Can't prove the supernatural God

[robvalue]

I really can't get where people are coming from with this.

Something that is impossible... happens? Normally impossible? Really really unlikely? It's all an appeal to incredulity.

It seems there's a clear implication that there are outside influences, and these are the supernatural things. There may well be such things. They may be involved in absolutely everything that happens, for all we know. But we can't identify them, because if we could, they'd be natural. Wouldn't they? If we can identify them just fine, why are we calling them supernatural? What's the distinction?

I guess it's appealing to (what is claimed to be) an unbalanced equation, and asserting something "supernatural" must make up the balance. But something "natural" may also make up the balance. Or nothing does, and we just don't understand it properly.

It actually seems to correlate with my own definition, which is things that can act upon our reality but can't be themselves acted upon by it: and this is relative. Maybe there are yet more things that can act upon these "supernatural" things, but which can't be acted on in return. Super-supernatural things.