So you don't think we can show that is the case (god creating the everything we know), at least not anymore than we can show anything else is the case, but you are willing to assert it anyway? Here is where I believe you are going wrong.
I'm willing to assert that point through philosophy. I don't believe it can be proven in science.
Everything in the universe has a cause
Therefore, the universe has a cause
Just because the things that make up something have a specific property does not mean the whole will share the same property. Example:
Each brick in the wall weighs 5lbs
Therefore the wall weighs 5lbs.
The brick wall in question, though weighing more than 5 lbs, still contains 5lbs of weight. The quality of having weight is maintained, and will always be maintained. There will never be a point at which the bricks have no weight, given that the conditions it is under stay the same. Therefore, within the realm of the brick wall, weight is a universal constant, irremovable, and unchangeable. Everything that composes this brick wall must have weight, even if that weight is not the same, and even if the combined weight is different.
The flaw in your analogy is that you fail to identify a specific generality to all elements of a set. Give me any other form of this analogy, and I can present you with a standard that all members of the set adhere to, such as weight.
The universe, in the same way, adheres to a standard, a rule, of cause and effect.
Refer to the videos of Dr. Krauss' speech.
Ok look, I'd really like to watch those videos, but that's like a good 2 hours out of my time, and I actually have other important things to do. If you understand the contents so well, then just summarize it here or something.
Just because something sounds ridiculous doesn't mean for a second it isn't true.
Quantum Mechanics tells us that atoms can be in two places at once, two states at once, and entanglement (atoms can affect each others movement over any distance). Don't dismiss an idea because it seems odd.
Also the entire Kalam argument is a God of the gaps argument. We don't know what caused the universe therefore God did it.
Quantum physics says A LOT of stuff that sounds ridiculous. I find it pretty fishy, that science, the process by which we make sense of thing, gets more and more outrageous as we get deeper and deeper into understanding particles. I don't dismiss any ideas that seem odd; the entire idea of god is pretty ridiculous anyway. However, I stay aware the trends of scientific discovery, and the more things that don't sense, the more things need to be questioned. The problem I have with a lot of atheists is specifically that they DON'T like to ask questions. Like this post:
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/mark_vuletic/vacuum.html
Basically, the gist being that simultaneously and spontaneously, without any apparent cause, particles and antiparticles can simply come into existence. This can be clearly seen in what I believe is called Hawking Radiation, where one of such a pair is sucked into the event horizon of a black hole, while the other is not.
Simply being able to show that the universe can come from the "nothing" of space doesn't answer all the questions of existence. You HAVE to ask how and why virtual particles function as they do. It's not enough to observe the phenomena and call it a day, science still has to try to understand why it works like it does. It must be explained.
Whoever is saying the "something from nothing" argument is preposterous, stop it.
Why should I? The only argument that has come to support the something from nothing argument has been the aforementioned link which essentially says that there is no nothing.
It's not that I don't comprehend the argument, it's that the argument is incomprehensible. The evidence presented itself supports that point, by claiming that instead of there being nothing, there are virtual particles.
