Are Atheists using Intellectually Dishonest Arguments?

[robvalue]

Maybe it could be rearranged like this. It's a slightly different take which you've probably seen before, but I think it's relevant.

Assuming that there is something that has always existed (which is a prerequisite for most "God" claims), which of these scenarios is more likely:

(a) Our environment has always existed in some form.

(b) There is a being called God which has always existed, with [whatever set of attributes it's being given at the time], and nothing else existed, until it decided to create our environment out of nothing, somehow.

Basically (b) does no more to explain how something can always exist, while adding extra layers of complexity, and raising a lot more questions at the same time.