Disproving Odin - An Experiment in arguing with a theist with Theist logic

[GrandizerII]

I believe person that examined the negative used the term 'supernatural' im reference to the light, seeing how there was no explanation for the light being there...

If there's no explanation, then there's no explanation. Full stop. It's a logical contradiction to say there's no explanation, while simultaneously declaring the supernatural as an explanation.

But we do have an explanation anyway (Min did a great job of providing it). You just don't want the explanation to be true for understandable psychological reasons.

Then you'd have to dismiss eyewitness testimony of a woman who says she saw a hovering light.

There we go again with eyewitness testimony. As if eyewitness testimonies don't have a history of being unreliable, and as if studies have not at all shown that to be the case.

And suppose a woman did see a hovering light. So what? What's so supernatural about hovering light when I can just turn on a flashlight in a dark room and hover its light with ease?