You are arguing a philosophical world view.
Your argument: "I believe there is no Supernatural creator that exists outside of the boundaries of the natural world."
You can only observe the natural world using tools designed to explore, evaluate and quantify the natural world (science and everything here is fine). You have concluded from this that is all there is and there can be nothing beyond. (philosophy)
Science can not explore anything outside of the natural world so demanding proof for the existence of a Supernatural creator that exists outside of the boundaries and confines of a natural world seems illogical to me.
The leap from "I observe the world in this way therefore there is nothing beyond my world" is I think the issue here. Could you please briefly explain to me how you came to this conclusion that there can exist nothing beyond the scope of what you can observe?
Not trying to stir you up just seeking to clarify the point that Science and a Naturalist world view are not one in the same thing