with god is comparing game developers to the video games they make. Do you think Sam Houser is limited by the way space and time works within GTA IV? Of course not, GTAIV is a separate reality from ours, the creators created time, they exist separate from it and can control it anytime they choose to do so.
They can go in and spawn any vehicle they wish out of thin air.. the world itself it ran by mathematical laws and equations just like ours.
Don't say it's impossible for an intelligent entity to exist outside of a certain realm of space and time because we experience this on a daily basis.