The one thing that can not be said with certainty is:
"God did not create any of the laws of physics or processes."
That statement can not be said as FACT.
I think you have gone about your argument in the wrong way.
Before mankind originated, there was water. Water existed as H2O at that time. We later discovered that water was composed of 2 hydrogen and one oxygen atoms and found out why it was only possible for the structure to be like that.
We also found that distinct elements were composed in a certain way and that combinations of these elements only gave one substance. We had discovered the chemistry of the universe. It cannot change.
You should imagine the elements to be like pieces of a jigsaw puzzle: some can fit well with some others, some fit but after that, nothing else will fit and some just don’t go together at all.
Now if there had been a god of some kind, he would have thus created a universe in which he could not interfere – his creation of chemical laws (where each electron, atom, molecule, etc, had only one way of doing things) would prevent him. Water into wine instantly would defy the rules, just as turning lead into gold would do. Curing the blind requires changing/creating new molecules from nothing – Now, the law of conservation of energy prevents this. It does not matter who created the law, it is true for everyone.
So when we look at a universe, we can see why it is how it is, and it does not require a god.
In fact, every explanation that involves a god is a better explanation if we remove the god from the equation.
Somewhere on the site, there is a link to the “List of gods” -> there are about 5,000 of them. Not all of the gods claim to have created the universe, but many do. However, all of the gods claim to be able to defy the chemical/physical laws of the universe in some way or another.
Now, as our knowledge has grown, we claim less and less for the power of gods. The claim for their powers rests solely upon our saying about things we do not understand “God did it.”, this is our ignorance.
This pattern is so well established that we can say it is a law/an invariable rule.Whereas we can say,
(i) “There are many things that we thought gods did, but now know are natural processes.”
We never say,
(ii) “There are many things that we thought were natural processes, but now know that a god did them.”
Skeptic, why do you think that is?