Because there's no evidence for God's existence, and the manner that he's typically defined grants him/it certain extraordinary powers such as being the creator of the universe and hanging out in a supernatural realm, problem is that there's no evidence for the existence of a supernatural realm, anymore than there is for God's existence.
The agnostic essentially says, "I'm unsure, and I'm waiting on compelling evidence to sway me"....however, once you understand that the concept of God and the supernatural were never possible, then it's pointless adopting this stance and it's illogical.
Suggesting that God created the universe actually explains nothing, ie, who created God etc, etc.....IOW, you open yourself to an infinite regress, and that's known as a logical fallacy, something that Numnuts is clearly oblivious to, LOL.
Asserting the universe to be eternal regardless of its dynamic form is the only logical deduction we can reach, ie, I don't expose myself to any logical fallacies when I make this assertion.....whereas ole mate Numnuts, believes something can come from nothing, and that infinite regresses are cool and highlight one's intellectual standing{laugh}
