Can't prove the supernatural God

[Ignorant]

If you're arguing for supernatural being something other than "an event or creature which stands outside nature", why bother using the term? [1]

We have a perfectly adequate one, "natural thing whose cause we haven't yet determined". [2]

But as I've posted above supernatural is simply a term to hide behind the fact that we have no evidence for god,[3] and increasing amounts of evidence that god(s) is not necessary.

1) Well, maybe I'm not arguing for a supernatural being at all? In fact, I am merely arguing for fuller understanding of the categories with which to discuss the topic. Also, if you are paying close enough attention, you you might deduce that I don't consider god to be supernatural. If that confuses you, then that is probably because the modern reduction of the categories have a tight grip on you still. Think outside that box! =)

2) Again, if you were paying close attention to my proposed use of the term natural: Things CAN ONLY BE NATURAL. In other words, The "what" of a thing is the same thing as the "nature" of a thing. Things can only "be" themselves, and therefore, there are only natural things. Here is where we differ:

You 

a) Things ONLY act/behave in ways which derive from their nature. 
b) We do not know everything about the natures of things. 

If, therefore, some thing behaved in a way that seemed impossible, the only explanation must be that it is a natural act deriving from some part of the nature which is unknown to us. In other words, "whose cause we haven't yet determined"

Me 

a) Things act/behave in ways which derive from their nature.
b) We do not know everything about the natures of things. 

If, therefore, some thing behaved in a way that seemed impossible, ONE possible explanation might be that it is a natural act deriving from some part of the nature which is unknown to us. Another possible explanation is that the action/behavior is actually caused by a different thing. Another possible explanation is that the thing is acting/behaving in a way which derives from the nature of some other thing which is acting through the first thing's nature.

Compare your a) to mine. Which seems more able to account for the possibilities?

3) If you enjoy beating up straw-men, then by all means, please enjoy.