What can you come up with as the most likely case for no creator God of all things?

I know this is a topic that'll continue on until death. 

But give concise clear cut reasons to why most likely there is just no consciousness ever again after death, no creator God, no life and or reincarnation.

When cells are duplicated ( regenerated) the information in the cell must be copied transcribed and replicated faithfully. Any mistakes in the copying of the information results in a weakened or non functioning cell. When the cells loss information the cells "grow old" causing the organism to grow old.
It is estimated that on the average all the cells in the body die and are replaced by copies every 7 years. At age seventy the human body has undergone 10 cycles of copying and replacing with 10 opportunities to make mistakes and lose information. Hair cells lose the information to make proteins like melanin that causes hair color. So by age 70 most humans now have grey hair. This is a visual manifestation of the aging of all the cells in the body.

There are no dragons.

There are no unicorns.

There are no warrior dwarfs.

There are no Hobbits

There are no aliens.

There are no Kryptonians.

There are no Amazonians. 

Need I go on?

My wife is a warrior dwarf

The fermi paradox indicates it is highly unlikely for aliens not to exist

There are definitely Amazonians

Unless there is evidence to the contrary it seems just as reasonable to presuppose a creator as presuppose no creator

Consciousness and therefore awareness, rely upon a consciously functioning system.

Has residual energy ever been verifiably detected leaving a dead body?

Though a scary idea which actually sounds quite feasible, is that the human consciousness could be downloaded to an alternative system.

But how is this directly connected to the contentious creator GOD hypothesis.

The only way to reconcile the creator GOD hypothesis, is to contradict the necessity of the creation, by asserting that a creator does not require creating.

In which case, it is implied that creation is not a necessary requirement.

Therefore inferring that a creator is also not to be a necessary requirement.

The reasons to believe there are not are just as logically supported as the reasons to believe there are.

The only proper response is therefore to not believe any of it until proven otherwise.

Not to believe in it until proven.

You're saying not to believe based on the logical reasons.

I think you're saying cause and effect is not a sound basis to believe in a creator when the law of causality wasn't required before it was required.

Required now but not before. I realized this a while ago but people still use the argument.

Farewell to our fallen soldiers. You finally tapped out of the battle.

Yep.