Why is god hiding?

[Neo-Scholastic]

The next question is this how long will you hold out for a natural explanation? 50 years...100? If you say until all natural possibilities are exhausted that's the same as never being willing to acknowledge the supernatural. Natural theories seems unlimited to the point of saying space aliens or time travels are responsible for the inexplicable. What if any limits do you place on your bias toward naturalism?

I'm going to say this one thing, and then stop: A lack of evidence for any other explanation does not mean that your preferred one is true.

What you posited in your example was an observation- this cell has the word "Jesus" written on its cell wall- but that observation wouldn't testify to a cause. I suggested some experiments that one could to do determine more about that observation, but given the situation you described, and absent any kind of definitive answer from those tests, what you'd be left with is an inconclusive result, not an answer of god. If evidence for god shows up- positive evidence, not circumstantial stuff, as the examples for these kinds of questions always seems to be- then of course I'll accept it, but I'm not going to pretend an inconclusive result isn't just to appease anyone else's need for god to be involved, nor their sneaking suspicions that I'd just never accept any evidence ever if I don't come to their desired conclusion.

I'm not going to be cajoled into accepting a conclusion on insufficient evidence, and that also goes for the naturalistic explanations, by the way. To say "this cell wall says Jesus, we have no evidence of naturalistic or divine explanations, and therefore it must be god because it says Jesus," would be an argument from ignorance. The only honest answer I could give that would be consistent with what I hold to be true about evidence would be to admit it: this is an inconclusive load of data. Here's what we know about it; it doesn't definitively point to either a divine or a naturalistic explanation.

And then I'd leave it at that, all the while leaving the possibility of a divine explanation as open there as I do for any other thing. But you can't just keep adding zeroes and come to one; without positive evidence for a thing, you can't just shrug and say it must have been god. That's a different answer to never, ever accepting the possibility of it being god, though.

Sorry. I just don't buy how you rationalize you negative bias. Give me one real example of evidence you would accept?