One of the reasons I regard this question as loaded, is because inevitably, the word ‘creation’ is peddled here by mythology fanboys, with the intent of asserting that the universe was poofed into existence by their cartoon magic men from their pre-scientific mythologies. But that’s all they ever do - assert this. Frequently accompanying said assertion with duplicitous treatment of science as a branch of apologetics.
On the other hand, those of us who paid attention in physics classes, recognise that there exists a multiplicity of options for the instantiation of the observable universe, involving testable natural processes, as presented in relevant papers in the field of cosmological physics. Apparently you’re unaware of this.
Those papers I’ve just mentioned from the field of cosmological physics make a mockery of your above assertion. Indeed, in the past, I’ve presented a detailed exposition of two of those papers, which not only provide a testable natural process for the purpose of instantiating the observable universe, but provide three elegant features, viz:
 The process in question provides a mechanism for the donation of energy to the universe being instantiated, facilitating matter synthesis;
 The process in question eliminates the singularity problem from standard Big Bang cosmology;
 The process in question leaves in its wake physical evidence of its occurrence, in the form of a particular power spectrum of primordial gravitational waves.
In the case of  above, the moment scientists detect primordial gravitational waves, and find the predicted power spectrum, the authors of the two papers in question pick up a Nobel Prize.
No it doesn’t, for the reasons I’ve given above.
Strong atheism fails to be rigorous, but that’s a completely different failure from being illogical. Furthermore, if cosmological physicists succeed in demonstrating that a testable natural process is sufficient to explain the origin of the observable universe as we see it, then strong atheism enjoys far more support than “Magic Man did it”.
You obviously have much to learn here.