Four proofs of the nonexistence of God

[mordant]

There. Is. No. Such. Thing. As. Supernatural. It is a useless and illogical concept. Anything that is truly supernatural, we would have no information about. Anything you claim to have information about, would be natural by definition, because you're a natural creature with natural senses and a natural brain. The corollary to this is that as soon as you have any actual data about something, it is no longer supernatural, even if the supernatural DID exist. If god reveals himself, he has entered the realm of the natural universe and is no longer outside it and so is not supernatural. [1]

100% -- one HUNDRED percent -- of all assertions about the supernatural and its inhabitants are unsubstantiated. That is to say, it's not just not fully substantiated, it's not substantiated AT ALL -- not even a BIT. [2]

100% -- one HUNDRED percent -- of all hypotheses about the supernatural, about invisible realms and beings, are not falsifiable hypotheses. We can't say how we'd disprove them systematically according to a proven methodology. So we can't demonstrate, that they are true. Hence, they are inherently unsubstantiatable. And that's by design, because they are completely MADE UP. [3]

1. It is not true that we would have no information about it. It's pretty much the whole purpose of the Bible and other writings to provide information on the supernatural. The supernatural has causal power in the natural world--presto--information available to consider. It does not make any sense that causal power from the supernatural to the natural world changes the supernatural into the natural. It only indicates the effects are natural. 
2. Except the ones that are witnessed, believed and cataloged (see the NT for examples of evidenced supernatural causation).
3. Falsificationism is a theory about what makes a claim scientific, and not every rationally acceptable claim is or ought to be a scientific claim. Hence not every rationally acceptable claim is or ought to be empirically falsifiable. Your conclusion is absolutely unwarranted.

Please do present to me any substantiation you can offer for the supernatural, and demonstrate clearly how it's distinguishable from just asserting something to be true, or stating that you afford belief to it as true.

Pro tip: ancient writings making assertions or large numbers of people making assertions are no more substantiations or evidence of any kind, than are your assertions. "Witnessed, believed and cataloged" is not substantiation. They are just assertions / claims until they can be evidenced. More assertions, longstanding assertions, assertions by authorities or by claimed holy books, popular assertions, etc., are still just assertions, not evidence.

Millions once asserted that the best treatment for disease was bleeding with leeches. Including medical authorities. Including books that it was written down in. You would have no trouble finding people who witnessed, believed and cataloged healing with leeches. None of that made it true that leeches were effective or appropriate treatments for the vast majority of illnesses, or for the notion of bodily humors being out of balance, etc. being the cause of those diseases.