I was not speaking of the logical foundations argument specifically,
especially with regard to the universe in its entirety. To insist that
the atom is a "perfect" structure is quite extreme, especially
considering just how little we know about it. When I say "we", as
before, I am talking about mankind as a whole, which includes both you
and the scientists you referred to.

If they are so perfectly logically minded, then they will see the many
faults in your logic as I do. For example:

"Either the Universe is a structure or is not a structure.
The most likely case is the Universe is a structure, because a
nonstructure requires
more explanation than a structure. "

What evidence do you have to support this claim? Why does the fact
that something requires more explanation decrease the likelihood of
its existence? The pure and simple truth is rarely pure and almost
never simple.

"So if the Universe is a structure, then the only thing that it could
possibly be is an Atom
Totality. "

Untrue. Let's say the atom is a "perfect" structure. This does not
mean the universe has to be as well. As a matter of fact, there is
evidence that the universe is changing, expanding, and that entropy is
constantly increasing, breaking down the physical laws and systems of
nature as we know them over time. Is this "perfect"? If perfect means
self-sustaining (in part), I think not. Now, no matter what you say,
your Atom Totality is subject to this happenstance as well, because
one atomic universe means one isolated system.

Finally, it is also illogical to state that only two people
(presumably three, if you include yourself?) of over 6 billion in the
entire world who were alive during the time you said are able to even
"wrestle with", meaning to comprehend and debate this theory, is
completely absurd. Your argument, based on what is here, has many more
holes in it than mine. I'll give you some leeway though considering I
don't know this theory inside and out, as you are obviously unfamiliar
with the mainstream views of science and cosmology, but ultimately it
comes down to the fact that a small child could wrestle with the
amazing Atom Totality Theory. It's crackpot science, and I have it
pinned, regardless of whether or not you agree. I know you don't, and
I know you won't change your mind and probably won't reply to this
response, so I will finish my rambling right here and now.