How about starting over from scratch? None of your "rebuttals" make any sense. you make up your own presumptions to fit your already foregone conlusion, there is a creator. Before you go "The hell I did!", let's do them by the numbers: 1: No, nobody assumed a designer is more complex than what he/she/it designs. Assumptions are quite different from reasonable deduction. I know creationists love the clock example, so let's use it: Is a clock more complex than the clockmaker? Give one example of anything designed that is more complex than the designer. One. Fail, and acknowledge that the deduction that a designer by necessity need to be more complex than what is designed, is not only logically sound, but also not contradicted by evidence. 2: I think you failed to grasp the concept of "complexity", not to mention basic biology. In fact your entire rebuttal here is so confusing and unclear that it do not amount to much more than rambling. (edit: Read it four-five times now, still make no sense. Clarification is in order perhaps? I deliver mucho better rebuttals to arguments that I can understand ) 3: Paradox? Where? The premise was simple: Whatever designed needs a more complex designer than the design itself. The more complex something is, the less likely it exist. Thus, a creator god existing is more unlikely than the universe existing. From there you can reach a conclusion, especially if you also throw in "who designed the designer?". “I can resist anything except temptation!” (O. Wilde) is a paradox, 'God is unlikely due to logic and evidence!' is not.
Maybe there just isn't an answer, or a truth, or reason. I think that God is a little more simple than people think. I think everything is God. You, me, air, everything that exists and everything that doesn't. That's just it. What else is there for God to do but create a universe that he can't understand?