Then I submit that one cannot go from "the universe is complex" to
"God is more complex than the universe" since the former is a
physical entity whereas the latter is not. In fact, to speak of God
as a complex being is most unusual. See
http://creation.com/god-simple
While you share Dawkins' view as seeing no reason to postulate
the existence of God, many people see a host of reasons to credit
God as being the cause of the universe. But I would like to hear
from you why the current understanding of the universe means that
there is no place for God.
Attributes such as omnipotence, omnipresence and omniscience
necessitate complexity. The simplictiy mentioned in that article
you gave is not the definition of simple which I'm talking about.
I'm not speaking about God being composed of parts per se, that
would be preposterous. I'm talking about complex mental attributes
which have an effect on the physical world. Such as the ability to
create universes and know your thoughts and etcetra. I would like
to know some of the reasons for postulating God as the cause of the
universe. Since you'd like to hear from me first, okay :P With our
current understanding of physical cosmology, we have smaller and
smaller gaps which need to be filled. I do not see a need to
predicate the existence of a God to explain current unknowns. God
of the gaps may seem appealing to many as it has total explanatory
power, but I reject it because it has zero predictive capability
and is an unfalsifiable thesis.