"God doesn't Exist"- Claim or Conclusion

[Mister Agenda]

I'd like anyone to define supernatural without using an equivocation fallacy.

The only definition I've heard that is consistent is that it refers to things external to our reality. This makes it subjective of course.

If something is defined to be unfalsifiable, it can be safely ignored. The question of its existence becomes irrelevant, for all practical purposes.

Supernatural is anything not part of the natural universe. As such, not constrained by our observable framework (perhaps constrained by another framework). That is not to say it cannot interact with our natural universe (causation). 

On what basis do you make the philosophical statement that "If something is defined to be unfalsifiable, it can be safely ignored"?

It can never be known whether something unfalsifiable is true or false unless convincing positive evidence for it's truth appears. If there is no possible evidence that could prove it false, and no available evidence to indicate that it's true, there's no reason to assign it significance. You can't prove there isn't an invisible, intangible leprechaun controlling your every thought and action. Do you think the possibility can't safely be ignored? Bear in mind that leprechaun decides when and how you die and for all we know, may get upset if you don't take it seriously.

Or you could ignore it as a real possibility unless the leprechaun appears and demonstrates its power to you. That's what I'd do, but you live your life as you see fit.