Yes, definitely. But can you say with certainty that an entity could not live up to that parameter?
Nope, but then again I'm never ever really thrilled with the notion of 'certainty' in the sense of 'absolute certainty'.
What humanity knows to this day is not enough to decisively claim that our universe does not have a creator.
Agreed. If, however, humanity were somehow able to establish that the universe (and/or the sum total of reality) does not have a creator, does that necessarily mean that humanity has established that there is no god?
Is a 'creator-of-realities-god' type of parameter a necessary parameter in establishing godhood? If the sum total of reality 'just was' and a powerful entity were gestated in some manner from that
, and that particular entity did stuff like 'create galaxies and planets and Lady Gaga' would that entity qualify as a god or no?
Now, I'm young and I hope that within my lifetime our knowledge will increase to the point where we can safely determine whether our reality is manipulated or came into existence by accident. I would be comfortable with either of those outcomes.
'Accident' has a lot of semantic baggage behind it, what with implications such as 'in opposition to an intended
outcome' or somesuch. I would just recommend that you not think in terms of a dichotomous 'reality was created' OR 'reality was an accident
'. Concepts like 'accident', 'without cause', 'random', 'indeterminate' all have some manner of semantic relation to each other in some form or another and it can be quite easy to interchange the use of those words/phrases without thinking about what other semantic baggage you've snuck in without your explicit intent.