Would I still be an atheist if I believed this?

[Cyberman]

It depends. Do these aliens care whether you masturbate and eat seashells?

Just don't masturbate WITH seashells.

[SuperSentient]

There is a scientific hypothesis proposed by James N. Gardner that postulates that there are cycles of cosmic creation within a multiverse in which highly evolved intelligent civilizations (if you could call their society that) have reached a point where they can spawn baby universes. They have enough knowledge in physics that they can tune constants and create a specific "life permitting" universe that allows for specific types of life forms, probably biological structures similar to them. This has already been done long before humans, and our universe is one of those spawned universes. Eventually, we may reach a point where we could spawn baby universes. This means that ET's create universes. This is the selfish biocosm hypothesis.
Now, suppose I accept this hypothesis and start thinking of these natural beings as superior intelligence beings that need to be acknowledged and praised. Could I call them God and then become some sort of theist? I could be a naturalist and accept this, so could it be like a naturalist theist?

I would think the term god wouldn't exactly match this and you would therefore still be an atheist if you are a naturalist.

Part of the idea of "God" is a necessary being (could not have failed to exist) rather than a contingent being. That is not the case in your scenario, so you would still be an atheist.

I am not exclusively talking about monotheism conception here, just what the label of God could apply to.