All so-far observed beings are subject the laws of the universe.
1) You cannot know that unless you mean "observed by you." If so, your statement is rendered useless by not only your extremely limited observation but by an inductive and subjective method which is hamstrung by your materialistic bias.
2) If you mean "observed by all mankind," you cannot rely on that either. Materialists freely admit that mankind's observations are not completely trustworthy because they tend to interpret phenomena religiously.
3) There exist records of observed beings defying the laws of the universe.
4) Your theory of evolution defies the laws of the universe.
Your hypothesis of an ultimate turtle still doesn't answer the question. How did such a being come into existence?
Again, everything that has a beginning has a cause. Therefore there must have been a First Cause which is self-existent, self-explained and uncaused. To assume that God needed a beginning is to embrace the infinite regression which (as shown in infinite set theory) is impossible. Besides, the God who has revealed Himself tells us that He is the First Cause.
Nor have you demonstrated the existence of any being not subject to the laws of the universe.
There are some of you who have said that they would not be satisfied unless God Himself appeared before them and revealed the mysteries of the universe. If that is the case, I imagine George Bush is required to come to you and justify his existence as well before you will believe he is President?
The evidence has been there all the time; the existence of something rather than nothing, the amazing order of the universe, the complex design in nature, the anthropic principle, the intelligence of man, the basic inborn knowledge of the existence of God, our sense of right and wrong, our search for meaning, our concept of good and evil and our ability to practice it. And there is more-- much more. It isn't the evidence that is lacking. The problem is the disregard and denial of the evidence.