This is contradictory and stupid logic, what they're essentially saying is that if you believe it is real then it must exist and that's the kind of arguments that religious people have been using for years, whether or not they are correct is down to the evidence provided as we've known yet again for years, I also noticed that these articles don't bother going into any of the actual maths or scientific evidence for this theory which basically means they're putting up a ridiculous headline so they'll get people reading.

As far as I'm concerned, gods have to prove their existence to me if they want me to believe in them, not the other way round, this looks a lot like fake or very dodgy science to me to make it seem that religious people are correct.

Typical mainstream media these days.  No clue and no cross checking, just post a nonsense (but controversial) article that will get views (and reposts) and hence advertising revenue.  Only the few people knowledgeable about logic will be able to point out it's flaws.  Not much more to say about it really.  Shocking logic.  

Computer scientists?  Let's see them write a computer program using the same logic and see if it works.

I'm not even going to waste my time clicking the link and reading the article.

What if I imagine a universe that operates according to physical laws without any sort of god or supernatural beings?

Their proof is that there is a limit to what can be conceived, and that limit is god? Well, it's not the Christian, Hebrew, or Muslim god. I don't really see how it's god at all, actually. Just a supreme limit that nothing can be conceived beyond...

By the way, scientists have disproven god a long time ago. Einstein said that god doesn't play dice with the universe, meaning that nothing is random and everything is planned and predetermined, and then quantum physics came out and proved that things in the universe are random and not planned out at all (maybe even killing a cat in the process, but we don't know), meaning god wasn't around to guide anything, or is just playing with dice, and thus was unimportant. Anyone can play with dice to make the universe completely random, or the universe can just be completely random on its own.

Who's imagining (creating) it?

You can't do with science the same thing you do with the bible, choosing the bits you like and ignoring the rest.

There is no evidence whatsoever, 0, nada, niente, for the existence of something like a god, much less the Abraham God!

Remember: there has never been a single fact, theory, or model that science has been able to prove beyond all doubt, and as long as the scientific method is utilized, this will remain the case forever.

Science can't prove shit.  Never has, never will.

This is the fundamental flaw with the idea of God. You cannot explain complexity by invoking prior complexity.  Ask yourself if you think God is as least as complex as the universe. If you consider this to be true then you have moved the problem of where did complexity come from - and in fact, made the problem far harder because you now have monolithic complexity to explain. Complexity arising from self-organizing processes acting upon smaller units is seen throughout nature and has been performed experimentally.  The real question is "How did the super-compressed ball of energy originate?

You do realize that a very small percentage of people understand this.