And, lastly, to your statement about "creator/supreme being". This is still a meaningless phrase, so it doesn't even rise to the level of being a falsifiable concept.So you're more agnostic than atheist. You cannot confirm nor deny the existence of a God which most people define as a creator/supreme being. Forgive me for assuming you don't know if there is a creator. I believe there is but could not prove it nor could I disprove it. Can you demonstrate the falseness of a concept? That sounds redundant. <quoted text>
To posit a "creator of the universe" would be either the standard cosmological argument or the kalam variant of the cosmological argument. Both have been shown to rely on the fallacy of begging the question in that they assume that "creator" exists and then use this assumption to prove "creator."
If instead you are arguing for the classic "omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent" deity, then you're argument has more holes in it than a Swiss cheese factory. Each of these "supreme" characteristics can be shown quite easily to be fallacious, and when taken together, they create impossible paradoxes.
And if you are arguing that it is "beyond humans", then I am reminded of Isaac Asimov --
"Are there things in the Universe that we cannot know in the usual way of observing and measuring, but that we can know in some other way -- intuition, revelation, mad insight?
"If so, how can you know that what you know in these non-knowing ways is really so?
"Anything you know without knowing, others can know only through your flat statement without any proof other than 'I know!'
"All this leads to such madness that I, for one, am content with the knowable. That is enough to know."