Do Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence?

[Mister Agenda]

Oh, I get it. Like if someone whats to demonstrate that the supernatural exists, maybe they would hang around for 3 years and perform series of miracles that only had supernatural explanations. How many miracles would that person have to do before a "success rate beyond the ordinary range described by brute force of statistics" was established?

Just one that left lasting physical evidence with no natural explanation would be a good start. Say a mountain moved from a mountain range to the middle of the desert, and the trail it left behind, for example.
We might argue about it, but we wouldn't be able to say something extraordinary didn't happen, particularly if there were a multitude of corroborating texts of the event by eyewitnesses of many backgrounds who thought the event was worth noting down for posterity.