I am the author of the above article; I just didn't have an account here earlier. With all due respect, I believe the argument you mentioned does not have anything to do with the article.

You obviously seem to be so fond of this argument; I noticed the link in your signature leading to the same argument in another post. However, nowhere in my article did I mention anything about the complexity of the universe requiring that a God exist. On the contrary, I believe I mentioned that my aim is not to walk that road, because - even though marvelling into the beauty of the universe could lead some to belief in God - this path is unscientific.

Thus, I have nothing to do with the argument you are trying to refute. Bringing up circular logic and then refuting it is just meaningless. I would appreciate to hear your opinion again when you have read the article thoroughly, understood it, and actually got my position.

Good luck! ;)